HN user

itsuart

137 karma

https://github.com/itsuart

Posts1
Comments42
View on HN

No, I don't. If foo is a (storage of) pointer to something, to get that something from memory I use dereference operator `* so

  *foo = 'a';
will write value of 'a' into memory at address that is in foo.
  type* foo;
is declaration and
  *foo
is dereferencing.
Laid off (2008) 10 years ago

Like smoke a weed, workout, work at a burger joint as a burger flipper and date my daughter's best friend.

What a beautiful story!

In Haskell I use Maybe's, Either's and their ilk (packing result code in returned data I guess?), in C - your usual boolean return values like this: bool parse_literal (ParsingState* state, LiteralValue* pResult).

In Java/C# I have to use what other people are using :)

My dislike of exceptions (as well as errno and Set/GetLastError) is due their masking, hiding error conditions and situations. And I prefer everything to be stated clearly. Including error handling code (answer to 'did I handled all possible failures of calling this?' should be instant).

Unfortunately proper error handling is hard, nearly as much as 'naming things' :)

I think exceptions are very bad idea. Not nearly as bad as implicit nullability but comparable. Hacky emulations of exceptions... Well I don't want to be near such code.

But that was interesting read non the less, thanks OP.

From top of my head.

Fork of Chromium without:

- all Google things

- Non-browser things like accounts and pdf viewers.

With:

- attempt https if protocol is not provided

- blocking all js unless whitelisted

- blocking all requests to 3rd party domains unless whitelisted

- blocking all attempts to hijack right mouse clicks

- blocking all redirect attempts unless whitelisted

- destruction of all cookies/web storage on start/close unless whitelisted

etc.

Whole new level of 'stop liking what I like!'?

Also 'hacker' should have released everything and sent links to the media. That would close the site for sure. And would generate quite a few lawsuits from exposed people. And who knows maybe some more regulations privacy-wise would pop up.

Yet another episode of self-righteous attention seeking.

I would like to chime in and say that if there is story, any story (or even no story) at all - there is manga about it. And interesting thing is, according to https://www.mangaupdates.com/genres.html - there is more series targeted at girls than boys: shoujo - ~17K, shounen - almost 9K. Though it's almost reversed for 18-30 age group: josei - ~7K, seinen - ~12K. In sum female oriented works trump male oriented (24 vs 21).

If only Japanese publishers (or it's laws?) were not so narrow minded and hired fans that translate those mangas to fill something like iTunes/Steam library, any human being of any age and sex would have something to read their whole life.

Seems I phrased my previous comment too vague, sorry for that. I'm aware of what REST stands for. My question is what advantages utilizing "obscure" HTTP verbs and headers with spreading "endpoints" all over ones application provides compared to RPC over HTTP? Surely, using RPC with a single endpoint is much simpler and thus more maintainable/modifiable?

I found using HTTP (a mere transport layer) status codes as part of an API very unnatural and wrong. It feels like bending TCP/UDP packets structure to implement FTP to me. And shoehorning your API into any kind of "blessed guidlines" just to earn you a badge? That's just a waste of time.

Ah, yes, ban everything that you don't like. That would get rid of it for sure. Chemical and biological weapons are banned? Yes. Do we have them? Yes. Will we use them to survive? FUCK YES.

So stop this meaningless "Geneva talks". "Killer robots" will be built and will be used.

Don't ban weapons. Ban wars. I don't see why 1st world countries would need them anyway.

First of all, I didn't read linked article. Which is wrong of course. As usual, I'm basing on comments in this thread. So you want to do type system without PL theory of modern age. Awesome! Seriously, interesting experiment. Unless you already have read TaPL in which case I fear you would antagonise ideas described there. However, there is a non-merit, non-technical problem: dismissing PL theorists is sounds like dismissing PL theory (wrong implication, but that is how humans are I believe). And this will put you into JS/PHP/whatever-back-to-the-trees basket and your ideas will be dismissed just because of this wrong association. Which means, that you will distorted results of your experiment. How do you plan to alleviate that? Or I'm wrong somewhere and it is non issue?