thestoicattack

the readline keybindings come from Emacs

Because I’m a vim user, It took me a very long time to understand where these keybindings come from

libreadline supports a basic vi mode. In bash, `set -o vi` lets you use vim-style editing. It is a lifesaver.

git blame does include --ignore-rev and --ignore-revs-file, so maybe if people updated such a file when making small edits, it would make your life easier.

Dead github theory.

GCC turns a fold over a parameter pack into test/sete and turns std::min == 0 into cmp/cmovg: https://godbolt.org/z/TjK7Gz74M

In the novel, Rico is Filipino.

Yeah, I had to click through that article, which didn't link the docket, to get to a tweet with an image of a scan of a two-page order granting leave to file. It seems completely unrelated to the headline. Even the word "reject" is the opposite of what happened.

Ada too, I think.

No doubt it's similarly easy using the vi keybindings.

I'd do kbihelp for the first and k2bdwA for the second.

Emmy Noether, Lisa Randall, Elise Meitner, Vera Rubin

Chien-Shiung Wu!

A new analysis from Fermilab measures the W boson as 76 MeV heavier than the Standard Model predicts. The uncertainty in the measurement is 9 MeV.

(1999)

Published in the May 1999 issue of "The C/C++ Users Journal"

The article does mention at least one advantage, so it's not as if the ladder is being pulled up for no reason.

As a note,

    find . -type f -exec grep stuff {} \;

    find . -type f -exec grep stuff {} +  # note plus sign

I can't remember my terminal emulator ever crashing, much less crashing due to memory corruption. Maybe I've just been lucky.

I'm glad his memoir, "Carrying the Fire", got mentioned. It's one of the best astronaut memoirs.

House seat changes by state:

    (+2) TX
    (+1) CO, FL, MT, NC, OR
    (-1) CA, IL, MI, NY, OH, PA, WV
     (0) everyone else

You could also use std::bit_not

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/functional/bit_not

We do have such a digit-extraction algorithm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bailey%E2%80%93Borwein%E2%80%9...

std::move_iterator was my first thought too, but I'm not sure if it works, since the key type for std::unordered_map is defined to be const, so you may have to make a copy anyway.

Maybe use a vector-of-pointer-to-pair, since we're leaving the map around and we don't really need the vector to own anything.

That's basically modern C++, if you cut out all the things that aren't slices, destructors, and copy/move semantics.

Sorry, I see I didn't answer your question. I am not one of those programmers that would deliberately ignore an error code, so I don't know what they're thinking.

My suspicion (and naive hope) is that most people would not ignore that case if they knew it was dangerous. But I would expect them to ignore it if they didn't know it existed. Hence this article, I guess, which serves to remind everyone that it can in fact happen and is quite dangerous (due to a potential later interaction with kill).

If I didn't know it could fail, I wouldn't check for an error in its return code.

If by ignoring, you mean non catching anything, I'm often okay with that. If an exception makes it top-level, you'll get a std::terminate and be done.

The "canonical" example people use a lot is std::bad_alloc. Often, there is no point in catching it -- what cleanup or fallback work are you planning to do when you can't even allocate memory?

Of course, silently swallowing exceptions with an empty catch-block is terrible.

Did you detect any crashes after the change?

C and C++ don't have good stories for working on embedded systems without a standard library?

I agree that the result, while cool, is not readable. An obvious next step would be to demonstrate how the type-checked lambda-heavy implementation can be refactored into something that also makes sense to a human.

just because the types check out doesn't mean it's free from bugs

That's certainly true in the general case. In fact, the author gives a type-checked-but-wrong example of "we need an Int, so just return zero."

But in some specific cases, as the author writes, "One of those facts we can infer [from a type signature] is often the the only possible implementation." The article demonstrates that "possible" includes "also makes use of all the values available (or else the signature would be simpler)."

I'm not scared of a "model" "trained" on the long tail of Github code any more than I'm scared of someone who can search stackoverflow faster than I can.

This could leak information to the other party if bailing is still available during the event. By trying to bail myself after you show up I could "prove" you really didn't want to be here after all.

So I was all set to bash include/data-swap.c for allocating on the heap every time you need to swap memory. Turns out that gcc can optimize out that temporary, and it ends up the same as std::swap.

But if we use operator new/delete instead of std::malloc the optimization doesn't take place: https://godbolt.org/z/vtxqD2

To avoid this insidious bug:

    std::lock_guard<std::mutex>(m);  // guard is immediately thrown away

    std::lock_guard<std::mutex> g(m);  // hold mutex til end of scope