... is that a microSDXC card reader at the top of the radiator?
1786 posts • joined 6 Sep 2007
... is that a microSDXC card reader at the top of the radiator?
I chose option d) design the car to make it more difficult to forget to tighten the lungs, which is not on the list. That's what new language design is about - to enable more robust software design, i.e. one where bugs stand out more, and correct programs easier to write than incorrect ones. This could be based on statistical observations (e.g. multithreaded programs usually work better if data passed between threads are immutable), or other collective experience of language designers.
... and why would anyone do it? The whole point of using specific language is to match the desired design (sometimes architecture) with tools available. The language informs design of the project, because it is created to support certain design constructs. By converting between languages you are losing the benefits of this design match and gain nothing, with the only exception when using lower level language as object file format. But Rust is high level language, so the conversion to Rust will not buy you that.
Unless of course the answer is "for fun" in which case, sure why not.
@hellwig there was no "C++95", the earliest standardization was ANSI in 1997, this was later ratified by ISO to become ISO/IEC standard 14882:1998 (hence called C++98). Bjarne's Annotated Reference Manual on the other hand is dated 1990, so you are not referring to that either. And C++ only very recently acquired functional capabilities (e.g. compile-time immutable data and functions, lambda expressions or std::function wrapper). Finally I do not know what you are referring to with "lowering to the lowest common denominator", as the new languages such as Swift or Rust are rather more refined than old ones, since they build on the experience on those who created these older languages. There is no "lowering the the common denominator" here, I think last such effort on creating a new language was PHP which is nowhere close to the topic at hand.
So, as you can see I am truly confused by your post above, care to explain?
How is this different to having an improved compiler for C
Short answer: very different. Yes in theory it is possible to add all kinds of checks to C compiler, but the result of this would be that any sane C programmer will call the resulting limitations unreasonable, and for good reason. It would be very difficult to write any program in C with checks as restrictive as the ones built into Rust.
In case anyone wanted to ask "so how is it possible to write any program in Rust" the answer is simple : it is a different language, so it can provide syntax for safe alternatives, without having to worry about syntax compatibility with C compilers. The need to maintain this compatibility is what really hamstrung the evolution of C++ language (in 21st century i.e. C++11 and after), but Rust has no such limitations.
Ow how cute. But the description is entirely inaccurate, should say "a nice looking model pretending to be field technician"
Still, the fine $7m seems appropriate and proportionate.
Almost there. The number of non-reported transactions was close to 27,000 ; the number of requests (that is, how many reports were created) is 2,300 . Meaning on average each report missed nearly 12 transaction. That's tiny but as you correctly note, there might (or might not) be large sums involved, or other signs of "noncompliant behaviour" which were effectively hidden from SEC.
I'd be surprised if SEC bothered to correlate transaction data from all the banks sending the data, and it wouldn't make sense to correlate data from some banks only.
... some of the "flew once, will fly again" Falcon boosters. As it turns out that the mission will carry some extremely expensive hardware, and already once destroyed in the fire, this seems less likely now.
... how does this impact packet switching time inside the switch? For the fastest switches out there this is now measured well under a microsecond, and it is hard to see how data collection could reasonably work this fast, without hitting the ceiling on price and power.
The resizing model at DigitalOcean works like this : you can either upgrade your instance permanently which also (RAM , vCPU and transfer limit change aside) increases its storage in 10GB steps (smallest instance is 20GB then 30GB etc), or you can upgrade other parameters (listed above RAM, vCPU and transfer) leaving storage unchanged, which will allow you to downgrade later (so called flexible model). The addition of block storage means that you can upgrade in flexible manner and still extend your storage, simply by buying extra device. Which you can release later if you no longer need it, alongside with downgrading your instance. Neat.
Death, taxes and Flash vulnerabilities
In other news, Adobe will soon release patch for another Flash vulnerability.
The icon? It's beer for me, because I do not use either.
In practice this is not editor config, it is editor state and very neatly packed into a single struct. It would be neat to pass it explicitly to all functions as a pointer, agreed. But then it would not be so blatantly obvious that it is one-end-the-only editor state, and there are benefits to such bluntness of design. In case when the whole project sits in a single .c file, without any headers, this seems appropriate.
had a look at the source code, and even though I am not a big fan of C this is a very nice example how this language should be used properly. Definitely one to watch.
Yup, "IP of arbitrary value" is exactly the interesting part. This (by definition of a word "subsidiary") includes company trade mark, just to keep things interesting.
Actually it makes sense: there is a cash flow between US based HQ and subsidiaries, and the net value of that flow makes part of the domestic profit, which is taxed in US. For example, subsidiaries might be charged by HQ for the right to use corp. IP, but keep the domestic cash flow. The question IRS is asking: is the cash flow between subsidiaries and HQ based on real numbers, or bogus ones? If this is the later, this means that someone (HQ or, unlikely, subsidiaries) might be hiding the profits. Thus it makes sense for IRS to want to examine this.
I think that firmware of a modern GPU is usually loaded by the driver at the moment of OS startup, and anything that the GPU can do before then is only dumb VGA BIOS (or UEFI) support. Meaning that yes, an updated driver can fix a lot of things.
I really like AMD hardware, but had to jump to NVidia, because working around poorly implemented soft PCIe reset (a necessity when doing PCIe passthrough) on newer AMD cards was driving me crazy. NVidia hardware was expensive like hell and I would really like AMD to be viable competition, also in "my" market segment. I will be waiting for newer generation of Polaris-based FirePro cards with VDI support, perhaps this will do the trick.
Well you do have the point, but personally I approach such news differently. I rather see it as a news from the front of a prolonged and very expensive war. We are far from winning the war, or even a battle, but at least we have not given up yet.
... also for reference to The Platform, the tables there are most useful. One more thing worth noting is (re)introduction of TSX-NI, which in theory should also kick without any program modifications, for optimistic locking of synchronized sections. I wonder how that works in practice, any ideas?
... but then one has to remember that Oracle is mainly made of lawyers, all of them getting prepared to "vigorously defend Java". The few engineers working there have other priorities, because who would waste time working on open source project, obviously.
best phone I've ever had. I will probably buy spare ... because phone without a keyboard is unusable for me.
@PaulFrederic yes, Linux kernel ripped support for 30 years old CPU, but it still supports and will support 32bit instruction set/mode of intel processors for a long time.
Oh, so here is the "follow the money" link between immigration and housing shortage
I disagree. Having a good look at the language, it is exactly the right language for a novice programmer to quickly bash the code, as long as (s)he leaves habits from other languages before the door. Of course a new programmer may be slightly impeded by limited choice of available libraries ...
I do not think this can be compared to Superfish, for a start this vulnerability comes from shared upstream (Intel own code) and is apparently present on HP laptops as well.
Does anyone know what level of access is required before the vulnerable function can be invoked? At this moment this seems more like sloppy code enabling "evil maid attack" that is, it appears to require hardware (or perhaps administrator level, from within the OS?) access before the attack. Or am I mistaken?
Oh and why do I think "sloppy code" - the function purpose in kernel sources is clear enough, the only missing part is validation of callback function address.
Light blue letters on dark blue background "Do not notify me again". Who would have thought they will put such an option at all, no matter that barely visible!
Let her explain how she would fix the problem of local monopolies of cable/ISP companies in the US. Without deferring all the action to FCC alone.
This is simply accounting for things like Great Void and the matter which surrounds it, and of course effect that such imbalances will have on the "shape" of spacetime.
Bloody hell, this has nothing to do with pirating games, and everything to do with allowing people to play the games they legally purchased. It is Oculus' own goal to couple the hardware recognition with game DRM!
on one hand, such a number of threads running would be a boon for some calculations Im running, on the other hand without support for TSX, the synchronization between threads is going to seriously cut into performance numbers. I guess I will wait this one out.
well, at this moment I'm happy to be ARM shareholder.
Windows is written in C, not C++.
Nope, it is written in both. Kernel is in C, huge majority of userspace code in C++. I signed NDA but this much I can reveal, and I do not think much has changed since the time I saw these sources.
This is open source under MIT license - which means it is not much relevant. Yes someone will find bugs, you have a guarantee for this. Someone will fix these bugs. Perhaps someone will fork the whole project in order to fix the bugs differently, or for any other reason. Not relevant, because you can take existence of bugs for granted. What's relevant is that there is an effort for standarized (i.e. portable) way to beat bugs in other C programs. I would drink to that.
yup, know the feeling ... :( That's why I think everyone should have their own distro. With minimum effort. And pigs will fly.
Red Hat is also listed as validating the system, but Shuttleworth said progress has been comparatively slow.
why, of course Red Hat needs more time - they need to find a way to integrate snapd into systemd first!
Dude, two-factor authentication does not need a smartphone. The ones I have seen which do rely on phone, use text messages (i.e. SMS), that's technology supported by all mobile phones since previous century.
Condolences to the family
yes, and that was smart choice it would appear. Specialised software can get really good at performing one task only.
On the subject, I was last week watching a Norwegian TV series "Occupied". Quite interesting view on what might happen if Norway decided to stop exploring oil.