Manually patched by pulling the commit and building your own source?
I’m glad I could help (I think?). I just think it’s funny, because imagine your doctor told you to stop eating so much meat because it was making your blood pressure high. Would you wait months to do so or start immediately? New Year’s resolutions haven’t really made any sense to me at all, and I think that’s a good way of thinking of it.
How does it hide a map?
How in the world do you remember the first airline you flew in much less the first twenty?
I’m afraid you missed the point of mine.
no, I didn't. You still aren't understanding even what you are saying, much less other people.
standard measurements are based on practical things that people interact with every day
no. no they are not. Let's look at some 'standard' measurements as you call them (they're actually not standard as you'll immediately see):
The foot was a common unit of measurement throughout Europe. It often differed in length not only from country to country but from city to city. Because the length of a foot changed between person to person, measurements were not even consistent between two people, often requiring an average. Henry I of England was attributed to passing the law that the foot was to be as long as a person's own foot.
Great. so we're off to a perfect start. A foot is..... as long as your own foot. ^https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_(unit)^
Next up! Inch!
Oh, well you might say "an inch is just a foot divided by 12". nope. no it was not (all stuff in this comment is past measurements, because every unit of measurement on the planet uses metric as its base)
The inch was originally defined as 3 barleycorns.
Perfect. What's a barleycorn's length?
As modern studies show, the actual length of a kernel of barley varies from as short as 0.16–0.28 in (4–7 mm) to as long as 0.47–0.59 in (12–15 mm) depending on the cultivar
Oh ok, so it could be up to 3x the distance from one barleycorn to another. Perfect. Another 'standard'
^https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inch^ ^https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barleycorn_%28unit%29^
How about the 'rod' or 'pole' or 'perch' (all the same thing) ^https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_(unit)^
In medieval times English ploughmen used a wooden stick with a pointed tip to spur or guide their oxen. The rod was the length of this stick.
Great. So this one I have no visual reference at all. Is this pike length or sword length? (oh you're all about referencing 'standard' objects, but just in case you don't know a pike can be up to 25 feet long)
Do you see how ridiculous this is? You're talking about standards that evolved over time from some 'base' to mean absolutely nothing today in relation to what they were hundreds of years ago. Metric was also based on 'standard' things, like the kilogram, which is just the weight of a litre of water (see, simple). You're acting like the 'standards' of one unit are superior to the 'standards' of another unit, except that the unit of measurement you're saying is superior is completely disconnected from each other. If it wasn't for standards bodies coming in and saying "a foot is not the length of your foot, it's exactly this ... long" then there would be absolutely no way to convert between any units in imperial measurement.
The same way? There’s thousands of words in the English language with the same pronunciation and different spellings. This isn’t the dunk you think it is.
Besides, gif existed first. If JIF wanted to use the name without confusion maybe they should have come out first (missed it by half a decade) or come up with a catchy phrase.
That second article is hilarious. It’s trying to point out that the first article is over complicating things then doing the same thing except the author thinks it’s not complicated what they’re saying when it’s actually insane.
Server has been upgraded. https://mastodon.social/@programming_dev/110654352337392030
That is really interesting. Does anyone have an example of what a web finger might contain? It says avatar data but I’m interested in how sites use it.
snowe
0 post score0 comment score
joined 3 years ago
MODERATOR OF
That comment was not talking about programming languages, it was talking about human's inability to write perfect code. Humans are unable to solve problems correctly 100% of the time. So if the language doesn't do it for them then it will not happen. See Java for a great example of this. Java has Null Pointer Exceptions absolutely everywhere. So a bunch of different groups created annotations that would give you warnings, and even fail to compile if something was mismatched or a null check was missed. But if you miss a single
@NotNullannotation anywhere in the code, then suddenly you can get null errors again. It's not enforced by the type system and as a result humans can forget. Kotlin came along and 'solved it' at the type level, where types are nullable or non-nullable. But, hilariously enough, you can still get NPEs in Kotlin because it's commonly used to interop with Java.My point is that C/C++ can't solve this at a fundamental level, the same way Kotlin and Java cannot solve this. Programmers are the problem, so you have to have a system that was built from the ground up to solve the problem. That's what we are getting in modern day languages. You can't just tack the system on after the fact, unless it completely removes any need for the programmer to do literally anything, because the programmer is the problem.
I'm not talking about whole scale rewrites. I'm talking about what Linux is already doing with writing new code in Rust, or small portions of performance critical code in a memory safe language. I'm not talking about like what Fish Shell did and rewrote the whole codebase in one go, because that's not realistic. But slowly converting an entire codebase over? That's incredibly realistic. I've done so with several 250k+ line Java codebases, converting them to Kotlin. When languages are built to be easy to move to (Rust, Kotlin, etc), then migrating to them slowly over time where it matters is easily attainable.