l-albertovich

Not really, we did consider one of those fancy new induction systems that goes through the countertop but there were too many limitations (ie. there had to be a cut in the countertop which was a deal breaker for my wife).

The reason for the thinner countertop was merely preference, she wanted it that way and I wanted her to be happy.

Well, I didn't check the git history so I can't confirm or deny that he implemented the feature, in any case, if you read the comment about how the passwords are anonymized it sounds pretty reasonable.

Leaving that aside, even if you diagree with it you (the user) are not entitled to anything, especially not entitled to have an attitude.

Just think about it differently, what do you think would happen if you do the same in the real world?

I'm pretty sure in the best case scenario you may be asked to leave and in the worst case scenario you may be "escorted" out of the premises.

A little bit of politeness goes a long way.

I mean, none of them behaved like an adult.

It's pretty clear that the maintainer should've handled it better but I'd be lying if I said I never felt like telling a petulant user off. The problem is he didn't handle it professionally.

I wouldn't go in debt but I'd pay the premium again, we're really happy with our countertops, especially considering that it allowed us to make them thinner which my wife wanted seemed to be a big no-no with other materials.

And that kids is a clear example of how not to interact with people online.

Thanks CJ, you've put some pretty cool things out there!

You know, Fox turned into a hardcore sex channel so gradually, I didn't even notice.

Yeah, I tried all of them with all the combinations of presets and orbit styles and the closest I could get was using tinkercad but couldn't match the orbit style correctly.

I just tested it out of curiosity and found that viewport manipulation behaves in a very similar way to onshape which feels very natural to me.

I've been thinking about trying to implement this in freecad but I'm still exploring the idea.

It's not even about API boundaries, it's about logic and the language isn't really responsible for that.

Expecting it to prevent it would be as gullible as expecting it to prevent a toctou or any other type of non trivial vulnerability.

That's why even though I appreciate the role of these slightly safer languages I still have a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to the exagerated claims of their benefits and how much of a piece of crap C is.

Spoiler, crappy programmers write crappy code regardless of the language so maybe we should focus on teaching students to think of the code they're writing from a different perspective and focus safety and maintainability rather than "flashiness"

It's a race condition that can be used as a primitive to achieve privilege escalation which makes it legitimate but even if it you couldn't use it for anything else but to trick the system into acting on a directory it didn't meant to it would still be a valid vulnerability (regardless of the application).

Claiming it's not a valid bug would be similar to claiming an infoleak isn't as well when it's one of the building blocks of modern exploitation.

I'm not trying to be an ass, I'm just trying to add a bit of context to ensure that the implication is well understood.

I felt the same way when I read the bold part that says "But that C codebase is an issue" so I quickly checked out the public databases and couldn't find a single serious vulnerability in the past 7 years.

Admittedly I stopped after going through a bunch of useless stuff related to CVE-2017-8823 (which was initially reported as remotely exploitable with no proof at all).

I went through the tor repository (not vidalia though) and read a bunch of conversations about some of the memory related bugs but none of those were exploitable either (exploitable as in remote execution, not a DoS) and most of the (not so many) bugs were actually logical bugs.

I really don't care what they decide to do with their project and honestly anything that can potentially improve the security of such a system is fine by me but I really think they're doing themselves and the language a disservice by communicating the way they do.

Also, as a side note, even with a C codebase there is SO MUCH you could (and should) do to minimize the impact of a vulnerability that the fact that some choose to present just rewriting code in a different language is not even funny.

Something I hadn't thought about is, could it be that electric cars are not perceived as a threat due to the lack / different of noise, vibration and heat when compared to a combustion car?

I know animals nap under cars all the time but at least with "regular" cars they seemed to be more aware of the danger.

I'm not talking about waymo, self driving, human in the loop or any of that here, I'm just curious because I wonder if the same thing would've happened with a combustion engine and if there are any "easy wins" in terms of deterrence.

You know it's not about the disagreement, it's about that toxic need to be a smart-ass that's so prevalent in social media (including this platform).

I would've loved to engage in a conversation about coding styles such as MISRA, CERTs or even the small tweaks such as the one that offended you so deeply but you wasted the opportunity to engage in a constructive convesartion and instead chose to nitpick the "reformatting" thing (seriously, I just moved things around slightly, it's the same thing) or the nothing-burger "bug"...

I don't know, maybe I misinterpreted you and if that's the case then I apologize but when I saw that code and felt the urge to play/doodle I thought it could be a fun way to connect with someone over something silly and I just got disappointed.

Oh no, I accidentally duplicated a function call while quickly rewriting the code for fun, what a terrible sin! (as a side note, I didn't even compile the code but I after quick check I don't see any notes on the man page that suggest that the accidental spurious repeated call could cause a problem)

I understand that you might not like that style but I think you're comming a bit too strong on this, especially considering how carefully I worded my message in terms of not hurting any feeling and being clear about this being MY preference.

I guess I shouldn't probably even answer but it saddens me and makes me a bit angry to get a reminder of why I don't usually participate in social media.

Just for fun I reformatted it minimally in the conservative way I write code that is intended to be easy to read and understand to improve the odds of future contributors (or future me) introducing a bug in it due to misunderstanding it.

It's painfully verbose but I think it's worth it considering that we're in 2025 and we're not limited to one character variable names.

https://gist.github.com/leonardo-albertovich/984fff0825ff8fe...

There doesn't have to be anything wrong for people to choose whatever they feel most comfortable with. Back when I used to do a lot of android (and some iOS) based RE I sometimes used gdb on the device itself through ssh because it was the path of least resistance which allowed me to focus on the hard parts of the job.

I've just installed it and tried to have it create a hello world using gemma3:27b-it-qat through ollama but it refused to do it claiming it doesn't have access to my filesystem.

Then I opened an existing file and asked it to modify a function to return a fixed value and it did the same.

I'm an absolute newb in this space so if I'm doing something stupid I'd appreciate it if you helped me correct it because I already had the C/C++ extension complain that it can only be used in "proper vscode" (I imported my settings from vscode using the wizard) and when this didn't work either it didn't spark joy as Marie Kondo would say.

Please don't get me wrong, I gave this a try because I like the idea of having a proper local open source IDE where I can run my own models (even if it's slower) and have control over my data. I'm genuinely interested in making this work.

Thanks!

I don't really see myself using this app but I loved textual and even used it for a PoC a while back.

I appreciate the work you are doing by dogfooding textual and how consistent you (or your team, I didn't know there was more than one person behind it) have been.

I just wanted to say thanks so yeah, Thanks!

I'm sure that there's a good reason to do it this way but I was wondering what would the benefits of doing it this way instead of installing openwatcom using whisky.

A few weeks ago I gave it a chance out of curiosity because I wanted to run total comander and was pleasantly surprised of how well it worked which makes me think that it should be able to run openwatcom perfectly.

Side note: in the end, even though TC worked great I just crossed that item from my ToDo and continued using double commander (although the search feature is much better in TC).

Wouldn't it be better to use FFI to build an idiomatic interface to use in Dart instead?

Be sure to put it behind a palo alto firewall which is by no means backdoored by the IDF!

Wow, this is amazing and I hadn't heard about it yet so thanks a lot for sharing it!

There's a clear logical difference in those two patches and I can't blame the maintainer for going with his version.

Attribution should be given though, regardless of the bug OPs patch introduced the actual line that fixes the issue is clearly the same thing with the appropriate coding style.

As a maintainer, I can understand his reasoning but TBH it would've been easier and more respectful to just reply with the proper code snippet, having the contributor submit it (if he agreed) and then giving them credit.

Honestly, the comment section of this thread sucks, the level of self righteousness, "aggression" and gatekeeping is ridiculously uncalled for.

There are some things that are much more valuable than raw speed but that's an aspect something every collector I've gone through was somewhat lacking.

I think vector could be a very decent middle ground in the performance / safety space.

Last time I went through the code I concluded that it was a bit lacking but that's definitely something that can be (and probable is being) improved.

Side note : their documentation is really nice!

You're a cool cat, respect.

That's overly harsh, they are doing good work I think their data model is a step forward in the right direction.

Their processors are quite capable and the entire receiver and exporter contrib collection is pretty good.

I'm not saying it's the best solution out there because that clearly depends on each use case but I don't think such harsh criticism makes sense.

Disclaimer: I'm part of the fluent-bit maintainer team.

It'd be funny to silently alias quetta=emacs in systems. I wonder what would people think when they find it.

Well, you know, there is a way to share your work without putting others down or being dismissive.

It's really valuable (and sometimes even enjoyable) for others to read (or even participate in) a conversation between two (or more) knowledgeable individuals who share their perspective and explain why they made the choices the made in their implementations (hint: here's where he could share some of their work!).

In fact, this is the polar opposite of that and it's just sad.

I think it's not polite, if you just want to show something cool you did you could create your own thread. You don't interrupt a street musicians and start playing in front of the crew just because you think you are a "better" artist or that your version of the song is cooler right? It's common courtesy.

On a side note, I looked at both codebases and even though I've already said that I wouldn't use either of them I have to say that I find rurbans to be somewhat messier and uglier so I have to disagree with you.