494 karma · joined June 25, 2012
p@pwaller.net
According to the manpage, -color can be shortened to -c and link shortened to `l`, as `addr` can be shortened to `a`. -br stands for -brief, which knowing makes it easier to remember.
ip -br -c a
ip -br -c l
Now I need the aliases less.(Note for anyone new to this that the "[]byte-value" - we say "the byte slice" - is a distinct thing from the "values stored-in-the-byte-slice", which is a heap allocated backing array)
What you're seeing is the LLVM IR for the program being printed. As another commenter noted, you can compile the program with make, which just runs `clang` on that IR.
It could be that the problem arises when trying to measure very small speed increases (small relative differences => noise matters more). But in that case the fact that such a small speed increase is wiped out by random layout effects surely means that time would be better invested in finding a more performant layout?
Someone's implemented a package for doing it with Go which looks good: https://github.com/zimmski/go-mutesting
https://github.com/mhagger/git-imerge
No previous commentary on it so far on HN:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=git%20imerge&dateRange=all
So, can anyone find any interesting discussion about this tool?
If you'd prefer reading rather than listening to the talk, here's an article which covers some of the same concepts:
https://wilsonmar.github.io/git-imerge/
The crux of it is that the tool does an efficient pairwise merge of all commits from the donor branch onto master. It can also be configured to run the test suite to detect conflicts.
Then you resolve conflicts in pairs of commits, which is only a small amount of work. The histories of your individual resolutions are preserved, so you can pause and resume the task.
Given his code you referenced, could you elaborate on what makes it look slow at a glance, and how you might speed it up? :)
Watching the countdown net it seemed plausible that they didn't know whether it had successfully landed either.
https://youtu.be/wbSwFU6tY1c?t=38m20s
... and then back to the presenters. As someone said to me, "That's their lying face!" :)
Can't fault them for wanting to dwell on the positives though, was an amazing moment to watch.
Edit: You can switch cameras on the above youtube video to the countdown net; you can clearly hear them saying "We lost the centre core" at 38m30s - not sure if that means "lost signal of" or otherwise. The people in the control room appear to become more muted at that point, though they still seem composed. It's really not clear.
Edit: On the countdown net you can hear some minutes later "suspected loss of signal": https://youtu.be/-B_tWbjFIGI?t=42m21s
... "But I _am_ administrator!?"
But 2M deaths in the last 30 years is not likely correct - this interesting WHO report on the matter suggests the final toll from the radiation would be more like "up to 4k":
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/
http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/chernobyl_di...
> The main causes of death in the Chernobyl-affected region are the same as those nationwide — cardiovascular diseases, injuries and poisonings — rather than any radiation-related illnesses
I think you're over-reading the phrase "How do you reach this conclusion?". The author didn't suggest that it was necessary, only that they were interested in seeing your reasoning. The world is a complicated place, so it can be reasonable to assume a default position that either thing is possible.
Can you provide a reference or show some workings which demonstrate that statement to be true? I've not heard this before, and it's not obvious that it should be true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOR_SzLW2Ns
There's some grainy test flight footage at the end, too.
https://www.lysator.liu.se/c/pikestyle.html
Quoting:
"Ah, variable names. Length is not a virtue in a name; clarity of expression is. A global variable rarely used may deserve a long name, maxphysaddr say. An array index used on every line of a loop needn't be named any more elaborately than i. Saying index or elementnumber is more to type (or calls upon your text editor) and obscures the details of the computation. When the variable names are huge, it's harder to see what's going on."
I don't agree with everything written therein, and it was written circa 1989. But in practice single letter variable names are used diligently and frequently in Go, they're convenient and don't break readability if you understand the (simple) convention.
Gmail sees the email coming from @theirdomain.com's servers, rather than my server. Gmail checks the SPF record which doesn't match, and it rejects it.
I understand that this style of forwarding is anyway bad because gmail see's all email the user receives @theirdomain.com as coming from those servers, not their true origin. If @theirdomain.com receives (and forwards) any spam, it looks like a spammer to gmail.