Needs (2014) in the title.
1,270 karma · joined February 20, 2013
But then again, in my day-to-day work we probably solve problems in languages without GC in ways that would raise eyebrows with the Go specialists at Tailscale. To each team their own favorite pet language, I guess!
https://mta.openssl.org/pipermail/openssl-announce/2022-Octo...
When you want to have "early return" in a component, it's possible to just split the component into two to introduce an "inner" component that contains whatever comes after the early return point in the original component.
Any local variables from before the early return then need to be passed as props to the new inner component.
However, naming this inner component is always an issue for me. Typically I just name them Inspector2, Inspector3, etc. until I have an implementation that works. Then I can start thinking about how to refactor the implementation into something that I can give sensible names.
It's really a code transformation similar to async/await where you derive a state machine from a block of code by identifying transition points. In async/await you have transitions at the await points; in components you have transitions at the early return points. In async/await, no one is forcing you to name the individual states or even write them out explicitly - the compiler takes care of it. Then why do I have to write out the state machine explicitly and name the states explicitly for function components with early return? I would love for React to have some facility like "Consider the rest of this component as a new sub-component; as if this component now returns a single Element pointing to whatever is in the rest of this component". But it's probably a Hard Problem™.
In my experience teaching 1st year undergrad algorithms, I'd be surprised if the average 1st year student that has just passed an "Introduction to algorithms" course would even be able to solve Problem Set 0.
However I don't think we should delay teaching algorithms until several years into the CS university curriculum. It's too important and central a topic to miss out on. We really need an intro algorithms curriculum that can teach both the basics (as in Problem Set 0) and the algorithms and data structures in the textbook.
[1] https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/6-006-introduction-to-algorithms...
[2] https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/6-006-introduction-to-algorithms...
[1] https://github.com/antialize/sql-parse/blob/7869595aa92aed0b... [2] https://github.com/antialize/sql-type [3] https://github.com/antialize/py-mysql-type-plugin
Donations from the beginning in 2007 through to 2021: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=179406.0
Donations in 2022: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf//index.php?topic=179926.0
This seems like a dubious claim - the AMVW code seems to provide a makefile that compiles using the free GNU Fortran compiler: https://github.com/eiscor/eiscor
However, I still think it's a damn shame that HackerRank needed such a high-profile incident before reconsidering their shady arrangement involving probably-automated DMCA takedowns against GitHub repositories. Either they didn't know what that would incur on open source repositories hosted on GitHub and other platforms, or they just didn't care about it as long as it wouldn't cause a huge fuss for themselves (which it did in this case).
However the actual chat part of it is very barebones with a simplistic JSON-based protocol and a simplistic IRC-like interface - quite unlike devzat.
I wonder how hard it would be to untangle the authentication and transport bits from devzat and plug in our own proprietary auth/transport.
> It would seem there is no end to how far businesses can take white-labeling and outsourcing.
> I’m sure engineering time to manually delete data must be more expensive in the long run than creating processes and tools for customers and customer support representatives to handle delectation requests.
> 11 of these were smaller niche online stores.
If I'm a "niche online store", am I somehow excused from these rules? I would think there would be a market for white-labeled online stores for niche online stores, but that's somehow Bad™? But having an in-house engineering team develop the platform and respond to development needs as they arise (to handle the first account deletion request) is also Bad™?
If Nvidia doesn't own the code, do you then imagine they're in a sort of licensing agreement with the rightsholders that allows them to distribute the binary blobs but not the code?
I don't understand what situation would lead a corporate-sponsored closed source project such as Nvidia's drivers to be in a position of complicated ownership.
One of the reasons that you shouldn't "point out something wrong the moment you see it" is because there might be multiple candidates for the "wrong" thing that needs to be addressed, and addressing any of them is enough to make the system as a whole "not wrong" (or at least, less wrong).
If a colleague says something that sounds immediately wrong, try to let them finish what they're saying and try to figure out why it doesn't immediately seem wrong in their own eyes - it might be that what they're saying is only wrong in the context of a larger system, and the colleague simply has a different understanding of the larger system from you, which causes them to not immediately think that it's wrong. Sometimes the "actually wrong" thing might be somewhere else in the system, and if your colleague hadn't been allowed to finish their thought, no one would have realized where the "actually wrong" thing is!
plan-edit() {
cd ~/wiki &&
git diff --exit-code &&
vim Rav-priority-queue.txt &&
! git diff --quiet Rav-priority-queue.txt &&
git commit -qm 'Update Rav-priority-queue.txt' Rav-priority-queue.txt &&
git pull -q --rebase &&
git push -q
}Deamortized resizing can work as follows: When inserting into a vector that is half full, allocate a new buffer twice the size and copy two elements into the buffer. For the subsequent insertions, copy two elements every time you insert one element. This guarantees that you are done copying all elements into the new buffer once the old buffer is full, and you only performed a constant number of instructions with each operation.
It's possible to deamortize many quite advanced data structures in theory - see e.g. the lecture notes on "Maintaining Order in a List" on this course webpage: https://cs.au.dk/~gerth/aa11/
... but as with everything in theoretical computer science you are not guaranteed that the implementation works better in practice than the "naive" approach. Deamortization techniques do have a lot of practical relevance in hard realtime applications, but I don't know how much of "real" hard realtime stuff uses academic techniques and how much of it is mostly engineering.
javascript:void(document.documentElement.addEventListener('keydown',e=>e.keyCode==9&&e.stopPropagation(),true),document.documentElement.addEventListener('copy',e=>e.stopPropagation(),true),document.documentElement.addEventListener('paste',e=>e.stopPropagation(),true))
> Randomized rounding, where the sender sends 1 with probability x and 0 otherwise, and the receiver uses the received bit X as the estimate x', has the property that E[x'] = x. Unbiased estimators are arguably more natural for many estimation problems. Here the measure of performance would be the maximum variance for the estimate over all inputs x, so for randomized rounding the cost is 1/4 (when x = 1/2).
The "cost"/"variance" of 1/4 in the above paragraph is talked about later in the article as the "expected squared error"; the main result is a scheme that has a cost of just 0.04599, which is better than the "send a 1 with a probability x" scheme, which has a cost of 1/4 = 0.25.
Have you tried running CS:GO on Linux through Steam on Linux? It's officially supported and for me it runs as well as I expect on low-end hardware. Are there any performance reasons to want to run in a Windows VM instead?