zasdffaa

> with competitors that were more focused and agile and had lower cost structures

so do economies of scale apply as a principle, or not?

One place advertised on StackOverflow jobs a while back. I followed to their job details. Under perks of the job they said free fruit, and that they used version control. That as a fat No then.

> creating threads is not possible because the logging system makes heavy use of setjmp().

Naive question from a non-c user, setjmp/longjmp just manipulate the stack and since each thread has its own execution stack, that should be completely safe ISTM - so why is it unsafe/impossible? I'm missing something.

Now this is a useful answer, and perhaps the best in the thread, thanks

WHY bad? HOW am I supposed to learn anything from "It's bad"

I don't think subqueries are so bad - at least they're clear, and if fast, that's surely problem solved. IME they are clearer and often faster, so overall better. I know purists don't like them but I do.

Am curious. How would you write it 'properly'? Other (good) alternative is

   with toporders as (
      select max(order_total) as maxOT, customer_id
      from orders
      group by customer_id
   )
   select last_name, maxOT
   from customers join toporders 
   on ...

What would you suggest?

In fairness there's nothing weird about that, it being just a typical correlated subquery. I'd quite possibly do it that way.

I do think we should be "protecting all the things we hold dear, family, culture, art, friends, the future", which is why I prioritise eg. climate change, it is a far greater threat.

Can't see the top sql because it keeps flipping over, WTF.

Where are these examples?

The website's awful. There's no user testing on it - why do I have a 20 sec progress bar before it tells me I need to select files - where from? Drag from where? What format?

Found the datasets - what is AAPL.csv? What do the columns mean? How do I use them to query on? The UI has been designed by someone who doesn't know anything about UIs. Like, anything.

Added: "AskEdith translates English to SQL to help you save 1 hour every day". Well that's a bloody strong claim. Wonder if it's justified.

> With single level store, the program pages are mapped in, not copied. Writing to the page alters the disk image. All processes running the same program share the memory pages.

Umm, mmap'ed files on linux allow both https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/mmap.2.html

       MAP_SHARED
              Share this mapping.  Updates to the mapping are visible to
              other processes mapping the same region, and (in the case
              of file-backed mappings) are carried through to the
              underlying file.  (To precisely control when updates are
              carried through to the underlying file requires the use of
              msync(2).)

       MAP_PRIVATE
              Create a private copy-on-write mapping.  Updates to the
              mapping are not visible to other processes mapping the
              same file, and are not carried through to the underlying
              file.  It is unspecified whether changes made to the file
              after the mmap() call are visible in the mapped region.

and AFAIK on Windows the same.

You can't copyright a style. And this is automation, which put lots of people out of work a while back eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite amongst other protests (people like Hollie, too). But Disney right now is a soulless factory as much as any other and they'll be onto this tech like a shot, and Hollie... I don't know. I wish her well.

I see. Seems rocket engine efficiency must have seriously improved while I was not looking, thanks.

Did I miss something or did this rocket have no stack - it was a single stage (with boosters, but aside those still one undivided rocket)? Can anyone comment on that please.

> At what point is the car a truck?

when you can use it as a truck (ie. when it can do what the car isn't adequate for).

I don't understand that. Quite literally it is (or seems to be). In the 'design' section:

"With a single-level storage the entire storage of a computer is thought of as a single two-dimensional plane of addresses, pointing to pages. Pages may be in primary storage (RAM) or in secondary storage (disk); however, the current location of an address is unimportant to a process. The operating system takes on the responsibility of locating pages and making them available for processing. If a page is in primary storage, it is immediately available. If a page is on disk, a page fault occurs and the operating system brings the page into primary storage. No explicit I/O to secondary storage is done by processes: instead, reads from secondary storage are done as the result of page faults; writes to secondary storage are done when pages that have been modified since being read from secondary storage into primary storage are written back to their location in secondary storage."

IOW this is classic VM behaviour. Which bit of the wiki article is revelatory?

(NB. I've actually used multics).

A search for Single-level store gets me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-level_store

"The term originally referred to what is now usually called virtual memory"

And seems to lead on to memory mapped files, so nothing apparently significant AFAICS.

I'll check out your slic link, thanks.

it's not undefined behaviour, rather it's trying to be helpful by coercing stuff where it can. Unless I'm missing something, it's perfectly defined.

This has been known for decades, and is why the original mac (1980s?) was black on white. It keeps being forgotten. UI knowledge keeps being lost.

I don't buy this eg.

> Black text on white from a computer display is akin to reading a book in direct sunlight and tires the eye.

No it doesn't. I don't know where that claim comes from. In sunlight reading is reduced through glare.

Personally his red on black makes those words unreadable. I really doubt his claims of testing it. But good luck to those who it does work for.

Good question, my answer was misleading. It changes virtually nothing in the parse or in the resulting AST.

Writing the parser as a process has made me (even) more familiar with SQL syntax and semantics and understand it better, which has only increased my disgust[1] of the whole matted thorny snarl that it is. I was asking for a dose of rationality for Lil, not a syntactic infection inherited from a misdesigned language. HTH.

(BTW the designers of SQL knew well that it had other problems and admitted them, eg. search for "A Critique of ANSI SQL Isolation Levels").

[1] yeah, that's the right word.

And helloooo eternal september. You haven't a clue.

That's entirely irrelevant. It was available, got used, and things massively fell over when it was pulled. You've given no case to show things have changed - can you actually give any evidence that 'JavaScriot runtimes are quite well audited'.

And a turing complete language delivered from a third party over said network connection to be executed locally will exponentially increases that risk, no?

> JavaScriot runtimes are quite well audited meanwhile.

Given (for example) the leftpad trainwreck, is that really true?

Turning mistakes into possibly unwanted run-time behaviour is dodgy. The user may end up with a problem that's harder to debug than just a crash.

Perhaps have a switch that can enables stronger type checking.

Having written an sql parser, I very very strongly agree.

> Lil has a soft, spongy, dynamic type system in which values do their best to convert to a more relevant type as the need arises.

Noooooo, this is a terrible idea if you want this to be used at any non-trivial scale

from https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/No-JavaScript_notes

2021: NoScript has between 100,000 and 1,000,000 installs on Chrome[1], and approximately 330,000 installs on Firefox[2]. NoScript is a "recommended extension" by Mozilla, and is one of the very few addons available for Mobile Firefox. (newer stats, and other reliable sources, would be appreciated. Statcounter doesn't yet reveal no-JS usage)

Internal

2015: ~3% using browsers that do not support JavaScript per Analytics/Reports/Clients without JavaScript#Preliminary results

2016: ~7% of visitors to Wikipedia Portal do not request JavaScript resources per File:Browsers, Geography, and JavaScript Support on Wikipedia Portal.pdf and File:Analysis of Wikipedia Portal Traffic and JavaScript Support.pdf

2020: Per T253033 (methodology in T234865), 13.84% of sub-A tier Desktop, and 36.48% sub-A tier mobile web page views are from browsers without JS support.

2021: Measuring the % of edits coming from users without JS enabled across all Wikimedia wikis: ~6% of logged-in users and ~1% of logged-out users (~5% total). Per T240697.

Perhaps the pervasive use of JS forces people to enable it. I disable it and when things work, they are fast and wonderfully ad-free (or greatly cut down; I do further ad blocking). JS is a security risk IMO.

> Great machines to develop traditional database apps on

Hi, could you explain what it was that made them so good to do this, thanks.