1500100900

The Raspberry Pis are hostile towards non-Linux systems.

If you mean a standard, it will be too abstract to be considered as something that can run anything. Sometimes it has to be too vague in order to not make existing Bourne-style shells non-compliant. This isn't, for example, a standard for the C programming language where you can throw some things into the UB bag or the ID bag. POSIX sh is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual standard.

Even if it were an implementation, how would you write a "POSIX sh" equivalent of these lines taken from a bash script? (My point isn't that it's impossible.)

mkdir -p /tmp/nodes/{a,b,c,d,e} ; NODES=( /tmp/nodes/{a,b,c,d,e} ) ; echo ${NODES[$((`date +%-j` % ${#NODES[@]}))]}

Which POSIX sh do you have in mind and how does one pass arrays around in it?

"Fighting the OS" you develop may lead to you fixing the errors and deficiencies of the system that annoy you and possibly annoy other people too.

Performance is not the top priority for OpenBSD developers.

> I don't use BSD nor Linux for desktop because I like the third party tools offered on macOS for work and now I don't know what BSD is for me. I'm also amazed how FreeBSD doesn't care to make it work on Raspberry Pi.

Where did you get that from? Maybe they care, but it's not that easy for some technical reason?

If it's something like a galera cluster then not really, I think. You want the updated machine to become operational again in a reasonable amount of time, because during the time it's down you have fewer points of failure. But the difference between 2 minutes and 5 minutes in this case is not a big deal, in my opinion.

Yes, something goofy like that.

I don't know about declarative vs imperative. I can see "versioned migrations" are "coming soon", so maybe that could work. Depending on what it will be.

> Anyway, in my previous comment, my point was that it is certainly possible to build trustworthy declarative schema management tools. It's difficult and requires a lot of effort, but it is not impossible.

Unless the schema is self-modifying. Then obviously the database schema definition is the only source of truth.

but is it "Gucci Gang" rhymes or "The expense of spirit in a waste of shame" rhymes?

To add, execution plans presented by MariaDB are also nearly useless.

A hand-written loose index scan sometimes helps in a case like this. I think it's not built-in yet.

And for good reason. If people already call command completion bloat, imagine the uproar if they found out that bash or zsh is built in and the default shell.

On top of that, most people expect syntax somewhat similar to Bourne shell and tcsh is far from such. Its for loop syntax is especially surprising.

Additionally, an empty element in this context means $PWD

Doesn't seem to happen to the Common Address Redundancy Protocol too much.

OpenBSD's crontab provides a `-s command` flag which does similar thing in principle:

https://man.openbsd.org/crontab.5

"-s command

Only a single instance of command will be run concurrently. Additional instances of command will not be scheduled until the earlier one completes."

But I don't think it saves the state somewhere permanently, which isn't a big problem until cron's process dies for some reason.

It's been available in FreeBSD since mid 90s and yet nobody ever uses it, not even FreeBSD developers. I like memccpy because it's easy to check for all possible errors known to me, but everybody else seems to prefer strlcpy because it came from THE security-oriented BSD.

>int8, int16, int32, int64 are all explicit and force the compiler (and the hardware) to obey the wishes of the programmer.

At least in C99, the compiler doesn't need to support exact-width integer types.

>People make much ado about the fact that "a byte isn't necessarily 8 bits"

Well, POSIX.1-2004 requires that CHAR_BIT == 8.

Scopes of identifiers, linkages of identifiers, name-spaces of identifiers, storage durations of objects, types, and representations of types.

I don't mean to criticize the blog post, since it's probably valuable to some people. But if you're sick of Skype for Linux and you realize that something like IRC would be good replacement, then what's the point of writing an IRC server in Haskell (except for fun/education/pleasure) when you could use existing software (open source or not) like Apache Wave, Mumble, one of the many XMPP servers, IRC servers etc.?