jibsen

The chapter Understanding Git in Git Internals by Scott Chacon also has a good explanation of how Git works.

https://github.com/pluralsight/git-internals-pdf

Is it just me, or are the bin sizes listed from jemalloc (assuming 150 should be 160, and 182 be 192) not dividing each power-of-2 range linearly?

16, 32, 48, 64, 80, 96, 128, 160, 192, 256, 320, 384, …

It looks like, from 64 and up, each power-of-2 range is divided into two quarter ranges and one half range.

Is it "free", or "free if you subscribe to a $20/mo basic VS online account"?

I think it is hard to find a more well-written and concise introduction to a programming language than K&R.

That being said, the example code in the book is sometimes terse at the expense of readability (and security). I would try to pick up a more modern, and defensive, coding style from the web.

I moved from the other way from Mercurial to Git a while back.

I started using Mercurial because the basic interface and operations appeared more natural to me. Also, at least at the time, the Windows support was better in Mercurial.

After working with some repos using Git, I fell in love with the staging area, and the ability to selectively stage parts of files. I am sure Mercurial has something similar, but it was built into Git.

The only thing that bugs me is that the Windows port appears to be stuck at 1.9.5 (yes, I know it's open-source so I should go fix it instead of complaining).

I certainly do.

The first parameter to memcpy is the destination.

Free BitBucket for private repos, free GitHub for open source projects.

I would have considered the micro plan if it weren't for the 5 repo limit -- I am (sadly) not rich enough to pay them just for being nice if I can get the number of private repos I need for free elsewhere.

The speed, and the text rendering for me. Sublime renders the fonts I use better, and it supports bitmap fonts, which I am still fond of.

What happens if a header file declares a function to return auto, does the compiler have to wait until link time to find out what the type is?

Looks promising, but disappointing it only supports the (more or less abandoned) official MinGW install [1].

[1]: http://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/CPP-668

zopflipng (with -m switch) is close to or better than the best on those five images:

    1_zopflipng.png  8.466
    2_zopflipng.png 18.739
    3_zopflipng.png  8.012
    4_zopflipng.png 91.879
    5_zopflipng.png  1.117

On that subject; say what you want about how clunky CMake is, but it's really nice to be able to build projects like this with VC++ or plain MinGW-w64.

Except SourceTree works fine with both GitHub and BitBucket.

As I understood it, part of the problem was that they rolled their own memory handling which cached allocations [1].

Otherwise, I imagine system memory protection would have found this much sooner.

[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.openbsd.misc/211963

CMake certainly has its own set of peculiarities, but sometimes it can work to let you build stuff on Windows with VC++ or plain MinGW without having to use MSYS/Cygwin.

Creating portable software and then distributing it with a Posix only build system seems wasteful.

It's skipping over ':' characters (which serve as delimiters) to get to the next token of the string (or end of line). So it looks correct, but the check for end of line is superfluous (unless any architecture uses ':' as end of line marker of course).

I think it is more likely it looks the way it does because it was made by copy-pasting and editing the loop a few lines further down that copies a token:

  while (categoryvalue[0] != '\0' && categoryvalue[0] != ':')
    *cp++ = *categoryvalue++;

As for the shifting, I would assume glibc is free to expect whatever holds true on the platforms it currently supports. But fair enough warning about it in a analysis tool.

I believe you actually see the sun "around the corner", due to atmospheric refraction [1].

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_refraction

Writing a dynamic array in C is a good exercise in the amount of details you are spared in languages which provide basic containers.

I recently revisited some example code I wrote many years ago [1], and found some new issues, and there are most likely still some I haven't noticed.

That being said, when you use a title like this article's, it is a good idea to check your example code thoroughly.

[1]: https://github.com/jibsen/scv

I have been using TeamViewer for this for some years. It works quite well, is localized so less computer literate parents outside US/UK have a chance of running it, and is free for personal use (even on weekdays :-P).

This reminded me of Ayumu the chimp [1]. The difference between being able to perceive the overall image like a zebra, and the specific details like the position of nine numbers seems interesting to me.

[1]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/16832379

One trick you could try is: in find_longest_match, if you already have a match, check if the byte at match_maxlen matches before doing the linear compare off all bytes up to it.

If that one byte does not match, the entire match has no chance of being longer than the current best (in this simple case).

Just noticed that pressing the exe download link on the front page actually takes you to the wiki entry now, that's helpful.

Perhaps part of the problem is perception.

When people download an exe installer on Windows, they generally expect it to install something that works out of the box.

Please note that I am not saying it should be expected that there is a one-click (or double- as it were) solution for Windows at this point, I am just saying that people might ge t that impression from the download link on the front page, and the fact that it is an exe installer.

Perhaps if you put it in a zip -- I am sure the people who can find and follow the notes for installing the rest of what is required can handle zip.

I seem to remember some statistics showing Linux users generally donating more for Humble Bundles than Windows and Mac users.

That doesn't mean they are more inclined to buy Steam games of course, but it does seem to indicate they do not mind spending money on games.

I think the little cool details that make it stand out work really well for short code samples, but I am a little worried they might catch your eye too much and end up being counterproductive if you look at them all day while coding.

Not sure if it's related to what the OP meant, but I can see 5 failed login attempts from different IP addresses over the past 48 hours (and pretty much none before that).

I think perhaps confusion on the use of parenthesis comes from the fact that you need them for types and not for objects.

I don't know if I am missing a setting, but here on Windows, it feels a bit like TextAdept is fighting a loosing battle with ClearType (as in, I almost feel I should be wearing 3D glasses).

On the wiki there was only one other theme available for the latest 6.3 release, so I tried an older Solarized theme, but TA crashes when I try to load it.

I feel having to press a keyboard shortcut to bring up the auto-complete menu is a step back in productivity compared to ST, but the built-in API help is a nice idea.

If you subscribe to versioning schemes like for instance semantic versioning [1], then the major version number must be incremented "if any backwards incompatible changes are introduced to the public API". In that sense, the change from Python 2 to 3 could warrant it.

[1] http://semver.org/