I'm using obnam now.
1,538 karma · joined January 9, 2009
I'm using obnam now.
The C++ code I work with usually has more strenuous alignments which are only possible to get right in monospace fonts.
If you program C like there's no overflow, it doesn't matter much whether you mis-index the next array with 4294967295 or -1. There's no substitute for overflow-vigilance, and particularly not rules like "such-and-such type is bad and such-and-such type is better".
(BTW: an ex-boss of mine claimed that signed ints were evil because because and insisted on using unsigned for everything, but that's a different story, and I'm glad he's an ex-boss)
So this seems not to be the tool to auto-create a .gitignore file...
I've never used it to build big apps, only toyed around with examples, but then again, it wasn't made for the big applications, rather for small ad-hoc scripts.
Kind of Eclipse plugins vs Emacs scripts.
SIM cards come to mind.
But hardware obsolescence is a valid issue, too. That's why I suggested Bochs as a lowest common denominator in another comment.
Repeat after me: "I'm providing people with valuable information that is highly relevant to their purchasing decisions".
Just curious: Were the lldb session snippets taken from the original debugger session? I keep getting weird looks when I use a command-line debugger just to have a transcript afterwards. (The weird looks being from people who'd rather send me a screenshot of their GUI debugger's call stack.)
That makes it harder to introduce Git in an organization where nobody brings along enough Git experience to design all that upfront.
If you're on Subversion and ignore that the repo is basically a counted list of big file trees with properties on the nodes, you won't get branching right.
If (FSM forbid) you're on MKS and ignore that it keeps per-file version histories somewhere in the belly of the expensive server, you'll try silly things like creating new files on a branch.
And for Git, you learn that there are commits, trees and refs.
However, I wonder if it isn't too painful in the long run to teach OS programming on a target where you have to flip SD cards every time you compile (as opposed to one of those with a hardware debugger included, like Launchpad or ST Discovery).
When I took Operating Systems (INF242 at Oslo) ten years ago, we wrote an operating system for PCs that booted from floppies, and debugging was largely a matter of poking bytes to 0xB800:0000, which made this course somewhat unpopular with students with little low-level programming experience.