mbel

> Recently I converted the C++ part to C, which halved the size of the wasm file.

So you are saying that "costless" abstractions of C++ actually had some cost? Who would have thought.

> We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options...

Full four months of engagement and commitment, that's pretty impressive.

It's easy: she just needs to become a computer scientist.

> For instance, pure rasterization cannot do shadows.

Well... the technique that you describe (shadow mapping) is actually pure rasterization it just requires more than one rasterization pass. This also ignores the fact that there are other techniques for getting shadows in rasterizing renderers (stencil volumes and other stuff that is rather considered historical today).

I get your point that rasterization doesn't support shadows "naturally" like ray tracing, but in my opinion your wording and the example is rather unfortunate. The same goes for reflections, I would say SSS or caustics probably are better examples since they are really only done with techniques based on ray tracing.

Yeah, I'm absolutely aware what is happening here.

Of course if they are creating slot machines they should follow the related regulations. However there is nothing that forces them to make actual games. If they can make business by selling virtual slot machines let them do so as long as it's legal. After all they are not the only game publisher out there and if there is an actual need for quality games it will be fulfilled by other publishers.

> Video game publishers have been trying consistently to implement a "less for more" attitude when it comes to their products.

Isn't maximizing profits just a natural consequence of having a for-profit business? It's not just evil video game publishers, everybody wants to sell less for more.

> So i wonder - how popular is using parcel lockers for e-commerce is in Poland?

From my own experience: extremely. It's the default option, everything else is considered only if the parcel doesn't fit the locker.

And is this situation any different from location logs based on mobile phone? It's obviously easier to leave s phone than a face at home, my point is that we have already pretty much agreed to be tracked most of the time.

> dynamic loading and runtime modification of code, which modern systems rely on quite a lot under the hood

Can you provide any example? I can't think of any and it sounds very interesting since you seem to be implying that it's common. I assume that "dynamic loading" means something more sophisticated than loading a dynamic library at run-time?

If you are developing a compiler you will need to understand the output assembly. Learning to program in it is one way to get to know it. There is also plenty of little code snippets around run-time libraries and OS that are written directly in assembly (e.g. crt0.o, crt1.o & friends).

Basically: somebody has to provide the infrastructure between assembly and high level languages, so that everyone else can write in HLL.

Optimization of games or HPC workloads is also a valid use-case, but today you probably want to use intrinsics in C instead.

Apart from potential performance issues I can't think of any other reason why not. Keep in mind however that games are made to be fun and sometimes ability to predict actions of not-so-smart AI opponent might be better that facing unpredictable and too intelligent AI.

> 5. Things I'm still looking for : Google Calender, Drive

Fastmail provides a DavCAL calendar and some storage space with their email offering. They also have a wonderful browser client (much better that gmail at least for me).

It was yesterday.

For anybody else looking for explanation what this particular software does here is its home page: https://luna-lang.org/

It's a sort of WYSIWYG data processing environment.

> Note that `malloc` is special in the C standard as well, and AFAIK it is not possible to implement `malloc` in standard C at all.

malloc() is usually implemented in C [0] and to be honest I'm not sure why do you think it wouldn't be? Of course you need OS API calls to actually get some memory (unless you want to operate on statically defined memory buffer) but well it's still C.

[0] https://github.com/lattera/glibc/blob/master/malloc/malloc.c

> yeah, there are standards, but they're actually ignored. There's lots of comments stories on HN about how C committee specified things that are unrealistic or outright impossible.

Any examples? It sounds ridiculous, perhaps you were speaking about C++? But then again I can't think of anything but "export templates" that were finally dropped from the standard.

Even more than architectures, there seems to be a tiny little bit of spite in everything IT related from programming language design (C++) to end-user facing software (Windows Update).

> someone else's server

Isn't that what cloud meant in the first place... and to be honest "nice package" sounds a little bit like a container.

Explanation why fork of clang was required (as opposed to just improving clang) would also be interesting.

> Most likely function call overhead

Quite likely: https://godbolt.org/g/xGkCyA although it really depends on the compiler (gcc is smarter here). He also seems to be benchmarking printing more than anything else (hence the difference between C and C++).

Without versions of the compilers and explained methods of measurement, the results posted on the blog are more anecdotal knowledge than any kind of benchmark.

> Seriously, why didn't anyone invented it yet?

Perhaps the user demand is not so big or even noticeable? It starts to make sense when you type in more than two languages regularly. I would argue that there are only couple of percents of bilingual users and people using three and more languages are even less common.

Nim doesn't meet all his requirements, it's garbage-collected. Complexity is hard to measure and rather subjective, but Nim in my opinion seems to be more complex than Zig.

> But I suspect of committe would depracate any features, mostly the same people would start nagging about not having backward compatibility?

Isn't it reasonable to desire a language that is both backwards compatible and not very complex?

But still can be (and is) used to implement some features from the standard library.

In C obviously or you know, in inline assembly since it seems that it isn't going anywhere. But joking aside they could be implemented by the compilers similar to how std::function is implemented today.

It seems to be a joke, they would have serious problem with backward compatibility with "this" pointer. Also it would limit the use cases for the language, unless they would introduce something like std::raw_ptr, which to be honest would be quite funny.

The fact that this headline cannot be distinguished from April Fools joke by other commenters seems to say a lot about the direction in which C++ standard committee is heading.

It really depends on the target architecture (and ABI), size of the struct and how fields in the struct are defined, more than if it's C or C++. For simple examples like this one: https://godbolt.org/g/ZT3bJ3 there usually will be no problem.

I would say: yep, pretty much. Generally abusing "weaknesses" is considered evil, and the likeliness that something becomes considered a "weakness" seem to depend on how much damage can be done by abusing this trait.

> is it evil just because they are better at it than others?

It really depends on scale and proportions. In this case the exact boundary when something becomes recognized as evil doesn't really exist. The more efficient you will become on finding out weaknesses of other humans and using them, the more people will consider your actions to be evil. Displaying a picture of happy family drinking coke won't shock anybody, but suggesting discount on alcohol to alcoholic might come as wrong to many people.

> No one is forced to use FB as far as I know.

With facebook actively scraping phones for contacts, calls and messages, embedding widgets on third party sites and what-not. in a way we all really are forced to be facebook users.