it'd be kinda hard to amend the clippy lints to ignore coroutine unwraps but still pipe up on system ones. i guess.
edit: i think they'd have to be "solely-task-color-flavored" so definitely probably not trivial to infer
491 karma · joined June 20, 2022
it'd be kinda hard to amend the clippy lints to ignore coroutine unwraps but still pipe up on system ones. i guess.
edit: i think they'd have to be "solely-task-color-flavored" so definitely probably not trivial to infer
Actually, unwittingly, problem solving being a common organizational behavior, and most algorithms being a blueprint for optimal problem solving; maybe get curious and shed the incline that they are merely academic?
Anyways, I did this, myself recently. I picked up CLRS and read it, omitting or skimming the proofy sections, opting to focus on design and intuition, which is troublesome when they begin to overlap. I hope to revisit it. It's a nice space to be in, a blissful stroll through pedagogy, little history lessons, easy stuff.
As I progressed through the readings I worked a healthy number of problems. Lots of struggle and pain working exercises, opting to avoid hints or shortcuts and spend hours and hours to internalize. This part stings. No one likes to bathe in the lather of their own ignorance, but it can be done.
the CPU is assumed to work, despite Linux being designed with portability, theres not really a programming interface to cleanly disable arbitrary features, I guess we just screw with it until it seems to work OK and no one is yelling.
Granted, Linux isnt a product, and a patch in a thread is unlikely to impact anyone
If you build things with wires, diodes, multiplexers, breakers, fuses and keyed connectors there's less maintenance needed than if you try and build a system entirely out of transistors and manually applied insulators.
I haven't looked at the package itself, but was it built on top of the C libraries with like, bindgen?
e: a glance suggests thats not the case, but perhaps they were ported naively by simply cloning the structure without looking at what it was implementing? that's definitely the path of least resistance for this type of thing. On top of that the spec itself is apparently in POSIX, some parts of which are, well, spotty; compared to RFCs
FHS seems to specifically imbue the user with the responsibility and consequences of filling up the disk.
I'd suspect there's probably versions of all those that have been made to function basically through WINE.
If your curious, it's very easy to use it as a hypervisor, and pull out what you can, though IOMMU/SR-IOV might be tricky.
Alternatively, checking if Blender/GIMP service your use cases wouldn't even require switching...
AutoHotKey has been solved a lot of different ways, for sure.
But yeah, granular detailed control over your hardware is still the primary use-case for Linux, so if you view bad defaults, annoying install procedures, occasional show stopping bugs a hindrance rather than an opportunity, maybe it's not a strong candidate.
I use Read Aloud across a few browser platforms cause sometimes I don't care to read an article I have some passing interest in.
The landscape is a mess:
it's not really bandwidth efficient to transmit on one count, local frameworks like Piper perform well in alot of cases, there's paid APIs from the big players, at least one player has incorporated api-powered neural tts and packaged it into their browser presumably ad-supported or something, yet another has incorporated into their OS, already (though it defaults to speak and spell for god knows why). I'm not willing to pay $0.20 per page though, after experimenting, especially when the free/private solution is good enough.
Probably a more apt analogy would be a keyed adapter.
Basically, they're not really setting up for a blanket ban on personal security features, that interpretation is obviously catastrophizing. Not that there aren't hamfisted laws somewhere like this, but NSWs implementation seems OK I guess
Generally all of the interfaces conform to the patterns in the mem module. If you want to understand the structure of everything else unambiguously it would be best to start there: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/mem/
It's very under-engineered, maybe a trifold pamphlet on light A11 printed with a laser jet running out of ink.
I've probably spent more time talking about how much it sucks than I have bothered considering a proper solution, at this point.
https://leetcode.com/problems/zigzag-grid-traversal-with-ski...
Here's an example of an ostensibly simple problem that I've solved (pretty much adversarially) with a type like: StepBy< Cloned< FlatMap< Chunks<Vec<i32>>, FnMut<&[i32]> -> Chain<Iter<i32>, Rev<Iter<i32>> > > > >
So this (pretty much) maximally dips into the type system to solve the problem, and as a result any comprehension the LLM must develop mechanistically about the type system is redundant.
It's a pretty wicked problem the degree to which the type system is used to solve problems, and the degree to which imperative code solves problems that, except for hopes and wishes, which portions map from purpose to execution will likely remain incomprehensible.
It's kind of conceptually like a Shepard's tone, though, which is maybe interesting.
// Comments for the non-Rust native reader, regarding this Function declaration:
// successors is a function that accepts an `Option` container for some Value of type T, called `first`
// and a Closure called `succ`, constrained below:
pub fn successors<T, F>(first: Option<T>, succ: F) -> Successors<T, F> ⓘ
where
// `succ` must receive the iterated state, and return the next iterated state
F: FnMut(&T) -> Option<T>,
// Each time the `next()` function is called on the returned Iterator (a Successors-flavored iterator),
// the state of `first` is yielded, and then
// `succ` is called to progress
// until a `None` type is reported by `succ`
I'm not sure where the concept came from, but it's not dissimilar to the author's implementation, but instead of the ControlFlow enum, it relies simply on the Option enum. I know though, that it was initially built in the Itertools crate as unfold and then upstreamed some time later.Essentially you use `first` to contain a Queue, Stack, or Level for the different traversals, and define traversal or activities from there.
It's fairly ergonomic in practice, ergonomic enough for Leetcode.
Here's a BFS: https://leetcode.com/problems/course-schedule-iv/solutions/6...
[0] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/fn.successors.html
[1] https://docs.rs/itertools/latest/itertools/fn.unfold.html
Write 20 sentences that end with "p" in the final word before the period or other punctuation.
Succeeded on ChatGPT, pretty close on gemma3:4b -- the exceptions usually ending with a "puh" sound...