I had zero problems reading the print version.
290 karma · joined June 19, 2013
I had zero problems reading the print version.
Am I mistaken?
The best orgs do a rewrite usually in the face of sea changes to the technology stack (e.g., containers vs. VMs) or business use (number of users is now 10X of original etc). Bringing key infrastructure in-house is also a decent reason, but the benefit of building expertise in an existing ecosystem vs. full rewrite should be carefully weighed.
You probably have read spolsky's article. It's quite dated by now, but it's still more right than wrong. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
However, I'm not convinced that void functions are better written in the guard-clause style. I think the intent of the code is better expressed with nested ifs. Of course, try to factor the ifs so that they're readable.
I'm saying this is more readable if the "do something part" is less than about 15 lines. Thoughts?
void do_something(input) {
if (!input.already_done()) {
// do something.
}
}Thank you vinkelhake for nailing the the real problem (exceptions) and bothering to check whether the stack overhead really exists.
Just wanted to chime in with a comment because HN doesn't show vote counts, so future readers will "see" my upvote on vinkelhake's comment.
I did this due diligence for a 10-user app. These guys have no excuse for not planning for a DDoS with a serious business.
>>> 'truthy' if None else 'falsy'
'falsy'
>>> 'truthy' if False else 'falsy'
'falsy'
>>> 'truthy' if 0 else 'falsy'
'falsy'But Ask the Korean made an excellent point about culturalism: "The term "culturalism" is my coinage ... is the unwarranted impulse to explain people's behavior with a "cultural difference", whether real or imagined. Because the culturalist impulse always attempts to explain more with culture than warranted, the "cultural difference" used in a cultural explanation is more often imagined than real. To paraphrase Abraham Maslow, to a man with a culturalist impulse, every problem looks like a cultural problem."
http://askakorean.blogspot.com/2013/07/culturalism-gladwell-...
FYI most Indians in the US like the more egalitarian, US way of lower "power distance" better.
"Yep, I know why the Mac's text looks blurrier" i.e., I meant to agree with 'coldtea' and add to the discussion.
The way I've written it now makes it sound like I'm disagreeing. Anyway, the link above should be useful to future readers.
Link for anybody else interested: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2007/06/font-rendering-resp... (linked articles are good too)
In my case it's Lightroom. :)
Longtime Ubuntu user here. Bought a Mac mini as my desktop replacement on the off-chance that I might write an iOS app.
I'm actually running Ubuntu inside Mac as my development environment. Ubuntu also nicely solves the "blurry text" problem [flame away! :)]
Is it still the case that updates from Apple will randomly break a Hackintosh? It used to be the case a few years ago. Has it gotten easier to update a Hackintosh these days?
I went through the delta between the reports with a fine-toothed comb and discovered that SNI wasn't the problem. It was a biggie: looks like HSTS wasn't enabled for visits to the static part of the site (like the homepage).
It seems like Nginx is doing something counter-intuitive. I've set HSTS at the server level using the 'add_header' directive.
I've set 'max-age=0, must-revalidate' at the location level using add_header for the static parts of my site. I expected Nginx to add both add_headers, but it only seems to do the "deepest" set of add_headers it finds.
Duplicating the 'add_header' directive at the location level (resulting in two add_header directives) results in HSTS being sent for the static parts also.
Now I get A+ on SSL Labs for both sites.
Identical SSL configurations otherwise.
Is this expected? Or am I doing something wrong?
Is your code filled with literal strings? Otherwise why your code be "an exercise in quoting"?
re Python: Remember that EDA tools aren't libraries, they're actual command line program programs. So those tools will still need a command line language. Python is horribly unsuited as a command line language, so the tool will probably continue to have Tcl to present the text user interface.
So you'll then end up with two interpreters in the same tool. Hardly a desirable state of affairs. So yeah, I think the ROI of embedding Python in EDA tools is probably not doing to be worth it.
A lot of the C code backing the Tcl APIs directly build Tcl objects or store pointers to Tcl objects in C. It will be giant task to make those APIs work correctly with Python also.
Pretty cool.
Using only the uppercase letters lets them worry less about whether the string got mangled because some systems interpreted it as Unicode and some didn't etc.
Something like Bitcoin and Flickr's base58 would have also worked, but the encoder and decoder would have been more complicated. They got away with only division by 16.
They get a little bit of integrity checking too.
Basically, this is base16 with a poor man's integrity checking baked in. Pretty interesting.
OK, I'll bite.
I'm assuming you're talking about the US. Do you really think that a "majority" are set to a level "well below" a "safe speed"?
You think 25 mph on a residential street is too low? There's a British video of how even low-speed collisions can be fatal for pedestrians.
I've personally found the speeds in the USA to be eminently reasonable. 25 mph: residental, 30 mph on undivided business streets, 40/45 for multilane main streets. 50 mph for minor highways, and 65+ for interstates and major highways.
I can easily imagine myself solving this problem in about 2 years if given access to Google street view data. Remember, Google probably has detailed (centimeter resolution) 3D maps of from their street view cars (they use LIDAR, afaik).
The Google plan is much more realistic than Amazon's announcement. IMHO. YMMV. I am not a robotics person etc.
1) AFAIK, bitcoin has "comments" within transactions. Why not embed the checksum as a comment in a transaction between wallets you control?
2) In the approach described here, no coins are being sent with the transaction (right?). Are blockchain participants really accepting NOP transactions involving 0 BTC transfers. Maybe I missed something.
3) As others pointed out, requiring the whole file to be uploaded is a non-starter for anybody savvy enough to be using this service. Users should be able to directly specify the checksum.
I think they use this signature in their backend as a last defense when routing a message to a recipient. Being meant for the backend explains why messages with corrupt signatures are accepted (the backend notices that incoming signature is bad, so it doesn't use the signature to check the message when routing).
2) I'm curious about what people who say "crytpo in the browser/JS is bad" think about this. This seems to be a pretty good application of crypto to achieve a very narrow goal.
Just my two cents. I don't expect to change anybody's mind. :)
PS: 'inevitable', you made the same suggestion. But you seem to be hellbanned.