srett
Then implement that. There are much more lightweight ways to achieve this than going full react. Especially with modern JS this can even be implemented from scratch.
Take HN as an example. Inline replying, voting etc. is undeniably convenient, but there is no way there shouldn't be a full page load when going through paginated results, or opening the comment thread to a post. That requires a couple lines javascript, no bloated js-framework-of-the-month. And the page stays completely usable without JS. A lot of stateful webapps out there aren't any more complex than this, structurally. Bonus: You get a fully working, predictable back button in your browser for free.
Trying to define an objective term like "simple" is of no use if you can't map it to something in human perception. Let's say we have some all-knowing oracle that can tell us which algorithm for problem X is the simplest one. If nobody would agree, what is the point? Or, if 51% of programmers would say A is simplest while the other 49% consider algorithm B more simple, should we just go "yay majority" and call it a day? In reality we have no way of knowing which one is objectively most simple, because at least regarding this domain, we as humans are unable to make an objective judgment.
Is the simplest solution always the one with the least lines of code? Least number of classes? Singletons vs static classes? Recursive approach vs. iterative approach? C style linked lists (next-pointer in data type) vs. "proper" list class? In general: Could we formalize this, ie. come up with an algorithm how to determine how simple code is?
Often times code that is easier to understand might be harder to work with, while more elaborated code with indirections and abstractions is harder to grasp (simply because it's more LoC/classes, just more reading), but once you got familiar with the code base, much easier to work with. So when you say objectively simple, do you mean "simple to understand so you can tell what it does", or "simple to understand wrt maintaining, extending and fixing"? And which kind of simple should I go for when writing code?
As for me, I still use Opera 12 almost on a daily basis and the main issue I have is not broken websites but inaccessible websites because of HTTPS and Opera not supporting enough recent ciphers. The second most frustrating thing is that the JS engine shows its age performance-wise; pages that make heavy use of it for all kinds of dynamic shenanigans get rather sluggish. So my uneducated guess from these observations is that it should have been possible to keep up if they'd wanted to. It's probably that management simply thought using an engine that someone else maintains for them makes it possible to cut down on devs even more. But that part might just be my make-believe world...
I'm currently trying to get the spectre.c PoC to work without using CLFLUSH or similar, but it doesn't look too promising yet. Then again, I only started an hour ago and lack the ability to think in those creative and twisted ways that lead to the discovery of this whole issue in the first place.
Assember is usually just considered bad/dangerous by people who have no clue about it and consider it something magical. It's not. At least not significantly more dangerous than C, which is still the language the most fundamental components of everyday computing are based on.
I set it up at my workplace because my wife would kill me if yet another desktop PC appears at home, although the design might have appeased here enough. My colleagues just called me crazy for getting this useless old heat producing rubbish. I managed to install debian on it, which was a bit of a hassle (protip: If you only install one HDD, put it in the primary drive bay, otherwise openfirmware and debian will disagree about the disk naming/path and you'll have a bad time) but worked reasonably well in the end. Also, when upgrading RAM I must have mixed ECC and non-ECC (or buffered and unbuffered?) because I just grabbed the first DDR sticks I could find at work. The machine still worked, but memory bandwidth was cut at least in half or so, notably slower. After I made sure I had matching sticks, everything was fine and I could enjoy the incredible speeds of DOUBLE data rate memory.
Yes, that might be true. I never complained about him before "in public" so there was some steam to release. However I hope I still gave enough clear thought on how I think he is acting wrong repeatedly.
(It's less forgivable to continue being loudly wrong once other people have pointed out real problems more clearly.)
Which only makes it worse. There is a good deal of serious replies to the issue, but because of some trolling, the whole discussion is considered invalid by the maintainers, or at least they make it look like that by just closing it without any further comment. Only about an hour ago did poettering reply again giving some more insight, but the damage has been done and next time there will probably be even more trolling.
No, apparently I'm not. In the thread I read, OP mentioned a regex that he found somewhere on the internet, and poettering just confirms it would be invalid. No references who says it's invalid or where to look up the definition. Nothing. Also no mention of the "default to root" issue in his post, which clearly could be considered a security issue as mentioned in several comments on the issue and here in the comments. He says config options are validated to prevent mistakes, but doesn't give any insight why anyone would consider default to root a sane fallback. You call that "explaining precisely"?
On the other hand, you come here to uselessly complain and have the temerity to complain that poettering doesn't write exactly the code you want him to write.
I gave examples of his contradictory behaviour regarding usability and dangerous pitfalls while claiming systemd would be elegant and easy to use. I'm not complaining he doesn't write code I want, I'm complaining he doesn't practice what he preaches and--as stated by the very first phrase of my comment--to explain why it doesn't come as much of a surprise to me he gets so much hate.
I've been working with systemd since late 2012 and like a lot of its ideas and concepts, but the way this guy deals with bug reports and people is just horrible.
How do you justify your ridiculous attitude?
Oh well, guess I just fed the troll by replying.
But yeah I noticed this trend too in browsers, it's getting harder to get to the technical bits every time they try to make these warnings more user friendly. I usually switch to openssl s_client in a terminal at this point.
I remember this from long long ago, when I was a student and helped running a vBulletin on the side for fun. When I noticed this trend while browsing older posts that had the a lot of imageshack embeds (they apparently deleted old files which weren't accessed that often, also the url format might have changed once) I cobbled together a plugin that would save all posted images locally and then serve those instead. This lead to some protest however by people who had those fancy dynamic images in their signature that would show the currently playing song or similar, so those had to be excluded...
What helps however is that I'm really good at almost zoning out of the real world when I'm focusing on something to the point that people have to repeatedly call my name for me to notice someone wants my attention. And usually if it's not important they will just leave me be instead of interrupting me for some chitchat.
Why should it do that? Just stop compiling and yell at the user, demanding proper code. I'd not let the code you gave as an example pass any review because it is not clear what the author intended.
...but at least with tabs everyone can adjust the gap size to their liking. :>
> He's talking like there are people with 64-bit PCs running 32-bit Windows out of cluelessness or spite.
Cause this is what's going on, he's stating that explicitly.
Haven't really used mysql in recent years (6+), but I remember once optimizing a query with about 8 inner joins, grouping and a very long where statement. After setting up all the indexes it still didn't perform as we hoped. Moving some of the conditions up into the ON parts just like in that blog post drastically improved performance. It seemed like in the naive approach, mysql really did all the joins first and only in the end started filtering. I was quite surprised that wasn't handled by the query optimizer, but maybe that has improved since then.