Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Yet Vinyl still endures (Score 1) 329

by bheading (#47003177) Attached to: Your Old CD Collection Is Dying

Back in the day, the cutting masters from which LPs were pressed were inferior (the sound had to be modified to make it fit on the LP - longer tracks had to have their levels cut so that the track pitch could be reduced to enable them to be pressed). There is absolutely no way any objective person could believe that the compromised masters, which were modified in order to fit on vinyl, were in any way superior to the clean digital copies - except for pop music which was exposed to the loudness problem.

These days I would have assumed that the same problem would exist so I don't get this about modern LPs at all. If I want the sound of an LP I'll listen to a CD while scrunching a packet of Rice Krispies next to my ear.

Comment: Re:They don't pay attention to Coverity (Score 2) 379

by bheading (#46799119) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

I have used another major static analysis tool at work, one of Coverity's competitors. And more than once have had the "if you had paid attention to the static analysis reports this problem could have been solved much more quickly and cheaply" discussion. In one case several weeks were spent chasing a particularly subtle and nasty memory tramper - which was found to be showing up in the analysis results.

False positives are certainly a concern. There is a tradeoff here in terms of dealing with the time spent (re)structuring the program so that they do not occur - a matter for the project lead. The same is true of compiler warnings. Best invest the time to clean them up and configure your build so that it breaks if they occur. You'll kick yourself later if you hit a bug that was revealed by a warning which was ignored.

Comment: Are they still running it through Coverity ? (Score 3, Interesting) 379

by bheading (#46798677) Attached to: OpenSSL Cleanup: Hundreds of Commits In a Week

OpenSSL is on the list of projects scanned by Coverity.

I wonder why exactly Coverity did not catch the heartbleed bug. Most likely, the scan wasn't set up to deal with OpenSSL's use of it's own internal heap management routines. That's something that I would have thought should be fixed right away.

Comment: Lithium Ion lifetime - really ? (Score 1) 131

by bheading (#46394829) Attached to: Sulfur Polymers Could Enable Long-Lasting, High-Capacity Batteries

Article says "In comparison, a lithium-ion battery typically starts out with a storage capacity of 200 mAh/g but maintains it for the life of the battery, Pyun says."

Hmm. I have lithium ion batteries that can't hold a charge at all.

And it's only partially to do with how they're used. Lithium ion batteries lose capacity while in storage. Which is why you should never buy a used, or a new-old-stock one.

Comment: Re:...but if you want free software to improve... (Score 1) 1098

by bheading (#46061909) Attached to: FSF's Richard Stallman Calls LLVM a 'Terrible Setback'

That's part of why LLVM is better than gcc today.

Certainly, the project has obtained its objective of being a simpler, faster compiler free of the FSF's politics.

But it isn't "better than GCC". It is targeted pretty much exclusively at x86 and looking at the project's website many features are missing from other architectures (such as the assembly parser I note). I also see no sign of advanced GCC features such as stack smashing protection, mudflap and so on.

Comment: Re:...but if you want free software to improve... (Score 1) 1098

by bheading (#46061817) Attached to: FSF's Richard Stallman Calls LLVM a 'Terrible Setback'

The GPL approach is "Here is something nice I made - you can use it, but if you you have to let me play with you stuff.

This is a grossly inaccurate mischaracterisation.

The GPL approach is just like the BSD "Here is something nice I made - have it and do what you like, hope you have fun!". You can do whatever you want with the code. You can modify it, add features to it etc. You don't have to share the source unless you redistribute it. You repay the community who created the original work with your own enhancements to it.

Comment: x32 is a premature optimization (Score 3, Interesting) 262

by bheading (#45779081) Attached to: Linux x32 ABI Not Catching Wind

The idea makes sense in theory. Build binaries that are going to be smaller (32-bit binaries have smaller pointers compared with 64-bit) and faster (because the code is smaller, in theory cache should be used more efficiently and accesses to external memory should be reduced).

But I suspect the problem is that the benefits simply outweigh the inconvenience of having to run with an entirely separate ABI. I doubt the average significant C program spends a lot of time doing direct addressing, and as such I suspect the size benefits of using 32-bit pointers is overstated.

"Your attitude determines your attitude." -- Zig Ziglar, self-improvement doofus