- Your company should keep using perl.
- You should get a job you like.
I've been using computers for over 30 years and have never once used this keystroke.
Is it telling that I ran across this article twice and both times thought "What's the problem? just hit Ctrl-R and get on with it!" Now what's this "application" you speak of?
If that were true then there would not have been 100 million downloads of Apache OpenOffice, would there? Therefore...
Sorry, that was me. I left curl running in a loop on a 56kb dialup and went on vacation. My bad.
I have a friend who's son is on the no-fly list since he's 3 years old! He's twin brother is not.
Oh yeah, will I'm DEAD and on the no-fly list, and they can't fly my body back to my hometown for burrial. So there!
Link to Original Source
"The bug in the GnuTLS library makes it trivial for attackers to bypass secure sockets layer (SSL) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) protections available on websites that depend on the open source package. Initial estimates included in Internet discussions such as this one indicate that more than 200 different operating systems or applications rely on GnuTLS to implement crucial SSL and TLS operations, but it wouldn't be surprising if the actual number is much higher. Web applications, e-mail programs, and other code that use the library are vulnerable to exploits that allow attackers monitoring connections to silently decode encrypted traffic passing between end users and servers."
What's even more, the coding error *may* have been present since 2005, so one has to wander, again, where were those "many eyes that render all bugs shallow" one keeps hearing about..."
Link to Original Source
The charging stations could be embedded in asphalt or pads that lay on garage floors.
They lay... power-up eggs that the pac-man vans pick up? This makes no sense.
Also, programmers write software, not documentation.
I've been contributing to a project over the last 20 years (which happens to be a text editor) which has 80+ pages of documentation in texinfo. I'm not specifically recommending texinfo; it's what the project started with and it works. The point is, the build process renders a plain text version of the texinfo documentation, then a script reads the formatted docs to build several of the program source files, including hash tables of the commands, static text for the internal "help" commands, enums (it's C code), etc. You literally cannot add a new command to the program without adding it first to the documentation. It's a slick way to keep the documentation in sync with the code. The same idea could surely be implemented with many other document source formats. It's a step towards Knuth's Literate Programming without going overboard.
Programmers certainly can and should write documentation.
The lower classes (the 98%) don't care about default because they see it as comeuppance for the robber barons who have all the money to lose anyway. It's only a catastrophe for those with something to lose. For the rest, it's an inconvenient equalizer. (Actually probably much more inconvenient than equalizing; hope we don't find out.)