It's going to suck.
Is it any wonder that UX designers are getting a horrible reputation among some segments of the tech-savvy crowd?
The main reason for this is that people who self-describe as UX experts, as opposed to HCI experts, tend to be the ones that favour form over function and ignore the last 40 or so years of research into how to design useable interfaces. Most of them wouldn't know Fitts' Law if it dragged them to the corner of the screen and made them infinitely long.
There isn't much testing of the C bindings. They're also in the process of being deprecated in favour of machine-generated ones that are less API stable and have no ABI stability guarantees (precisely because most people don't actually use them from C, they use them from some other language with C bindings). For everything else, there's a bit regression test suite that works by feeding some code (source code when testing clang, IR or assembly when testing bits of LLVM) into one of the tools and then checking that the output matches. Bugs still slip in quite easily, unfortunately. The second tier of tests involves compiling and running a bunch of benchmarks and similar sample code and checking that they haven't got slower (by a statistically significant margin) and that they still produce the right answers. There's a network of buildbots that runs on a variety of operating systems and architectures that first builds and runs the regression test suite on every commit and then (less frequently) runs the executable tests. These catch most regressions, but not all - the rest are caught by users testing betas and filing bug reports.
There's been a lot of research work on improving this. The LLVM Miscompilation Detector, for example, had a semantic model of LLVM IR and would feed real and randomly-generated IR through the optimisation pipeline and then use a theorem prover to attempt to prove that the semantics of the before and after versions were the same. This could then be combined with the LLVM bugpoint tool to find the optimisation pass that performed an invalid transform.
It's a tradeoff. Blowing away the i-cache is a good way of killing performance, but so is having a load of function calls that do almost no work. If you had to do a virtual method call for comparing two unsigned integers and a different virtual function call for comparing two signed integers when inserting them into a set then you'd have a lot more overhead. In a typical std::set implementation, the compare operations are inlined and so the costs are very low.
The real problem with C++ is that the programmer has to make the decision about whether to use static or dynamic dispatch up front and the syntax for both is very different, so you can't trivially switch between them when it makes sense to do so.
Snowden is not convicted, He can't be pardoned yet.
I'd love to hear you try to explain that to Gerald Ford.
The story does use a lot of funny wording which implies that they had been donated to the Public Domain, but if you click through to sources, it looks more like they were still under copyright, offered through some kind of free-as-in-beer license.
Looks like. It's really hard to see WTF the actual status is. What shitty, lazy reporting! But my guess is they're not PD, because the lawyer would have checked before he sued, that being the responsible and common sense thing to d-- why is everyone laughing at me?
Android is Linux with a customized shell. The fact that more people are using Android as their primary computer shouldn't be a surprise. This makes Android / Linux on the desktop. There is no real arguing that it is. It may not be YOUR idea of "Linux on the desktop", but it is Linux on the Desktop all the same. Add in Chromebooks (also Linux) and Google's intention to link Android Apps with Chrome at some point continues to make the case that Linux on the Desktop has arrived, and is much stronger than most people realize.
No, it isn't a "traditional" OS desktop, but it is one none-the-less.
Data aggregation appears to not be a concept you know about. Luckily, I do.
Government can't even run itself, how can we trust it to run anything else?
All of that is true, except when Government interferes with consensual agreements, in the name of "protecting" one party or another. Unfortunately, those with power end up with unlimited amount of "protection" and those without have none. The battle ground for power is where the fight actually resides, and the "average" person has no power.
And therein is one of the big reasons why I am a Libertarian. Group Power is tyranny. Liberty is for one and for all, or it is for none.
My own kids, I have a hard time understanding their lack of ethics and social mores. After all, the example I have given them over the years is consistent with how I would like them to behave in public. I get on them about it and I get some results (they are 21 and 18), but there are lots of others who don't get that criticism. I suppose that has a lot to do with it.
If every guy stopped trying at the first "no" there would be very little if any procreation at all. No girl ever says "maybe, if you try harder".
If a woman says "yes" after any number of "no", the "no" doesn't count any longer. No is only good until the first "yes". Pressure or not.
Many women want persistent men, and use "no" as a test of fealty.
I hate the PC crowd and the cries of Misogyny whenever the thousands of years, multicultural rituals of mutual courtship are dismissed because of some SJW view of how things ought to be.
Yup, the one at the outlet mall. Very much recommended, based on my experience. I was only on vacation in MN and I am not a native, but I was taken there by a native, so they must like it too.
How about we stop making economic decisions based on political whims?
"How many teamsters does it take to screw in a light bulb?" "FIFTEEN!! YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?"