Viewing profile — Dr_Emann
Dr_Emann
HN member- Joined
- Mon, Jul 24, 2017, 1:18 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 108
- Public activity
- 28 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About Dr_Emann
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #49227225
It's a little unclear, but it's a live updating number, if you follow the directions, you'll see the second number decrease.
- story
-
comment
Comment #48735884
I don't think so, "while vacant" is an infinite amount of time, if you look infinitely far into the future.
-
comment
Comment #48143219
"Participants got behind the wheel of a driving simulator equipped with everything you’d find in a real car – from the steering wheel to the pedals and dashboard. A large touchscre…
-
comment
Comment #47944768
To be even fair-er, it wasn't actually memory unsafety, it was "just" unsoundness, there was a type, that IF you gave it an io reader implementation that was weird, that implementa…
-
comment
Comment #45605267
Thats kinda the problem, there are concepts in rust that don't have equivalents in other common languages. In this case, rust's type system models data-race-safety: it prevents dat…
-
comment
Comment #45445577
Rust has access control. Fields are private by default.
-
comment
Comment #43382639
Wow the comments are.. Bad. Not all single instruction operations are the same.
-
comment
Comment #42972351
"The common ground is that I have absolutely no interest in helping to spread a multi-language code base. I absolutely support using Rust in new codebase, but I do not at all in Li…
-
story
Show HN: One Million Sliders
Inspired by onemillioncheckboxes.com, I made my own version, where everyone shares 1 million sliders, setting one to a value sets it for everyone.
-
comment
Comment #39384567
Hi, I think even the remaining benchmark isn't showing what you're trying to show: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/r9rP6xohb Rust realizes the vector is never used, and so never does an…
-
comment
Comment #39359519
Rust optimizes factorial to be iterative, not using recursion (tail or otherwise) at all, and it turns `factorial(15, 1)` into `1307674368000`: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/bGrWfYKrP…
-
comment
Comment #32764307
Honestly feels like a very, very different use case from utf8-ish strings, at a quick read?
-
comment
Comment #27164503
For simple cases, I'll do that, but for longer commands, I've taken to doing rc=0 long command || rc = $? if (( rc == 0 ))...
-
comment
Comment #26819807
Literally every file operation HAS to go through the kernel. This is implementing "what does it mean to read/write this special device file"
-
comment
Comment #26410585
I believe they're asking for "this function returns a function of the same type (Fn/FnMut/FnOnce) as its first argument, but with different arguments. A generic way to write someth…
-
comment
Comment #26238078
Yes it does exactly that. It returns an iterator over the removed items, but when that iterator is dropped, it modifies the collection. See https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stab…
- comment
-
comment
Comment #26225998
And for move to front, why not `a[..i+1].rotate_right(1);`, rather than moving to the back and then shifting everything?
-
comment
Comment #26225767
Expand does actually exist in the standard library, but it's a bit of a strange incantation... vec.splice(i..i, std::iter::repeat(0).take(length)); This replaces the values in rang…
-
comment
Comment #25452225
_Implementing_ a variadic function in rust requires nightly. I'm guessing that's what they meant. Calling one has been available for forever.
-
comment
Comment #25430236
I would absolutely support something to replace ( ( ( ( a).b).c).d).e with a->b->c->d->e, regardless of how much code had been written without that feature. Do you not like the arr…
-
comment
Comment #25426729
Of course. There should never be more than one way to do something in c, even if it makes things easier or less error prone. This is why the -> operator would never be included in …
-
comment
Comment #25423354
Because there is no UB in the original program. It constructs a pointer to the "one past the end" element, but that is fine, and the original program never dereferences that pointe…
-
comment
Comment #25423174
Your block of code can be (and absolutely is) optimized to output zero directly (in c, because the assembly is easier to read): https://c.godbolt.org/z/qe3f4K `*(&i+1)` dereference…