Viewing profile — cautious_int
cautious_int
HN member- Joined
- Sun, Aug 02, 2015, 6:16 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 73
- Public activity
- 47 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About cautious_int
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #10068607
I don't trust open systems either. Don't put words in my mouth please. I reject the thesis that trust is binary. Were I to accept it, I trust nobody - everyone is vulnerable to bei…
-
comment
Comment #10068539
This is a lose-lose scenario. If you don't trust a closed operating system in the first place, why would you then, after performing these steps, trust the system that it really doe…
-
comment
Comment #10068517
The Sun is the center of the Universe. Interesting.
-
comment
Comment #10068227
Transmission like this looks really good in a simulation, but I wonder how much lubrication would this require to operate in the real world. this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N…
-
comment
Comment #10059747
Mill processors? Aren't they still in research stage, only using emulation and no hardware.
- comment
-
comment
Comment #10059139
Why not put it into a Faraday cage?
-
comment
Comment #10057596
I was talking about the same line. Apparently new is a "special" operator, or there is a bug in the compiler. I also can't get a warning with g++. The problem seems to be that, as …
-
comment
Comment #10057414
Because no truncation happens. In this case [] operator doesn't specify any type, only that the expression inside is an integer expression. While normally the type size_t is used f…
-
comment
Comment #10056674
This is a common problem in C. Integer types are inherently type unsafe and are silently promoted with many different rules which are hard to remember and understand. As is seen in…
-
comment
Comment #10056334
Because unsigned overflow will not happen in C, and will instead wrap the value. The variables in question were unsigned. This is defined and perfectly normal. However signed integ…
-
comment
Comment #10054936
Can you also fake/spoof the appropriate signatures/headers? Otherwise separating that data is going to be very easy. Unless you do it on a higher level like emulating input, but th…
-
comment
Comment #10054038
Why?
-
comment
Comment #10054011
Windows 10 seems to transmit information to the server even when OneDrive is disabled and logins are using a local account that isn't connected to a Microsoft Account. Well there y…
- story
-
comment
Comment #10048117
You got it backwards there. Only if you know your implementation and plan to code only for it, can you even start to consider bending the C Standard, and not the other way around.
-
comment
Comment #10047900
Since you didn't back it back then, you can now buy it immediately on Steam. It looks like a functional game, and not a failed project.
- comment
-
comment
Comment #10046243
Actually it is misleading by them( and you ) to assume that in C, an unsigned int can represent values larger than the largest signed int value. In other words, C allows that UINT_…
-
comment
Comment #10046213
It is not true that unsigned wrap is defined? Did you even read my comment, here is the relevant part: unsigned wrap is defined
-
comment
Comment #10045114
The conditional move still depends on both values taken from the array, via other variables.
- comment
- comment
-
comment
Comment #10044314
Well a branch will fetch the incorrect cache line if it mispredicts, but a conditional move will fetch both cache lines every time.
-
comment
Comment #10044239
That blog is wrong. The program won't be undefined( unsigned wrap is defined ), but the offset will not be correct.