Viewing profile — ric129

I do like that the article touches exactly this, and even though I'm a stranger to the entire concept, it makes sense: >Hardly anyone hitchhikes any more, which is a shame because …

that’s the submitters‘ user name, not the submission date

There's an inherent trade-off in everything Besides, in this case.. it does not help that you'd also have to exchange hardware

I recall plenty of implementations turning into the same as a memory_order_acquire, which seems fine these days

What if your young 'uns just do not... participate? I am in a position where I am doing TL-level decisions, and try quite hard to demo, discuss, share the details and rationale. I …

Yes, all allocators (except perhaps OpenBSDs from what I see in this thread) do this. It is also why `calloc` exists - because zero-initializing every single allocation is really, …

I'm fairly confident that SQLite deals well with filesystem crashes nowadays, see https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html and https://www.sqlite.org/atomiccommit.html

>I'd never heard of the Robson bounds but they seem quite crucial to know about I'd argue it's not really important in modern systems due to the use of virtual memory. With virtual…

By "mobile" I'm guessing you mean laptops, and not phones. Energy consumption of AMD's x86-64 CPUs are only impressive when comparing with Intel, they're not competitive with curre…

>It's applicable to C because most realistic implementations of malloc(3) store the size of the malloc'd area to the nearest word[2] This is not so true anymore, and I'd be very ca…

There's malloc_usable_size[1], assuming you mean asking the memory allocator what the array size is. But chances are that wouldn't work correctly, because what the amount of memory…

What if you lose your Yubikey?

Only virtual functions behave as you described, and even them don't exactly cause a function pointer to be stored in an object.

Browsers have already taught us how useless this is, users will always click through.

>The funny thing is Microsoft’s linked lists are faster than C++ standard vectors. If I had to guess, it's because the std::vector is more conservative in memory use and it causes …

That sounds very economically taxing.

It's C++, I recall using C++11 constructs on a recent Arduino project.