Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

steve-yegge.blogspot.com

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#111
post #109
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a rule in the preprocessor to prevent infinite recursion: only replace each symbol once. The first time it encounters 'true', it's replaced with 'false'. The first time it encounters 'false, it's replace with 'true'. It's already seen 'true', so it throws up its hands. The consequence of this rule is that cycles of #defines don't do anything. Edit: Well, that's only true if there aren't other symbols introduc…

Ah .. Makes sense. Thanks.

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#114
post #106

I have to say, for me private methods and fields are not a security thing. They are a way to keep the public interface clean and only confront the user with the information they need.

And that's the problem.

Why? It conveys a piece of information. Would you feel better about it if instead of writing "private" in front of it, I would write a comment "it is probably a bad idea to use this method in your own code"? What would be the gain - it is simply more verbose?

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#115
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having worked on both telephones and nuclear reactors, I can say for sure they have nothing in common.

They're both the subject of vast public ignorance in regard to the hazards. :D

On one hand clever, on the other hand, misjudging the probabilities of personal danger is subject to 2 or 3 common cognitive biases, so the public everywhere always has been ignorant of the true hazards.

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#116
post #11

In a global header long time ago, a friend of mine (and big "C" lover) did this to his best buddy once (a C++ and especially boost lover): #define class struct #define private public #define protected public

I once opened Squeak and said "True := False"

The image halted immediately.

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#118
post #106

I have to say, for me private methods and fields are not a security thing. They are a way to keep the public interface clean and only confront the user with the information they need.

Not just for cleanliness but more importantly change protection: denying direct access to the internals assures that you can rewrite those internals and not break any external dependencies.

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#119
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This actually reminded me of Apple...

The difference between phones, and all other products, is that phones don't work unless you're currently in a business relationship with some telecom or another. It's a bit more like selling someone a nuclear reactor—they're beholden to your rules as long as they have no other source of fissile materials.

Can't we have one conversation on HN that doesn't turn into an Apple / iPhone conversation...

This article was about something totally unrelated.

Re: Wikileaks To Leak 5000 Open Source Java Projects

#120
"If I make something private, it means that no matter how desperately you need to call it, I should be able to prevent you from doing so, even long after I've gone to the grave."

I am pretty sure this can be defeated without taking private out. Reflection will get you there with the security checking turned off.

Post reply on HN