51–60 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Three way merges were a thing before 2005... The author was merely comparing with today's tools.
I wonder what percentage of people on HN have ever used subversion or cvs, let alone older systems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Windows NT started supporting unicode before UTF-8 was invented That's not true, UTF-8 predates Windows NT. It's just that the jump from ASCII to UCS2 (not even real UTF16) was much easier and natural and at the time a lot of people really thought that it would be enough. Java made the same mistake around the same time. I actually had the very same discussions with older die-hard win developers as late as 2015, for…
>, UTF-8 predates Windows NT. Windows NT started development in 1988 and the public beta was released in July 1992 which happened before Ken Thompson devised UTF-8 on a napkin in September 1992. Rob Pike gave a UTF-8 presentation at USENIX January 1993. Windows NT general release was July 1993 so it's not realistic to replace all UCS-16 code with UTF-8 after January 1993 and have it ready in less than 6 months. Even…
Which, let's not forget, also meant an external ecosystem already developing software for it
moving changes from Windows 95 to Windows NT involved manually doing three-way merges for all of the files that changed since the last drop. I suspect that this manual process was largely automated, but it was not as simple as a git merge. The first release of git was in 2005, around a decade after Windows 95.
Wow! I am stunned how wrong that feels. I remember adopting git in the first year, and it still feels fairly recent. That it only took 10 years from Win95 to git, and 20 years from git to now, is truly uncanny. Win95 feels like a genuinely old thing and git like a fairly recent thing.
Win 95 feels from era1, xp and git was already in era 2.
Once those two changes were done by 2010 though, there’s been no game changer, if anything we've regressed through shittyfication (we seem to have fewer social networks vs the original Facebook for example, as most of them turned single player feed consumption).
Maybe pre and post LLMs will feel like an era change in a decade as well?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Three way merges were a thing before 2005... The author was merely comparing with today's tools.
I wonder what percentage of people on HN have ever used subversion or cvs, let alone older systems.
Google still uses a clone of Perforce internally (and various wrappers of it). Perforce was released in 1995.
It's always funny to me, the more you go into the depth of windows settings, the older the UI that start to show up. Which makes sense, between the "if we change it we break it in some subtle way" and "we don't expose that in UI anymore so the new panel doesn't have it". My understanding is that windows want to move to a "you can't configure much of anything, unless you use group policy and then you set everything th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny how fast Git became entrenched as the way of doing things, though. Around 2010 I said in passing, in a forum discussion about how a FOSS project was getting along, “…you’d think someone could send in a patch…”, and I immediately got flamed by several people because no one used patches any more.
Funnily enough the Linux Kernel still use patches (and of course Git has helpers to create and import patches)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder what percentage of people on HN have ever used subversion or cvs, let alone older systems.
I'm still using subversion as it servers solo developer needs perfectly.
Windows is like real life archeology. You can dig up the UI of ancient generations of humans before you underneath the modern facade.
(Heck, recently I migrated a VM to its third hypervisor. It began as a physical machine a quarter century ago.)