The incredible thing is this is actually the result of an explicit design decision.

The compiler accepts most GCC flags. Unrecognized flags (e.g., architecture- specific -m flags, unknown -f flags) are silently ignored so ccc can serve as a drop-in GCC replacement in build systems.

They’re so committed to vibing that they’d prefer if the compiler just does random shit to make it easier to shove it haphazardly into a build pipeline.

maybe they were looking for extra special characters like 🁄 or ⶸ. Who am I kidding, RFC 1738 tells us that literally everything is unsafe and you know, we need to prepare for the inevitable occasion when the password somehow ends up inside an URL.

The characters “<” and “>” are unsafe because they are used as the delimiters around URLs in free text;
the quote mark (“”") is used to delimit URLs in some systems.
The character “#” is unsafe
The character “%” is unsafe

It ends up with

Thus, only alphanumerics, the special characters
$ - _ . + ! * ’ ( ) ,
are safe

Rendering is not what you are doing server side.

No shit sherlock. Rendering requires information about the game, and that information is enough to allow cheating. Aimbots don’t need to perform “invalid actions” in order to wreck a game. They just need to be faster and more accurate than most human players. Trying to heuristically detect aimbots is also commonly used alongside other anticheat methods, it just doesn’t work (unless you have people manually reviewing individual reported cheaters, but companies try to avoid that because it’s expensive and risks false positives).

Ultimately you either have basically google stadia (with all its technical problems) or you are trusting the client to render the game.

Even if the client only has exactly the absolute minimum amount of information needed to draw all the things that are visible, that still allows a cheat to see the player coordinates and the coordinates of visible entities, which usually makes eg. an aimbot trivial to make.

“Never trust the client” renders entire genres of games inaccessible for a big corporation. But those genres have billions of dollars of potential profit in them. So they will go as far as they can to make the client almost trustable. The average player of a first-person shooter doesn’t really think about the implications of kernel-level anticheat at all so it’s not a hard choice for them. 95% of them are on windows after all and that already gives kenel access to their PC to some entity they really have no good reason to trust.

it’s

while (true) {
    let t = Date.now();
    if (timeoutMap.has(t)) timeoutMap[t]();
}

of course. Clearly O(n).

SteamOS for Desktop is imminent

Do you have some source? I recall the latest rumor related to a valve patent is more likely to be about some VR thing than a steamOS PC

“You want to use teams a bit? We have a session here” “I’d be happy to, actually. Not really, but it wouldn’t be bad” “Not really? If you say so, I have a teams session ready right here” “No. No. I’m not stupid” “People use it every day.” “Tell the truth” “It’s a good user experience.” “So are you ready to use it? For 5 minutes?” “No, I’m not an idiot.”

They already have almost all of the discrete gpu market, they’d have to expand to new markets (although they are kind of exploring that already)

and with a good enough leak, the amount of unused memory will become negative!

The oxford that says this?

Acronym

1. A group of initial letters used as an abbreviation for a name or expression, each letter or part being pronounced separately; an initialism

or the merriam webster that says this?

Some people feel strongly that acronym should only be used for terms like NATO, which is pronounced as a single word, and that initialism should be used if the individual letters are all pronounced distinctly, as with FBI. Our research shows that acronym is commonly used to refer to both types of abbreviations.

Well eh, the binary seems to be about 130MB while the ffmpeg source repository is only 80MB (and the version with separate .so files (all part of the project as far as I can see) is even larger)

buffer overflows are critical for memory safety since they can cause silent data corruption (bad) and remote code execution (very bad). Compared to those a “clean” unhandled runtime error is far preferable in most cases.

We can avoid expensive branches (gasp) by using some bitwise arithmetic to achieve the so-called “absolute value”, an advanced hacker technique I learnt at Blizzard. Also unlike c, c# is not enlightened enough to understand that my code is perfect so it complains about “not all code paths returning a value”.

private bool IsEven(int number)
{
    number *= 1 - 2*(int)(((uint)number & 2147483648) >> 31);
    if (number > 1) return IsEven(number - 2);
    if (number == 0) return true;
    if (number == 1) return false;
    throw new Exception();
}

After working at blizzard for 51 years, I finally found an elegant solution by using the power of recursion

private bool IsEven(int number){
  if (number > 1) return IsEven(number - 2);
  if (number == 0) return true;
  if (number == 1) return false;
}

funny how well this fits for both meanings

Yeah, it’s in my edit I realized the same thing. I’m thinking it doesn’t actually really make sense and the real reason is more “the specific way C does it causes a lot of problems so we’re not poking syntax like that with a 10 foot pole” + “it makes writing the parser easier” + maybe a bit of “it makes grepping easier”

So I think it’s still probably unclear to people why “mix of keywords and identifiers” is bad: it means any new keyword could break backwards compatibility because someone could have already named a type the same thing as that new keyword.

This syntax puts type identifiers in the very prominent position of “generic fresh statement after semicolon or newline”

…though I’ve spent like 10 minutes thinking about this and now it’s again not making sense to me. Isn’t the very common plain “already_existing_variable = 5” also causing the same problem? We’d have to go back to cobol style “SET foo = 5” for everything to actually make it not an issue

yep, it’s almost all banana pi, and at least 4 different ‘models’ of it it seems. But the word is also used in some string processing tests and as an example comment of how suffix arrays work…

And most of those cases are of course using the word sarcastically

The next function to implement is called, amazingly, next(); its job is to
move the iterator forward to the next position in the sequence.

if (lc->sync == NOSYNC)
	for (i = lc->header.nr_regions; i < lc->region_count; i++)
		/* FIXME: amazingly inefficient */
		log_set_bit(lc, lc->clean_bits, i);
else
	for (i = lc->header.nr_regions; i < lc->region_count; i++)
		/* FIXME: amazingly inefficient */
		log_clear_bit(lc, lc->clean_bits, i);

/*
 * Amazingly, if ehv_bc_tty_open() returns an error code, the tty layer will
 * still call this function to close the tty device.  So we can't assume that
 * the tty port has been initialized.
 */

 *   this header was blatantly ripped from netfilter_ipv4.h
 *   it's amazing what adding a bunch of 6s can do =8^)

/*
 * I studied different documents and many live PROMs both from 2.30
 * family and 3.xx versions. I came to the amazing conclusion: there is
 * absolutely no way to route interrupts in IIep systems relying on
 * information which PROM presents. We must hardcode interrupt routing
 * schematics. And this actually sucks.   -- zaitcev 1999/05/12

 * corresponding ABS_X and ABS_Y events. This turns the Twiddler into a game
 * controller with amazing 18 buttons :-)

 * In an amazing feat of design, the Enhanced Features Register (EFR)
 * shares the address of the Interrupt Identification Register (IIR).
 * Access to EFR is switched on by writing a magic value (0xbf) to the
 * Line Control Register (LCR). Any interrupt firing during this time will
 * see the EFR where it expects the IIR to be, leading to
 * "Unexpected interrupt" messages.

 * Thanks BUGabundo and Malmostoso for your amazing help!