meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 2 years, 8 months |
| seen | May 20 at 11:16 | |
| stats | profile views | 215 |
|
Apr 27 |
revised |
Plagued by indecision - how to choose technologies to use for projects? added 1 characters in body |
|
Apr 27 |
asked | Why did we not see these when *we* were kids? |
|
Apr 25 |
comment |
Should my async task library swallow exceptions quietly? But you do get a normal exception for op1, right? If that one remains unhandled, it will bring down the process, right? |
|
Apr 12 |
awarded | Guru |
|
Apr 11 |
awarded | Good Answer |
|
Feb 22 |
comment |
How bad would it be to obtain a lock on every object? Sorry for deleting and then reposting this; I didn't really mean to delete it. StackExchange might do well with an undelete button... |
|
Feb 22 |
asked | How bad would it be to obtain a lock on every object? |
|
Jan 15 |
revised |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? deleted 39 characters in body |
|
Jan 15 |
revised |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? deleted 39 characters in body |
|
Jan 14 |
comment |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? @gnat: Try set Accumulator32 to BaseIndex32? Simply expanding the traditional abbreviations is not the only way to make something more readable. |
|
Jan 14 |
comment |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? @SK-logic: ① “it will be nearly 8 times slower if the source stream is 8 times more verbose” — poppycock. Have you measured it? ② “assembly is usually produced by a compiler backend and consumed by the assembler” — also poppycock. That was the case in the 1980s and is only maintained in antiquated rubbish like gcc. Any proper modern compiler simply spits out a binary and there is none of that nonsense. |
|
Jan 14 |
comment |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? If it’s an intermediate representation, then overhead is irrelevant nowadays, unless you have been in cryostasis since 1980. The final representation — the one that is actually distributed to all users — is in a compact binary format. As for readability, people who find such a short and cryptic representation to be more readable than normal English words seem to me to be elitists who (subconsciously, perhaps) want to exclude the “noobs” from their noble profession. You must memorize these abbrevs or you can’t be one of us! |
|
Jan 14 |
revised |
Why are cryptic short identifiers still so common in low-level programming? added 1 characters in body |
|
Dec 16 |
asked | Is the separation of program logic and presentation layer going too far? |
|
Oct 8 |
comment |
what are the advantages and disadvantages of putting code for an unfinished project on github You can make it private with a free account if you use BitBucket instead... |
|
Oct 8 |
comment |
Processing a stream. Must layers be violated? @LordTydus: No. See my answer. The data layer closes the stream when the enumeration is either completed or aborted. The business layer doesn’t know and doesn’t care that this happens. (This should have been obvious to you because yield return is just syntactic sugar. It is possible to write equivalent code without using yield return.) |
|
Oct 8 |
revised |
Why should one use a single-use temporary variable? deleted 4 characters in body |
|
Oct 8 |
comment |
Why should one use a single-use temporary variable? @RealityDysfunction: If you don’t have a variable, where do you think the string goes? Do you think it disappears and magically reappears when needed? Obviously it’s in memory somewhere, irrespective of whether you have a variable pointing to it or not. |
|
Oct 8 |
revised |
Processing a stream. Must layers be violated? edited body |
|
Oct 7 |
comment |
What topics do I need to study for *web* client server programming? The abstraction distance between C++ sockets and modern web development is mind-boggling :) |
