• 0 Posts
  • 47 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle


  • The packager always should “explicitly require” what are the dependencies in a Nix package… it’s not like it’s a choice, if there are missing dependencies then that’d be a bug.

    If the package is not declaring its dependencies properly then it might not run properly in NixOS, since there are no “system libraries” in that OS other than the ones that were installed from Nix packages.

    And one of its advantages over AppImages is that instead of bundling everything together causing redundancies and inefficient use of resources, you actually have shared libraries with Nix (not the system ones, but Nix dependencies). If you have multiple AppImages that bundle the same libraries you can end up having the exact same version of the library installed multiple times (or loaded in memory, when running). Appimages do not scale, you would be wasting a lot of resources if you were to make heavy use of them, whereas with Nix you can run an entire OS built with Nix packages.




  • Flatpak still depends on runtimes though, I have a few different runtimes I had to install just because of one or two flatpaks that required them (like for example I have both the gnome and kde flatpak runtimes, despite not running either of those desktop environments)… and they can depend on specific versions of runtimes too! I remember one time flatpak recommended me to uninstall one flatpak program I had because it depended on a deprecated runtime that was no longer supported.

    Also, some flatpaks can depend on another flatpak, like how for Godot they are preparing a “parent” flatpak (I don’t remember the terminology) that godot games can depend on in order to reduce redundancies when having multiple godot games installed.

    Because of those things, you are still likely to require a flatpak remote configured and an internet connection when you install a flatpak. It’s not really a fully self contained thing.

    Appimages are more self contained… but even those might make assumptions on what libraries the system might have, which makes them not as universal as they might seem. That or the file needs to be really big, unnecessarily so. Usually, a combination or compromise between both problems, at the discretion of the dev doing the packaging.

    The advantage with Nix is that it’s more efficient with the users space (because it makes sure you don’t get the exact same version of a library installed twice), while making it impossible to have a dependency conflict regardless of how old or new is what you wanna install (which is something the package manager from your typical distro can’t do).


  • Ferk@kbin.socialtoProgrammer Humor@programming.devWhitespace
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    But C syntax clearly hints to int *p being the expected format.

    Otherwise you would only need to do int* p, q to declare two pointers… however doing that only declares p as pointer. You are actually required to type * in front of each variable name intended to hold a pointer in the declaration: int *p, *q;


  • Ferk@kbin.socialtoProgrammer Humor@programming.devifn't
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Yes… how is “reducing exclamation marks” a good thing when you do it by adding a ' (not to be confused with , ´,or’` …which are all different characters).

    Does this rely on the assumption that everyone uses a US QWERTY keyboard where ! happens to be slightly more inconvenient than typing '?



  • It’s also ironic that they say it offers a “compatibility” that didn’t exist before. Windows 98 with MS DOS under the hood was fully compatible with older games, and it was only with the Windows XP, 2000 & NT line when this compatibility was broken and those same old games no longer worked out of the box. The only way to get some level of compatibility back was to introduce workarounds and special “modes” that they had to add to XP which often didn’t really help if your DOS game was old enough.

    Imho, getting rid of the underlying “command prompt” might have been a good thing for the more casual gamers, or the ones who were new in the hobby… but most gamers coming from MS DOS at the time were not afraid of COMMAND.COM, many of us only moved from Windows 9x when we were forced to (due to newer software no longer working, or having to change PC). To me, the newer editions always felt more opaque… giving less control for the sake of security. It was getting harder and harder to try to understand what your OS was doing. With Windows XP you no longer had an AUTOEXEC.BAT or a CONFIG.SYS for power-users to customize.



  • Personally, while I appreciate when people add a “snippet of explanation”, I do prefer that to be in the comments. Not as the main text of the submission.

    Making it part of the submission can feel like editorializing. If I want to read the artice, I read the article, if I want to read opinions / interpretations of the article, I read the comments.

    Using the “text snippet” for opinions or interpretations can cause bias… and it also might encourage people to repost the same content multiple times just so they can post with a different bias.

    I think the comment section is a more organized and suitable place for that. It also allows people to use their votes to decide whether the opinion/explanation deserves the upvote, separatelly from whether the link itself deserves promotion.


  • I think it’s also safe to presume that in the ultra future tech advanced society of Star Trek, they can remove the bacteria that causes body odor in humans.

    A lot of odor-causing bacteria are actually beneficial for us though. And what causes Vulcans to experience that “odor” might not be coming from bacteria to begin with… for all we know it might be one of the thousand of compounds that leak into the air we exhale directly from our lungs.

    Virtually every gas or volatile liquid is susceptible to cause odor. The only reason we interpret pure water as odorless/tasteless is because water is everywhere so our senses evolved in a way that it doesn’t trigger a response. There are many other compounds we don’t really perceive because we are used to them at the concentrations that exist in our breath.

    If let’s say an alien species is not used to having 78% Nitrogen in their atmosphere, and they happen to have receptors sensible enough, then being in a ship with breathable air similar to Earth might just make them puke in disgust after having a sniff of what we might consider “clean air”.

    I’d argue it’d make more sense for everyone to wear the equivalent of a high tech mask (supressants?) rather than having to re-engineer the biology of the species every time they encounter an alien that might have a different set of compounds they might find unpleasant.






  • Ferk@kbin.socialtomemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    In the past, English had “thou” for 2nd person singular and “you” was exclusive to the 2nd person plural.

    I don’t see why that can’t happen with “they” vs “he/she” too.

    Though it’s a bit sad that it would likely result in a more ambiguous language that could potentially lead to misunderstandings. Unless we start to use constructs like “they all” for adding specificity, in a similar way as how “you all” (or y’all) is sometimes used.


  • Ferk@kbin.socialtomemes@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You aren’t giving it to them so why would anyone bother giving it to you?

    Isn’t that the point being made by he/she/they? (now I don’t know what to call @Bondrewd )

    I don’t think Bondrewd was “preemptivelly” calling them “morons”. The way I read it, Bondrewd was referring to those “who don’t give me the same benefit of the doubt”. Bondrewd did not specify if those who complained belonged to any particular “group of people”, what was said is that they did do that so, given that, he won’t bother.

    Also note that there’s more than one party here… the ones scolding/complaining are not necessarily the same ones being “misgendered”, so that’s why there can be different "they"s involved. The ones that don’t give the benefit of the doubt (regardless of whether they are the ones being misgendered) are the ones that, according to your own statement: we don’t have to “bother giving it to them”