jcr1488

7 ms·

1.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> That step is 90% of the work I spent several years working on a production grade compiler and I can assure you it's not. But keep just making things up off the top of your head if it makes you feel smart.
2.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> It's just a type of dead store elimination It's not just any, typical kind of dead store elimination. It also would require other optimization passes that I can assure you no mainstream compiler actually does. You can disagre
3.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> This is the kind of thing that can break by accident and ruin everyone's month. Not in practice. Compilers make use of undefined behaviour to optimize things that are widely applicable and profitable. No real compiler does what yo
4.
by jcr1488 7y ago
As soon as a pointer to said memory is passed to an extern function in another translation unit, the compiler can't prove anything about how it's used, which is the case in pretty much all of the examples mentioned in this thread.
5.
by jcr1488 7y ago
You mean it can remove a memset() that doesn't cause the observable behaviour to change? For the sake of argument, can you show me some example code where it would be conforming to remove a memset() call? Preferably a realistic example
6.
by jcr1488 7y ago
You clearly haven't understood the thread.
7.
by jcr1488 7y ago
I guess we are misunderstanding each other's point. I just found hermitdev's comment to be misleading (despite being correct), but perhaps it's just my reading of it. To be fair though, memset() usually IS a fix. As mentioned
8.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> But the problem is that the security concerns and fixes are all undefined here. No one in this sub-thread has mentioned (or implied) any "fix". You appear to be putting words in my mouth. > So the initial comment is still
9.
by jcr1488 7y ago
Right, but I didn't make a case that memset() is any more secure, did I? The parent comment was talking about undefined behaviour as if it's some kind of universal get-out clause.
10.
by jcr1488 7y ago
What's even more weird is making every 10 line function a "library" and the average program having 500+ dependencies. JS people are so hung up on "re-usability" that they completely miss the concept of dependency hy
11.
by jcr1488 7y ago
If you pass partially uninitialized objects (including padding) between kernel space and user space, there's a chance that the (less privileged) user space code can recover information it shouldn't be able to see, regardless of wh
12.
by jcr1488 7y ago
What has he done, besides The Cathedral and the Bazaar...? Most of his open source contributions seem to be littering up source files with long-winded comments and grandiose attributions to himself. I've read a fair bit of his code and
13.
by jcr1488 7y ago
I'm further right on the political spectrum than ESR is. It's his delusions of grandeur and constant, smug championing of his own relevance that I can't stand...
14.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> Everyone forgets that SASS is meant to be programmable CSS That sounds like a solution looking for a problem... The vast majority of real SASS I've seen has been much like the stuff this article mentions. > If you treat it as C
15.
by jcr1488 7y ago
I'm not sure. I think the caret is just a prefix to make it distinguishable from the normal letters. It is the reason why Ctrl+i in a terminal is the same as Tab though. Likewise for Ctrl+m == Enter.
16.
by jcr1488 7y ago
ESR is a poseur who doesn't belong next to those other names.
17.
by jcr1488 7y ago
> Holding `CTRL` essentially lops off the first three bits No, it inverts the 7th bit (or subtracts 64). The Linux `ascii(7)` man page has a similar table, but with 2 columns. The first 32 control characters listed there have their &quot