|
My feet are in shock, I reintroduced them to shoes for the first time since I retired (I read somewhere that barefootedness promotes warts).
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity -
RAH
I'm old. I know stuff - JSOP
|
|
|
|
|
I think that is bare feet in shared, public areas like gym showers or dance class. There is a very high chance that a child in (barefoot) dance class will have warts on their feet (pre covid). Post covid may have better sterilization!
|
|
|
|
|
And what is about pants and outerwear? Also optional? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: apparently my oom has failured.
You can get a cream for that - ask your doctor or a quantum mechanic.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Must be something to do with Kubernetes, we occasionally get pods in CrashLoopBackOff status because of OOMKill.
oom - Out Of Memory
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
|
|
|
|
|
In my case Kubernetes isn't involved.
Thanks for the clue on oom (out of memory).  That makes sense.
I searched the error code & others are having this also[^].
It's just interesting & amusing since it didn't really hurt me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the input.
Slacker007 wrote: not too sure how they could make the error message better.
Uh, they could at least serve donuts & coffee with the error message -- so I would be entertained while I await the [reopen]. If they can't do that, they should obtain my bank information & deposit $1,000 USD for my troubles. 
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: If they can't do that, they should obtain my bank information & deposit $1,000 USD for my troubles.
I'm sure that if you post your bank details here, they'll get back to you ASAP.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: reason: 'oom', code: '-536870904'
The code translates to 0xFFFFFFFFE0000008. The value 0x0008 is the Windows error code ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY, so the 'oom' reason that someone else posted makes sense.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
For me my favorite IDE is a toss-up between VS and IntelliJ (for Java).
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree...Visual Studio is a great IDE. And I really like IntelliJ via Android Studio.
VSC is very nice light-weight & I run Linux as my main desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
Not only that they couldn't be bothered to type "Out of memory", but they couldn't even be bothered to capitalise the abbreviation.
I guess that just about sums up the way the world seems to be heading these days. People fighting for a 4 day working week because they feel "overworked", and this is an example of the daily struggles they face: having to hold the shift key at the same time as pressing other letters!
|
|
|
|
|
There was not enough memory for “Out of Memory”, but “oom\0” can fit in a 32bit const in program memory and used as a string.
Reminds me of the good old days of Win2.1/Win3 when your fatal crash error messages had to be hard codes in your data segment to guarantee the message box would work. It happened a LOT in Win2.1 as there was no memory protection between processes.
|
|
|
|
|
englebart wrote: It happened a LOT in Win2.1
Did you really mean 2.1? I started out using Windows 3.0 then to 3.1 & then windows for workgroups (3.11 I believe).
But, wow! 2.1? That's kind of amazing. Most people weren't brave enough to use windows before 3.x.
|
|
|
|
|
Yup. Win 3.0 is what made the Win system highly productive for Developers IMO.
I think the debugging features added to 3.0 is what pushed it past Apple Macintosh at the time. Mac had a better platform for a while, but it was harder to develop for.
Debugging in 2.1 was line based; debugging like old line based editors. Yuck! I came into Windows just in time to use it only a few times. Win 3.0 with its better memory protection and second monitor debugging was where you wanted to debug, especially for debugging drawing code. We used beta 3.0 for a year to fix dozens of bugs that helped stabilize our Win 2.1 product.
CodeView cvw.exe cview.exe was the debugger if I remember correctly.
Win386 2.1 was a pretty solid preemptive platform for running multiple DOS programs.
The funny thing is, it would not surprise me if a Win 2.1 program would run on Win 10 today. MS has produced some amazing, backward compatibility bridges through the years.
|
|
|
|
|
Great story about your work on those systems. Thanks for sharing.
englebart wrote: MS has produced some amazing, backward compatibility bridges through the years.
I agree. I still have code from the old Petzold Programming Windows 3.1 & I've run it on modern Windows versions up to 8.1 at least. It's amazing that old code still runs.
|
|
|
|
|
Those whippersnappers wouldn’t know a message loop if it bit them on their behind. 😊
Of course, web apps don’t need message loops. Just the browser.
|
|
|
|
|
It really is interesting that modern Windows devs even know very little about the Message loop.
Actually, I trained some people via C# and I'm sure those devs would not really even know what I was talking about if I told them about the Message loop.
It's all hidden now for so long. It's interesting how that has changed. It's really for the better of course because it took a lot of boilerplate code to just get a simple app.
But it is good to know what is going on under the layers.
|
|
|
|
|
We had one system that had a single message loop built into a framework such that multiple top level windows only shared one thread. One of our team members decided to kill the framework message loop and provide a separate thread for each top level window to have its own message loop/ dispatch. Worked like a champ.
|
|
|
|
|
Windows 2.1 was also being distributed with Word for Windows and Excel. So it was getting a fair bit of distribution.
The company I worked for at the time was developing EGA and VGA display chips, so we had to develop custom drivers for Win 2.1 and beyond. I wasn't involved in that, instead was creating emulation code in x86 for MDA, CGA and Hercules modes on these chips. But I was using Word and Excel for my development documentation.
I can remember that our company was working with MS at the time to develop the Win drivers, so that we got a pre-alpha release of Win 3.0 to work with. I have to say, we were all pretty impressed with what we saw then....
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
