|
|
Yes.
I'm not even sure leaving a chips bag open a month would make them go stale in Denver. An open soft drink, on the other hand, will go flat in less than an hour.
|
|
|
|
|
I leave peppridge farm cookies unwrapped for a day because they're too crunchy.
Other than that, no.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't recall ever saying: that's nice and stale ... unless I was making bread crumbs.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Eating leftovers without enjoying the original meal? 
I know that many of us were brought up never to throw away food because there are starving children in <wherever>, but this is ridiculous!
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
There are around 8 billion people on earth, and I guess you are the only one who has this specific preference.
-= Reelix =-
|
|
|
|
|
meagreProgrammer wrote: I like my potato chips and Cheetos stale as by opening bag leaving out for a week more or less.
Are they actually "stale"? Or perhaps just that they have absorbed a bit of moisture? Or dried out a bit more perhaps since it might depend where you live.
|
|
|
|
|
I Thank Fueled by Decaff for his/her idea The Lounge[^] of #include'ing every header and one by one eliminating those not needed. It can easily be automated i.e. to wit once compiled as in my case the order matters though finding the correct order is only 1h of labor more or less on my pig of a machine then starting at the bottom of the list doing as suggested which can easily be automated for all the files in the project via awk. Voila Bingo Presto Problem Solved! Once and for All. I can not see any reason this will not work. Why is FbyD's idea not common widespread or taught in school though I would not know if not common widespread or taught in school as I am a meagre programmer but a happy one now that I can minimize my build times on my pig of a machine with just a press of a button.
|
|
|
|
|
meagreProgrammer wrote: Why is FbyD's idea not common widespread or taught in school though I would not know if not common widespread or taught in school
Because the answer you came up with is
meagreProgrammer wrote: automated for all the files in the project via awk
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
|
|
|
|
|
1. I have about 400 headers, and there are much larger projects than that. Want to start?
2. As software evolves, #includes get added. Want to maintain that?
3. As I mentioned yesterday, you can remove an #include for a header that is included transitively. But doing so can break the compile if a file that you #include removes an #include that gave you this transitive embedding.
The only way to make this painless is with a tool that analyzes dependencies so that it can update #include directives automatically.
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: The only way to make this painless is with a tool that analyzes dependencies so that it can update #include directives automatically.
I didn't know that such a tool exists. Thanks for the tip.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to me no matter how headers are #include'd there is an order w/ a top and a bottom. Perhaps it is tree-like. In which case each branch may have different needs at a common root. This would complicate things but can still be automated per FbD's idea as near as I can discern. Specifically if a root of one branch does not require a particular file but another branch w/ the same root does, the automation keeps track of this and #include's it for both branches.
|
|
|
|
|
A similar issue I have with C# is that I use CSC (the command-line C# compiler) with response files -- some response files include other response files, etc.
As my code has evolved, I may have some code files included in a response file when they are no longer needed.
Every once in a while I think about writing a tool which will eliminate references to code files which are no longer needed in a particular build.
|
|
|
|
|
I do not know C# or what a "response file" is. If they are anything like C++ #include's I do not see why a simple awk program which would execute the suggested procedure would not solve the problem at the press of a button.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, right, definitely not AWK.
|
|
|
|
|
May I please inquire why not awk. It is the only text processing language I know. Would you recommend another.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it depends on your target audience.
If you're targeting folks that primarily develop on unix, awk may be the way to go, as most distributions have it installed, or it's easily addable.
With WSL under windows, you *can* add it, but if you're not already set up for it it's more of a pain.
If my target was Windows, I'd consider another programming environment, like C#.
It I truly wanted it to work easily on any platform, I'd write it in C++, and compile it for common platforms + distribute the source .
That being said, sometimes I do use C# on linux because Mono is often shipped with linux distributions. It can be the quick and dirty route to make something easily usable on common platforms.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
C# of course.
I don't use UNIX.
|
|
|
|
|
I do not use unix either. I work on Windows. I recall not having too much trouble installing awk for Windows. I suppose if I were to use a general purpose language I would rely on a regular expression library which C++ provides. I wrote a nifty little awk program which indents my source after Visual Studio mangles the indentations the result of my insisting macros embed the statement terminator ';' as it looks ugly otherwise which unfortunately causes VS IntelliSense to mangle the indentations. As I recall I wrote a little tip here re/ same.
|
|
|
|
|
Amazing l just now noticed Edge utiIizes a font in the address bar for which capitaI i and smaII I are indistinguishabIe Just as here
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTOH, after the page has loaded (which is a little bit too late, I guess) the browser removes the capitalization...so while silly.com (lowercase "el") brings you to some sort of Hello world blog, siIIy.com (two uppercase "eyes") brings you to some Chinese page (and the title apparently translates to "site note found"), but the address bar then clearly shows "siiiy.com"
I don't really see a clean way out of this, unless domain names suddenly have to be recognizable dictionary names (which would break half of them)...
|
|
|
|
|
A partial way out which is why I am amazed by this is our browsers are supposed to protect us as best they can. The least they can do is choose a font which does not help malicious actors.
|
|
|
|
|
meagreProgrammer wrote: The least they can do is choose a font which does not help malicious actors.
Devil's advocate:
The user gets to set his own font preferences at the OS level. That can include some specific accessibility requirements. If the browser ignored those choices and started arbitrarily using some alternate font for a control such as the address bar, you would annoy those users - why should the browser's controls be any different than the OS itself? All apps running on the OS should respect what's been selected there.
(Page content is another mess altogether, outside the control of the OS and best left for another discussion.)
All that said, I'm not disagreeing with you...the browser is the doorway to potentially very nasty stuff, so yes, it should go out of its way to validate everything. I'm just not sure how you're supposed to guess the user's intent...to re-use my previous example, maybe I did mean to go to siIIy.com (using two capitalized "eyes") rather than silly.com (two lowercase "els").
OTOH, as domains aren't supposed to be case-sensitive, and a link being followed contains capitalized letters as part of the domain...warn the user and show him the domain as all lowercase? Or at least, have the hover text show the lowercase version? But if the user types in a domain name with capitalized letters...then he only has himself to blame.
Food for thought for sure...
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: OTOH, as domains aren't supposed to be case-sensitive, and a link being followed contains capitalized letters as part of the domain...warn the user and show him the domain as all lowercase? Or at least, have the hover text show the lowercase version? But if the user types in a domain name with capitalized letters...then he only has himself to blame.
DNS is case insensitive by RFC, so domain names are case insensitive. What isn't case insensitive is email addresses before the @ sign, but all major mail servers treat them as case insensitive.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
