|
I shall avoid using it in as sophisticated, supercharged, and frictionless way as possible.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft's newest Windows 10 Fast Ring test build, 19603, adds File Explorer-Linux integration, as well as new user clean-up recommendations. Yup, it's the Year of Linux on Windows
It's like millions of heads all exploded at once...
|
|
|
|
|
Did we ever find out whom they're doing this for?
Is it the same users that they added 43,000 emojis to the keyboard for?
Or maybe the three people who bought windows phones, for whom they also made the windows 8 and windows 10 desktop interfaces?
Or is is for the Linux guys (who don't want to run Linux on windows)(and many of whom don't even want to run windows on Linux)?
Or is it a windows-business-user thing, y'know, the users who only really want a web browser and an office suite?
Or maybe for average home users, who are obviously big fans of CLIs?
I'm only asking because they appear to be expending an inordinate amount of developer hours on this -- time that could perhaps be better spent on creating new icons.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It's for the person who wants/needs to use a windows desktop while developing penguin stack software.
I suspect internal use is probably a major customer. Azure needs to support *nix well; but MS's network/user management tools are Windows focused. Letting the azure team do linux dev on windows boxes makes things easier for the rest of MS's internal bureaucrazy.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
So maybe 500 people world-wide, then.
At least it's an improvement in the regard that that's bigger than the user-base that they turned the windows desktop into a phone interface for.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It has been said that much of the good stuff that Microsoft does is due to internal requirements.
One alleged example is improved long file path length support in Windows. Improvements in this were apparently encouraged due to internal use of node.js and problems that devs were having with path length limitations.
|
|
|
|
|
Not surprising. There's nothing quite like eating your own dog food.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the main reason why I so much enjoy that The Old New Thing[^] blog of Raymond Chen is the number of posts he makes about legacy software and backwards compatibility problems. (The fraction of such stories are higher in his book than in the online blog, though).
I have lost count of the number of people I have had to explain why you simply can't lift that maxpath limit and let all programs have access to the full filename with no further question.
Frequently (especially with Linux guys) I have to make parallels to replacing IPv4 with IPv6 - an application setting aside 32 bits for an Internet address, with display functions for showing it as a.b.c.d, cannot simply be thrown an IPv6 address. Or the switch from 7 bit US-ASCII, first to 8 bit ISO8859-1 that couldn't go unencoded through a 56 kbps connection, and then to UTF-8, where advancing to the next character could mean anything from 1 to 5 bytes forward (or alternately, a rewrite to replace char[] with uint32[] throughout and rewriting all libraries).
Lots of people believe that they know the simple and easy way to switch to long file names. None do.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, quite. For the avoidance of doubt I wasn't suggesting that improving path length limits in much of Windows/Win32 was easy, only that the (alleged) story is that Microsoft were finally prompted to do it for node.js internal dev purposes. 
In fact, didn't Raymond Chen do a blog article about path lengths?
G'wan, you're Raymond, aren't you? 
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think Raymond Chen makes any attempts to hide his identity on the net.
Why would he? He markets his competence and professional interests well enough under his real name!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise software provider Sonatype has found a clear connection between DevOps and developer job satisfaction in its seventh annual DevSecOps Community Survey. If you're happy and you know it, deploy your code
|
|
|
|
|
Golly, it's so good to have completely unbiased companies [^] looking into such things.
Yes, their product is used to: Automate DevSecOps
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Anyone who signs up will get two free months of Stadia Pro with instant access to nine games, including GRID, Destiny 2: The Collection, and Thumper. I guess they worked out the scaling issues?
This one's a "usual": "Give us your credit card and sign up for a subscription, but we promise not to charge you for two months. Oh yeah, and we might forget to tell you when the two months are up. So sad." type of offer.
|
|
|
|
|
The laws of physics imply that the passage of time is an illusion. To avoid this conclusion, we might have to rethink the reality of infinitely precise numbers. Just another reminder that physicists (and theoretical mathematicians) have been doing this, "stay isolated at home long enough to start thinking about weird stuff" for a long time
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: a century-old mathematical language called intuitionist mathematics, which rejects the existence of numbers with infinitely many digits.
I'm a strong supporter of this.
In fact, we shouldn't really need more than one number.
I propose that it be four, because three's not enough, and five can get too noisy.Quote: If numbers are finite and limited in their precision, then nature itself is inherently imprecise, and thus unpredictable.
Exactly!
So if there is only one number, then all the unexpected things in the universe can be explained!
(Like I say, though, let's stick with four, because I've got a headache.)
Essentially, what he's saying is that because we'll probably never have enough data to reliably predict absolutely everything, we should give up trying to figure out the causes and effects of how the universe works.
I don't think I'll be subscribing to his newsletter.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: So if there is only one number, then all the unexpected things in the universe can be explained!
Of course... 42
Sorry for the obvious, but it was too tempting
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure that's the answer to the right question?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Liquid nitrogen
Sorry for the obvious, but it was too tempting II
I am leaving it here... enough silly comments from my side for today
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
The accuracy required is a measure of how unstable and difficult a juggling pattern is. If they didn't, the balls would fall
|
|
|
|
|
In other news, bees can't fly.
But "reaction times" don't come into the juggling thing. Jugglers don't stand there and wonder which ball is going to fall next or where; there's no thinking involved.
Each throw, catch, and movement has to be practised heavily, until it practically becomes autonomic.
So by basing the study on reaction times, they're looking in entirely the wrong direction.
I suppose that's what you get when you let a mechanical engineer and a mathematician make choices on how the body and brain work.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
modified 8-Apr-20 13:24pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Right. Besides, you don't need any fast reaction time to know what happens if you throw a ball straight up: It comes straight down. If you throw a ball against the wall at a 45 degree angle, it will bounce back at a 45 degree angle. These are elementary rules of physics. When you have internalized then, you know what is going to happen; you don't have to analyze a visual impression of it to know.
|
|
|
|
|
Just restating Mark's valid point.
|
|
|
|
|
A real test would be for a juggler to just stand there and have people throw balls at him randomly from different directions at varying velocities.
Which sounds like fun. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not very accurate in ball-throwing, and worry that that could skew the figures.
Would it be OK if I threw darts, instead?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
