Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | fanf2's commentslogin

FaceID is much slower than TouchID, FaceID fails with wet glasses, it fails with a breathing mask. I can’t use the phone with wet fingers or gloves so needing a bare dry finger for TouchID is fine. FaceID annoyingly worse.

The big problem for me is using FaceID in bed. Unless you sleep on your back, the pillow obscures your face.

All you typically need to do is lift your head up so FaceID can get a clear look... but when I'm sleepy, it's annoying.

Ideally, the phone would just have both... somehow... but this seems technically infeasible so I get it


What happened to the blog post? It was moved and now it has disappeared :-(

Archived copy here: https://archive.is/tIXt7


Sorry, it was published early and we have to wait for some approval checks to clear

No, because Knuth’s test was for Algol 60 and Algol 68 is a very different programming language.

No, it cane from DEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeronym#Numerical_contractio...

It seems unlikely to me that stenography would use this style because they have better ways of abbreviating long agglutinative words.


(2019)


The IETF’s review has an amazing title “The Helminthiasis of the Internet”

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1135


Before apt, the main user interface for dpkg was dselect, which was written in C++


But doesn't this actually strengthen my point? Debian transitioned from a tool written in a more demanding language to a tool written in a less-demanding one.


At a quick skim this looks like they reinvented something very similar to phkmalloc, but they didn’t cite phkmalloc nor include it in their benchmarks.

https://phk.freebsd.dk/sagas/phkmalloc/

https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/tree/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c?h...


Instead of representing atoms as string literals, you can represent them as global variables, eg

    const char conti[] = "conti";
Then you can use pointer comparison instead of strcmp().


You'll still probably need the `strcmp` because the pointers won't be the same unless you check for them and make them the same.

You may be thinking about how `eq?` (reference equality) works in scheme. That's usually done by hashing the identifier string. Which is the more general solution to this equality problem.


The atoms strcmp()ed by the interpreter are all created by the compiler so you can ensure the pointers are equal by construction.


You're right `virtmach` only works on things that are output from `compile` and maintaining the invariant that virtmach lisp uses those pointers isn't difficult to do in with how the evaluator is presented.

It gives virtmach lisp and scheme different ontology, but I can't think of any practical reason why that would matter other than it makes things a little bit more complicated. But, then again if I'm thinking practically scheme should be using hashed identifiers, and then there's no reason for them to have different ontology and conceptually we're right back where we started with virtmach lisp and scheme using identifiers as objects.


A newish solar farm near here has fixed panels https://maps.app.goo.gl/DCw7DfNb5bDTRu1E9


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: