Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ww520's commentslogin

LoRa is for long range lower power communication. It can achieve a range of approximately 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) in practical conditions and up to 330 kilometers (210 miles) in perfect conditions. There are plenty of applications for it.

This is great. Other things needed for a great C development environment are a standardized build process plus build tools and a standardized packaging system.

I think most people who are into c that I’ve met quite like header only libraries. Copy paste as a package manager does have its benefits.

I mostly just install a -dev package on Linux and I am done.

Not even that; OpenBSD and Hyperbola GNU don't split packages between headers and binaries. Install a package, you get both.

That's a great approach but your examples sound like: the 4–4–2 soccer formation —known for its use by Paris Saint–Germain and Clube de Remo.

The Elf interface is a standardised packaging system.

I do NOT want a package manager in my c code. I'm perfectly content with cloning a git repo from my cmake script.

And there is plenty to choose from if you don't like one or another build system.


Thanks! I agree, a better build story for C projects is desperately needed.

What most people forget is that software is meant to be used as part of the system. The rush to adopt packaging tools like npm and cargo prevent standardization of system tools. On debian, installing tools should be as simple as ‘apt install’, but now you have to check what toolchain version you install then download GB of stuff from the internet. And that for each software. Easy deps donwload for devs means maintenance nightmare for admins and users.

Because that's precisely what is needed: an easy way to ship dependency malware like npn, pip, cargo, etc.

Like it or not, having a little bit of friction prevents pulling in packages with thousands of transitive dependencies.


I actually find music with lyrics helps me concentrate, as long as it’s an old song that I’m familiar. New songs are distracting as I would wander off trying to understand what’s being sung. Old songs have no such problem and they just become familiar background patterns.

Same here. Emacs has been the stable editor for all kinds of language changes, tool changes, and IDE changes. Emacs is great with LLM, as LLM is mostly text related and Emacs is great in capturing and dealing with text.

Base point is like the minimum payout. All players agree upon a minimum payout (base point) ahead of time. E.g. $10 as the minimum for the first fan. A fan literally means doubling. A 4 fan win means the payout is $10x2x2x2=$80 from each losing party. It can go up very quickly.


We play with a base point being a dime or a quarter. Note also that the function from fan to points is subject to house rules, it's not always p(f) = 2^f (I've seen rules for example that start to "level off" the payout at higher fan values).

I'd add the note that the whole strategy of mahjong really only gets interesting when you play repeated hands (a full game has at least 16 hands, with each player acting as the dealer once per prevailing wind) and when you're gambling (or otherwise tracking points). Most house rules also enforce a minimum fan value for a winning hand, banning the "chicken hand" which wins but scores no points. We play with a 2 fan minimum. If you just play for mahjong (i.e. a a hand that "wins" the round regardless of score), the game is a pretty uninteresting game of luck, and you're not incentivized to gun for the higher scoring hands.


Yes. Many people set a limit on the maximum payout as doubling goes up very fast. A 8-fan win is $1280 payout, from each player. People usually limit the max to be 9 fan.

Looking from Earth at the stars closer to the center of a galaxy, they are found to be older. Looking from Earth at the stars closer to the edge of a galaxy, they are found to be younger.


I feel there should be a PowerToy applet to turn Segment Heap on or off.


This is a great idea, honestly. PowerToys is open source. There's a decent change that they would be open to such a contribution.

It is a crime that segment heap is over a decade old and still so underutilized. Gamers in particular go to such great lengths to tweak and optimize their windows machines for perf, but I still haven't seen that crowd discussing segment heap anywhere. It's more important than ever with the recent explosion in RAM cost.


Gen X was the last free range children. They ran wild after school without the tethering cell phones, playing in sand and drinking from garden hoses. The silent generation turned out to be a great generation building most of modern technologies.


If the engine failed due to missing oil change because of the difficulty, the whole car is gone. The waste in cost, material, and environmental impact far outweighs the savings in 2mpg improvement.


Glad to know in this hypothetical car scenario the owner decided to not get an oil change leading to the total loss of the vehicle. That seems very realistic and definitely something that car designs should be optimized around.

Or, we consider that 2mpg across 100,000 cars can save 3,500,000 gallons of gas being burned for the average American driving ~12k miles per year. And maybe things aren't so black and white. You're argument, in this hypothetical, is that negligent car owner who destroys their car because they're choosing to not change the oil is worth burning an extra 3.5millon gallons of gasoline.


To be fair, you are constructing an entirely hypothetical car scenario where oil filter placement leads to a 5-10% increase in fuel efficiency.

We're already in the land of the fucking ridiculous. Let's have fun with it.


I'm using this hypothetical to illustrate the point that: tradeoffs exist, and that you (we) may not have full insight into the full complexity of the trade space that the engineers were working with.

Putting some random number of hypothetical mpg improvement was clearly a mistake, but I assumed people here would be able to get the point I was trying to make, instead of getting riled up about the relationship (or lack thereof) of oil filters and fuel efficiency.


And he's using his hypothetical to illustrate the point that: even while some benefits may exist, there are other considerations besides one measure of efficiency.

That's the point you're not getting. People get your point. They're just pointing out that sometimes the juice isn't worth the squeeze. And for something that needs to be regularly accessed, it's better for it to be accessible than strictly optimal.

And during the whole debacle, you've demonstrated that you don't have much insight to the trade space at all. And you're so dead set on "not being wrong" here that now you're accusing everyone around you of being riled up. We're chill, dude. We're starting to worry about you.


> there are other considerations besides one measure of efficiency

Bruh that's literally what I was saying? Instead of how efficiently can you replace a filter in an engine, another benefit might exist instead. Said another way, maybe the "juice" gained from redesigning a fuel filter system instead of using an existing one form another car wasn't worth the "squeeze" of cost and development for the company.

Kinda feels like maybe you (the majority of replies to my original message) didn't get the point, and instead took this as some literal suggestion that I think engines need to have filters in certain spots.

The fact that so many people took this as literally as they did, and seemingly chose to ignore the underlying message of "hey maybe consider tradeoffs exist" makes me start to worry about you too.


No, you were saying that accessibility is subservient to efficiency.

And you were explicitly told several times that your hypothetical efficiency just does not exist. So constantly saying, "Yeah, but what if" looks like you're being obstinate for its own sake.

If the majority of people "didn't get your point", consider that maybe you aren't great at getting your point across.


> No, you were saying that accessibility is subservient to efficiency

Where do you believe I said that?

I don't recall saying anywhere that efficiency should be a priority over accessibility. I said "what if" to create a hypothetical to demonstrate that it could be. You know, trying to introduce nuance to a conversation. You can read that as obstinance for its own sake if you want.

My hypothetical not existing doesn't mean that some similar scenario isn't true. That's kind of the point of a hypothetical, it's an imaginary example to demonstrate a point. My suggestion that fuel efficiency could be effected may not be correct, but the efficiency of using a pre-existing design to save on new parts/labor very likely is true.

Again, people choosing to latch onto a hypothetical and tear that down instead of treating it like a tool for illustrating a point like it's intended to be is really odd and related to:

> If the majority of people "didn't get your point", consider that maybe you aren't great at getting your point across.

As I've said in other replies, I've already noted this- a specific mention of a hypothetical 2mpg that seems to really have distracted people lol


Yes. Winget is getting better support on Windows apps. The other day I tried to download the latest version of ImageMagick but all the links on the official site were bad. I tried Winget and it had it!


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

Search: