lambalicious

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago

Well, you'll need dopamine and serotonin for all the new product spam mails you can get!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I think it’s pretty much guaranteed that they’re not going to take the sensible route of making it opt-out,

Because that's not the sensible route in the future, whether we like it or not. Hardened STL is being announced in the papers as "we are going to start with these silly one-line fixes that in theory should perturb no one, but as we iterate over this we're gonna start breaking things", which is not what you want to hear from the default.

One good example: placing enforced bounds check into the operator[] of std::array<> of all places. People keep telling me that I should be using std::array instead of normal C arrays, but then punish me for using std::array? That ends up making people revert to the True Old Ways That Work (aka: C arrays).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago

How cute that you believe that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 hours ago

imagine someone comes over to your place and starts protesting and saying how bad you are

What, you want them to lie to you to your face?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 hours ago

¿Puede compartir el dato? Como para ver los specs igual, necesito notebook nuevo, y harto mejor si es un AMD...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago

This should like… just not be a rule though

Eh it's issues with l.w mods being overall cowards.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

but isn’t one of the job of the police supposed to actually check people’s ID?

Define "people's", because not doing so is how we get into a police state and that was some Germany shit. Everyone? A subset at random? A subset at convenience? A subset based on how brown they look?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Think of the lemmy.world mods!!!!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

"Volume Up makes volume number go up"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Sí de hecho por ahí va la cosa.

Me imagino que la entrada del crontab va a ser así como 0 10 * * 1 /path/to/crear_hilo_semanal.sh (el 0 10 es para hacerlo a las 10 de la mañana del lunes, como el chiste de Alvarito Salas).

Ojo de evitar crear el título del hilo dentro del crontab porque las máscaras de formato de date y otros comandos similares que usan %, no funcionan correctamente dentro de un crontab.

 

publicado de forma cruzada desde: https://gregtech.eu/post/6514020

[email protected] gang, rise up

 

(Only half joking with the poll options, too.)

 

Aquí en la mejor instancia de feddit celebramos el largo de Chile. Y en otras instancias, parece que también.

 

RFC 3339, the "alternative" to ISO 8061, was extended to RFC 9957, which also allows adding interpretative tags.

Sounds like unnecessary complexification to me. What is wrong if anything with "2024-04-26"?

 

publicado de forma cruzada desde: https://lemmy.world/post/9470764

  • ISO 8601 is paywalled
  • RFC allows a space instead of a T (e.g. 2020-12-09 16:09:...) which is nicer to read.
 

I've seen the Wikipedia article on year 9 doesn't mention anything of relevance happening during November. Closest thing seems to be September. Since people around have spent a few years making lots of ruckus about how the date with "9, 11" has some sort of importance as a date, I was wondering if I'm missing something here.

 

Basically title. 2019 edition of the Standard denotes the "T" prefix to time as mandatory (except in "unambiguous contexts"):

01:29:59 is now actually T01:29:59, with the former form now designated as an alternative

But date does not have a "D" prefix, not even in "ambiguous contexts".

1973-09-11 never needs to be something like eg.: D1973-09-11

Anyone know the reasoning behind this change and what is the intended use? The only time-only format with separators that I can think would be undecidable in ambiguous contexts would be hh:mm which I guess could be mistaken for bible verses?

 

I mean, it's the obvious choice. So why not? Maybe we can do with the zoom on the cat if there is a better version.

view more: next ›