I still suspect those industrial battery management systems have a separate embedded systems that is actually running the communication.

The risk of a linux system freezing and rebooting is faar greater than a 500 row c state machine that is passing application state back and forth.

I Really dont think its common for linux to directly manage can traffic outside of logging and diagnostics. (atleast from those i've seen)

I suspect the usage of the CAN driver in Linux is pretty low. The largest user of the Linux can driver is likely testing and diagnostics tooling for developing cars rather than the car themselves. Even when the car has a Linux computer, they often use multi CPU SOC's that run the real-time CAN logic separate from Linux, and only convey application logic into Linux.

I could also speculate that the overlap between Linux kernel developers and automotive and industrial embedded systems is pretty low. So the high bug severity in the CAN driver could be developers contributing patches from a very different programming background?

You're getting into pedantics about specific languages and their implementation. I never made a statement about C++ or java. I work in primarily in c99 myself.

> the utility of making them implicit is close to nil. > Without relying on interfaces or inheritance.

Implement a function that takes three strings without 3! permutations of that function either explicitly or implicitly created.

Just because something already exists in some language doesn't make it less clever. It's not very widespread, and it's very powerful when applicable.

This format can handle "string views" with the same logic as "normal strings" without relying on interfaces or inheritance overhead.

it's clever.

There are plenty of articles or news ive red that made me think "that's pretty clever" only for HN to point out background i missed and tradeoffs making a solution worse.

Sometimes criticism is shallow or pedantic, but thats easy to dismiss if irrelevant.

I do agree with the string imutable argument. Mutable and imutable strings have different usecases and design tradeoffs. They perhaps shouldn't be the same type at all.

The transient string is particularly brilliant. Ive worked with some low level networking code in c, and being able to create a string containing the "payload" by pointing directly to an offset in the raw circular packet buffer is very clean. (the alternative is juggling offsets, or doing excessive memcpy)

So beyond the database usecase it's a clever string format.

It would be nice to have an ISO or equivalent specification on it though.

Destroying that pipeline pushed Germany to act more against Russia (being officially unable to continue buying gas).

Historically anti russian states like Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Estonia or even NATO would have liked that.

Russia could have blown it up themselves to pin it on Ukraine to decrease support, but that doesn't seem to be the outcome.

Even germany could have blown it up to pivot their own politics.

It's a massive game of clue. It may become declassified in 20 years by whoever did it.

Testing limits and tolerance, threatening what they could do in a real attack. Creating econocic pain in retaliation for support with a strong alibi to blame.

Boarding and detaining is a new escalation. How many cables cut before we consider military reaction? 3? 10? all of them?

It's exactly the way to go; because the alternative currently being pursued by half the western world is to attatch your full government ID to every internet request. Some preference flags are pretty harmless in comparison, and very powerful tool to solve some related problems.

The internet is already segmented and will continue to become more segmented (Intellectual property, GDPR, gambling). Adding a method to control that with the power in the hand of the user; is the least bad way to implement it.

It also makes regulating the internet alot less painful for businesses and governments. A buisness can refuse my service if they don't like my http request. No more murky "US company liable for EU user traffic even if unintended" nonsense. (The user can choose to voluntary remove GDPR protection with this method for example)

If you dont want to serve or moderate your site for children and be exposed to fines, you block any request with the relevant flag.

You just need a law to enforce what can be served when using the relevant flag, and some talks with Google, Apple Microsoft and w3 to implement it.

you can even segment it my category; no-login, no-posting, no-18-plus, no-violence, no-politics, under-16, region-EU, region-UK.

This leaves control to parents to do what they deem appropriate for their age, and doesn't turn into a authoritative surveillance state.... wait thats the point isn't it...

nevermid there is no alternative /j

I think this approach is effectively testing if a student studied the material. It makes the correlation between memorization and understanding. Recall a piece of information is fast if avaliable.

Its a commonly expressed experience among university students that learning memorization techniques and focusing on solving previous exams is a disproportionately effectively way to pass courses.

It's technically more impressive to pass the exam by never doing a single similar problem before and deriving a solving method or forumla that wasn't memorised.

I took deliberate effort to avoid looking at previous exam question for a course until the week before, since it cased good grades at little value to me long term.

If I need to install pandoc to test compile a doc change before i submit it for code review with 3 other maintainers, id rather keep my note or useful screenshot to myself.

If i need to create a c binding of my function so that pytest can run it through 50 rows of cryptic CMake, I'd rather do happy testing locally and submit it as a "trust me bro".

Good and fast international tooling matters massively for good software. And it all comes back to speed and iteration loop.

On top of that, slow meticulous work can then be done. 100% test coverage, detailed uml diagrams describing the system, and functional safety risk analysis matrix documents.

So speed and slowness supplement in different levels of analysis.

Setting asside the very clear science of neurodevelopmental causes, in practice your description is very helpful way to describe it.

(Ive often myself described it as a standard deviation beyond 2 sigma in a normal distribution with 500 dimensions.)

The traits associated with autism are naturally present in the population in healthy and useful ways.

Matching a large fraction of the definition may pose no problem for alot of people. But another smaller deviation in another sub permutation may be detrimental to live a normal life.

So it's really difficult to draw a line between "condition" that need assistance and just outlier human that like trains.

I mildly match a significant fraction of the diagnostic criteria myself, but have had a rather easy time. I don't need special resources, and feel wierd to count under a medical term.

But recognising the traits of ASD had allowed me to find quite a lot of good practical advice that improve my life significantly. So the broad definition has been helpful.

Technology isn't intuitive and there ares loads of things to remember. Sometimes the dumb question is needed by more than the person that asked.