Collection expressions today are more the sort of thing that a code poet or golfer can do to prettify their code than something a newbie can count on using. It's tough to explain "you can only use this when the collection type is implied in that spot" to a newbie. The value of the base feature is still unproven for me. I'm not sure I agree, without some convincing, that collection expressions made the language more coherent rather than doing https://xkcd.com/927.

tbh, I thought that I had built enough reputation on this particular MSI release, until testing it just now. Hate to see it :(

[1] https://comodosslstore.com/code-signing/comodo-individual-co...

The Microsoft Store account was painful to set up, I'll note. My developer account had also been cancelled by Microsoft for unknown reasons, and I ultimately had to set up a brand new one. New email, new name. My new account has my middle initial because I couldn't clash with the existing, closed account. My first and last name alone are banished forever from the store.

The "same thing", as you concede, isn't the same thing. Quantity has a quality of its own: one happens all the time and we're reading an article about it happening right now. In the comments there's another prominent maintainer who it happened to, and it happened to me personally! That's three right here! The other happens so infrequently that people in this same HN thread are complaining that it isn't happening enough. Can you find an example that's like Veracrypt and WireGuard? In practice, it seems they rarely do this, even when they should. You can actually view the list under "Manage computer certificates" > "Untrusted Certificates." On my computer the entire list is 20 certificates.

I'm standing by my suggestion, 100%. These aren't equivalent risks at all.

I recently de-listed my app in the store and closed my Microsoft developer account. I was wrong for having bothered with it; just a waste of my time for no benefit. Stick to your own deployment.

I will boldly claim Windows Forms is more stable than Gtk and Qt. Don't let random teams at Microsoft confuse you because they released yet another unrelated framework that you don't have to use. They are engineer-sirens trying to lure you from the true path. Let them pursue their promotions in peace while we rely on a stable workhorse.

Here's how they announced 24.04.0. It says LTS and doesn't mention anything about LTS coming in the .1 release: https://canonical.com/blog/canonical-releases-ubuntu-24-04-n...

I contend it's almost never important and almost nobody writing user software should bother with this. Certainly, people who didn't already know they needed big-endian should not start caring now because they read an article online. There are countless rare machines that your code doesn't run on--what's so special about big endian? The world is little endian now. Big endian chips aren't coming back. You are spending your own time on an effort that will never pay off. If big endian is really needed, IBM will pay you to write the s390x port and they will provide the machine.

(Separately, I don't think the article has adequately demonstrated this claim. They just make the claim in the title. The actual article only shows that some network request is made, and that the request happens after the React app is loaded, but not that they prevent input until it returns. Maybe it's obvious from using it, but they didn't demonstrate it.)

These days, are MTurk workers simply feeding it into AI anyway, though? It's been a few years since I've run an MTurk campaign. At the time it was clear that humans were really doing it, as you get emails from the workers sometimes.

I used this technique for awhile, but it was too problematic for my use case. Now, I use https://github.com/lief-project/LIEF -- among other things, this project can modify Windows PE, macOS Mach-O, and Linux ELF binaries to add resources to them, then offers an API to read them back later. It's a little different for each format, but it's capable of doing all three and I was able to build a cross-platform resource-bundling system that doesn't care how big the resources are.

I don't believe that .NET's XML serializer uses any of the open source projects mentioned in your post, so maybe we just have especially good XML support in .NET. I think Java has its own XML serializer, too. I bet most XML generated and consumed in the world is not one of those three open source C/C++ libraries. I think Java alone might be responsible for more than half of it.

Here's Scintilla driving a TUI text editor: https://github.com/magiblot/turbo

Here's Scintilla driving a custom GUI control (not the system text control): https://github.com/desjarlais/Scintilla.NET

Same engine, different frontends. The engine has a series of hooks that you implement in whichever way you please for your particular interface. It's definitely the presumptive choice here.

    ARG JULIA_CPU_TARGET="generic;skylake-avx512,clone_all;cascadelake,clone_all;icelake-server,clone_all;sapphirerapids,clone_all;znver4,clone_all;znver2,clone_all"
    ARG JULIA_PROJECT=[...]
    ENV JULIA_PROJECT=[...]
    RUN julia -e "using Pkg; Pkg.activate(\"[...]\"); Pkg.instantiate(); Pkg.precompile();"

Thank you so much for this! It's too late for me to edit my original post, but cutting the install time in half is a major win for me. Now it only needs to precompile, not also compile a sysimage.