Comments for idle thoughts

Comment on fun with shared libraries — version GLIBC_2.14 not found by power

power — Thu, 10 May 2012 17:52:47 +0000

You’re right – that’s exactly the situation – my desktop machine is running a newer distribution then our cluster machines. Normally, I do end up compiling on the older machines when this type of thing crops up, but I was curious if I could avoid doing that in the future.

Sorry about the typo – that’s what happens when I type in a hurry

Comment on fun with shared libraries — version GLIBC_2.14 not found by Anon

Anon — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:30:32 +0000

(it sounds like your software was built against a new glibc but being run on a system with an old glibc – perhaps it would be safer to do builds on the older system?)

(additionally “run some software on our local software” doesn’t quite scan)

Comment on fun with shared libraries — version GLIBC_2.14 not found by Anon

Anon — Thu, 10 May 2012 14:26:09 +0000

Isn’t this due to “backwards memory copying” changes in memcpy: http://lwn.net/Articles/414467/ , http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12518 ?

Comment on Operator Overload by power

power — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 20:22:13 +0000

I agree, it’s the kind of thing that can be really handy in some cases, but at the same time, it’s very easy to overuse and end up with something opaque. Another example that I see everyday is how dependencies are specified in SBT:

libraryDependencies ++= Seq( "junit" % "junit" % "4.10", "org.apache.hadoop" % "hadoop-core" % "1.0.2", "org.apache.lucene" % "lucene-core" % "3.5.0", "org.scalatest" %% "scalatest" % "1.7.2" % "test" )

It turns out ‘%’ and ‘%%’ mean different things (%% appends the Scala version for the package). I definitely would have been okay with writing ‘package(A, B, Version)’ here .

Comment on Operator Overload by UMLCat

UMLCat — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 04:59:31 +0000

Not Scala developer, but, operator overloading can be a litle mess in several programming languages. I met once a pascal compiler that explicitly allow declare an operation, both as a function, and an operator:

…
integer function Add(x, y: integer); operator “+”;
begin
…
end;
…

BEGIN
X1 := Y + Z;
X2 := Add(X, Y);
END.

If you ever check operator overloading in C++, you’ll see its quite a mess.
I wish that could be explicitly added to many programming languages.

Comment on Operator Overload by power

power — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:16:57 +0000

Sure, that’s a reasonable idea. Something that I would prefer (in cases where an operator is non-obvious) is to have a named method, and the operator for those who want to go that route.

Normally I end up F3′ing into the source and poking around until I figure out what the intent of a method or operator is.

Comment on Operator Overload by stingz

stingz — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:58:39 +0000

Maybe your intellisense should be better. A single comment that descripes the acceptable operands and the opration would be more than enough to fix this situation.

Comment on Now an author in multiple languages by power

power — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 22:12:35 +0000

Hi Qi — thanks for pointing that out! I’ll fix the link now.

I managed to break my computer a few weeks ago — now I know why backups are important .

Comment on Now an author in multiple languages by Qi Huang

Qi Huang — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 03:30:00 +0000

Hey Russell,

I am searching your Piccolo paper for a class discussion tomorrow at Cornell and find this blog post. As a native Chinese, I can’t help downloading this version. BTW, the link is broken, but Google did help me find the working link

Broken URL: http://rjpower.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Piccolochinese.pdf
Correct URL: http://rjpower.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Piccolochinese.pdf

- Qi