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

This doesn't entirely solve the problem of potentially killing the wrong process though


No but it is a lot less likely for a PID to get reused on accident within a new PID namespace.


It's really no less likely, namespace or not. There are better mechanisms for handling this situation, pidfds for example.


Linux introduced pidfds for this reason.


I have adhd. I find listening to familiar voices talking gives my brain just enough of something to focus on to calm my anxiety. Starcraft vods are my go to.


Fyi before anyone else decides to read the idiocy that follows in this thread, this is guy is a known troll with a long history of this exact behavior. Same person:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27862463

I think this person is just mentally ill unfortunately.


when people resort to doxing, it shows how truly pathetic they are. I pity those people.


Who cares though? We get it, you prefer golang, congrats?


I am not seeing a technical argument here against the previous points, only one against the commenter:

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem


But you're also arguing in bad faith. Your go code is shorter, okay, but it doesn't do the same thing as the GNU yes code, so what point are you trying to make? I can also link to philosophy 101 wikipedia articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


I think I have made it pretty clear already, but here it is again:

the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code. yes its not as fast, and yes the executable is larger, but for many, thats a good tradeoff for the extra standard library features, and the reduced LOC/code complexity. sadly as of yet, I haven't seen any cogent technical arguments against my points thus far.


> the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code.

Your code does not have more functionality than GNU's yes as written. It's less code you have to write because of the flag parsing code that has already been written, and it's incompatible with GNU's yes because yours requires -m to change the message.


> Your code does not have more functionality than GNU's yes as written.

it has flag parsing


Which does not do functionally more than the C version that was shared by inferiorhuman.


yes it does


For an extremely simple utility like the 'yes' command that is compiled and distributed as a binary to trillions of installations what metric do you consider more important, size and speed? Or lines of code in the source? Think about this in engineering terms, everything is a tradeoff and it's your job to come up with the best solution.

I'm genuinely curious to hear your argument.


> I'm genuinely curious to hear your argument.

previous comments have demonstrated this not to be the case, so I will stand by my previous points. I have already made over 10 comments on this one topic, so if any aren't already convinced, they never will be, either because they disagree with the tradeoff, or they just have stockholm syndrome for C.


You've demonstrated nothing and made no discernable argument to anyone. Best of luck in the job search my friend.


I think anyone who has the ability to read and comprehend text would disagree with the comment I am replying to. Best of luck in the high school level reading class my friend.


Also, take a look at openbsd's version of yes

https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/usr.bin/yes/yes.c


more lines of code, and still doesn't have flag parsing


There are no flags to parse. Why are you adding flag parsing? This would fail a junior interview Steven.


when people resort to doxing, it shows how truly pathetic they are. I pity those people.


Because you can't imagine a case its needed it must not exist? I also remember being a junior dev who thought they had all the answers.


I just finally rid myself of boxes worth of old computer parts and cables. But what if I need 7 VGA adapters???


Murphy's Law dictates you will need them next week.


> But what if I need 7 VGA adapters???

All depending on what they were - you might wish someday you had kept one of them!

As somebody who "collects" old computer crap (ok, ok - hoards might be a better term), I had a situation not too long back where I needed one of those old adapters.

I had purchased an AMD motherboard that had onboard VGA; having gone so long since I last upgraded, I didn't read the fine print saying that onboard VGA was dependent on having an AMD processor with VGA built in (APU I think they called it). I had purchased a different processor for the socket, without that feature - thinking "naw, don't need it, because I'm gonna drop my GPU in there - and switch the BIOS over to use it".

I get everything together and I boot it. I get nothing on the monitor, and beeping - POST code saying no video, and I'm like "wtf?". Some quick research and such reveals my mistake: Without the APU version of the CPU, I can't change the BIOS to use the GPU in the PCI-E slot. But I don't want to spend a boatload more money on a CPU just to get this setup. So I have a plan: Somewhere out in my junk I know I have a PCI slot VGA card (like an old S3 Virge or such) - I just have to find it.

An hour of digging around finally nets me the card - has 4 meg on it - I figure that's enough to see the BIOS, right?

I boot it - and it sorta comes up, but everything's all glitched out, nothing's really working right, then it dumps to a screen with a "not enough video memory" error, and now I'm wondering "huh?". So I go dig some more...

30 minutes of digging, I find a different PCI video card with 8 meg; surely this will work. I slot it in and boot it; finally it boots - and I am greeted with this entire super-graphical fancy GUI for a BIOS setup, complete with mouse and everything! That's how long since I last did anything PC building-wise (I was replacing a Core2Duo machine); my last BIOS was textual. It was pretty apparent why it ran out of memory; honestly, I thought it was stupid - but what'r gunna do, right?

So after some orientation and such - I find where on the BIOS it was looking for the video card (of course, defaulting to "on board" - but you would think that if it didn't find it, it would then try the PCI-E slot, but nooooo), change it out, save and shutdown, then re-install my GPU on the PCI-E slot, reboot...

...and it worked.

Had I not had that old VGA card (granted, it's not the oldest I have - I have an EISA VGA card somewhere) - I would've been hosed.


Yes, Aaron Swartz is mentioned 6 times in the article above.


Yeah I guess I just couldn't believe what I was reading that two people so closely related to each other could have the same outcome. It's just staggering news and quite hard to comprehend.


I just replaced my 5 year old XPS 13 and didn't even bother researching other laptops. Hands down the best hardware I've ever owned.


I've learned no greater lesson about program structure than the time I finally got around to writing test cases for my first modest (~10k lines of C) personal project.


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

Search: