I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I don't think your feature request had anything to do with when apple implemented call allow listing. It's been a thing forever and they were surly aware of it since the iPhone first came out

> Everyone in the world knows teams like Real Madrid or Barcelona

I promise you that if you go canvas a random selection of North Americans you would be astonished at how many do not recognize "Barcelona" as anything but a city. Football is really not very popular there. Though in recent years it is slowly becoming a bit more watched.

I can assure you that Mexicans (where football is the main sport and has been for years) would, Hondurans, Panamanians, and many others. If you simply mean the USA and Canada say so. Football is the most watched sport comfortably, with the odd anomaly like the US.

If I'm refuting that everyone in the world knows x, by showing a large population that doesn't know x. Saying that there is some other population that does know x makes no difference.

GP: all trucks are red. Me: no, here's some trucks that are blue. You: but look how many red trucks I see over there.

Seems a bit US-centric calling UA population "large": it is roughly the 4% of the world.

Beverse they are benefitting from the financial situation of owning the ai companies that are getting pumped massive amounts of money, not from the debated usefulness of the output of the LLMs.

The print example has no defined order of accesses, function parameters can be evaluated in any order. But further, the entire problem with UB is that it supercedes the regular guarantees that you get (like with volatile) when it's encountered. Yes gcc and clang do the obvious thing that makes the most sense in this example, but what people are trying to tell you is that they could just not do that and they would still be complying with the standard. For example, you can imagine a more serious example of UB that causes the program to fail to compile completely, and then do you emit the correct number of in order reads of volatile variables? Obviously not.

Function parameters cannot be evaluated in any order, when one of them is a volatile.

> The initialization shall occur in initializer list order, each initializer provided for a particular subobject overriding any previously listed initializer for the same subobject

And what I am trying to tell people, is the standard has expectations around the volatile keyword, that the compilers took into account when designing how they would work - it isn't just kindness, its compliance. But no one is actually talking about the quotes from the standard, and just quoting themselves and their own understandings.

That quote doesn't have anything to do with parameter evaluation order. There is no order for function parameter evaluation.

And no, there is no exception for undefined behavior. There can't be, otherwise the behavior would be... defined. It's in the name. Again, what do you think the compiler emits when the undefined behavior causes the program to not compile altogether?

I totally agree that modern c++ is pretty robust if you are both a well seasoned developer and only stick to a very blessed subset of it's features and avoid the historical baggage.

However, that's obviously not the point? Ignoring the idea that people can/should just "git gud" and write perfect code in a language with lots of old traps, you can't control how everyone else writes their code, even on your own team once it gets big enough. And there will always be junior devs stumbling into the bear traps of c/c++ (even if the rest of the codebase is all modern c++). So no matter how many great new features get added to C++, until (never) they start taking away the bad ones, the danger inherent to writing in that language doesn't go away.

Also, safe != non-UB. TFA isn't so much about memory safety anyway.

The .nl indicates the netherlands. Many people in the netherlands vent/joke about how the doctors here only ever tell you to take paracetamol and come back in two weeks if it's still a problem (recursive solution).

However the last time I went to my GP she scoffed at me taking the maximum and suggested I take literally double the maximum recommended dose 4-5 times a day which totaled I think 2.5x the daily maximum on the package. I am very much a "believer" in science and reasonable medical authority but this experience sowed the seeds of doubt, because from what I have always heard, that can actually kill you or cause permanent liver issues. I was also taking diclofenac simultaenously, and when I told her how many mg, she asked "where can you even buy such small doses, that's what I would give a small child" =/

My understanding is double the max dose of paracetamol is the LD50. Seems crazy for your GP to advocate for that. Published recommended dose is assuming average weight, so maybe if you're a very large person, the advice makes some sense, but wow.

I use a kitchen knife to prepare dinner, and yet I am still appalled when someone uses a knife to stab someone. This is not hypocritical.

The article is partly about a _misuse_ of AI, and partly about just how bad the system around accounts and appeals is in general.

Do you think the wilds two hours north of NYC are more or less difficult for laying fibre lines than between homes literally in the alps? 60% of switzerland is alps. Not exactly a cake walk for infrastructure development.

And why would they need open pit excavation for FTTH in NYC? Are there not existing trenches and under-street ducting for cables already in most of the city? Surely there are going to be some tricky areas but how to the other utilities like phones and electric work on their cabling?

If anyone on my team browses HN they will now know who I am :D

I moved to a new house in the Netherlands at the end of last summer. KPN the FTTH provider was there by chance the day I got the keys to put the fibre in the cable box by my front door, however there was something wrong on the other end and the fibre was dark. The fibre lines themselves are owned by a different company and KPN couldn't issue a work order on my behalf to the fibre managment company since I didn't have an active KPN subscription. The way you get an active subscription is for the tech to connect his diagnostic machine (or a self installing modem/ont) to validate the connection works. Catch 22, can't fix the fibre without an active subscription, can't activate the subscription without a working fibre.

In one of the ten or so phone calls trying to come to a sensible resolution, one of the support people suggested the only way to resolve this was for someone with an active KPN subscription moves to my street so they can issue the work order on their account instead (yea let me get right on that KPN) or to simply get a different ISP that is willing to issue the work order and then switch back to KPN.

I told them to forget my number and went with a hyper local ISP that literally has a cat 6 cable running under the cobblestones from my neighbours house. Unfortunately it's not a very stable connection and the 1gb is more like 30-300mb depending on presumably the bandwidth usage of the neighbours.

I think at the current level of LLM code I have observed there's basically zero chance they can produce a competitive cad/cas. Maybe they could approximate an open source kernel like opencascade but I don't see the point in that when freecad already exists.