I'm picturing something like RUST servers, where the admins get to set their own rules and resource multipliers to facilitate the particular part of gameplay that they want.
On one hand, sure, the entire point of a programming language is to make complex ideas able to be expressed in simpler abstractions. On the other hand, we can damn well try.
In the USA you'll get buttloads of mail urging you to do things such as confirm your home warranty at risk of not being covered. With addresses that says "RE: (your mortgage provider)" to make it look like it's from them.
You'll see some scripting languages (ab)use this. Where the native "number" type is a 64 bit float and only one NaN bit pattern is a real NaN. The others smuggle a pointer to an object in the lower bits. This way you don't spend any memory overhead indicating if a given variable contains a primitive or an object.
Vaguely reminds me of that planet in Hitchhiker's Guide that started to lose too much mass to tourists leaving. So,
> Thus today the net balance between the amount you eat and the amount you excrete while on the planet is surgically removed from your body weight when you leave; so every time you go to the lavatory there, it is vitally important to get a receipt.
Going by Fabien Sanglard's cheat sheet (who I trust uncritically) https://fabiensanglard.net/usbcheat/index.html it looks like 3.2 actually is a broader term than expected. Maybe there was some awful attempt at backwards compatibility? Or forwards?
It reminds me of how vinyl records are fairly lossy, but they provide a superior experience in some cases because those limitations have been accounted for during the mastering process.
It's an entire pipeline from photomultiplier to recording medium to the inverse process and everything is optimized not for any particular mathematical truth but for the subjective experience.
So I'd probably rewrite that code to first find the ulp of the larger of the abs of a and b and then assert that their difference is less than or equal to that.
Edit: Or maybe the smaller of the abs of the two, I haven't totally thought through the consequences. It might not matter, because the ulps will only differ when the numbers are significantly apart and then it doesn't matter which one you pick. Perhaps you can just always pick the first number and get its ULP.
The space shuttle, too, was able to communicate. I imagine the smaller the craft the smaller the angle you can "speak" out of and, below a certain size, it just doesn't work.
You can't do software updates securely, but it strikes me that compromising the revocation process is a good thing. Suppose you can use a key to sign a message saying "stop using this". If someone else breaks that key and falsely signs that message, what are the downsides?
You revoke a cert because you lose control of it; if someone else can falsely revoke that cert, doesn't that truthfully send the exact same signal? That you lose control of it?
This reminds me of Magicore Anomala, a side scrolling game being made for the 1985 Atari. I wish there was a way to know how people contemporary to the release of the Atari or the N64 would react to seeing these modern engines.
Wouldn't that be the play, though? Get a buttload of bitcoin, turn it into real money, then destroy bitcoin. If you found a break in bitcoin you wouldn't rely on keeping your wealth in bitcoin and then hoping nobody else discovers it.
I think translation should be the only exception. It might even need to be, given how all automated translators use LLMs these days. The only alternative I see is to have people post in whatever language they're most comfortable in and then everyone else has to translate for them which just feels inefficient.
And of course, a more limited exception for posts about LLM behavior. It might be necessary for people to share prompts and outputs to discuss the topic.
You have to generate random bytes with sufficient entropy to avoid collisions and you have to have a consistent way to serialize it to a string. There's already a standard for this, it's called UUID.
Now that Google and Apple have to (more-or-less) allow other app stores, I wonder if Valve is bankrolling FEX with the intent of selling games on mobile?