> By "through metadata", you mean with some external separate mechanism unrelated to the XML spec?
The code generating the xml text may not be aware of the final encoding used to store/transmit it and a library writing text to an encoded stream might not be aware that the text it is sending contains xml. So I would say allowing xml to be parsed using an externally specified encoding makes at least some sense.
> A document that initially looks like UTF-8 could be almost any of literally hundreds of encodings including all the common ISO 8859 encodings
Your own link shows that those "hundreds of encodings" are all based on ASCII, which is enough to get the concrete encoding from the declaration.
> and then switch to a "parsing" phase after rewinding to the start of the document.
By default XML is either UTF-8 or 16, any other encoding has to be identified either through metadata or an explicit declaration in the document itself.
If you are guessing it is because someone failed to properly store or transmit the document.
The candidates for prime minister and similar positions tend to be front and center during an election.
From what I remember the head of the european commission was picked from a group of people that weren't even up for election after the official candidates that were paraded around during an EU wide election where dismissed.
> Netscape decided to add a programming language to Navigator. They pursued two routes to achieve this:
And the reason for that two language approach is given in the linked source:
> We aimed to provide a “glue language” for the Web designers and part time programmers who were building Web content from components such as images, plugins, and Java applets. We saw Java as the “component language” used by higher-priced programmers, where the glue programmers—the Web page designers—would assemble components and automate their interactions using [a scripting language].
Earlier sources clearly state that Java was intended as the primary language and JavaScript merely acting as glue.
> Having to install a binary blob from a free-software hostile vendor that wanted a monopoly to load a website was always ridiculous ask.
The entire browser ecosystem started out closed source. Even JavaScript was written to interact with closed source Java Applets.
> Flash was a constant embarassment of RCEs vulns
Browsers still are the goto target for contests like Pwn2own. It is almost like inviting the entire world to run untrusted code on your computer is not a great idea, no matter how many security buzzwords browser makers like to throw arround.
The result I get has an entire section dedicated to scammers using the company name. The only links in that section go to a wikipedia page that doesn't mention any scams and a police help page that doesn't mention the company.
> due to how easy it is to trick them into installing something
You have tools from large corporations where the official installation procedure involves copy pasting a command from a random blog post, run it with sudo and watch it download and execute a script from a random filehost. This is somehow deemed acceptable by everyone involved.
Meanwhile I can't use teams in our meeting rooms, since any form of internet access was deemed a security risk in rooms where customer projects could be discussed. This is in a day and age where 90% of customer meetings are done over the internet.
Anyone trying to follow sane practices in this industry just asks to end up in a padded cell.
> In modern CPUs a mispredicted branch is much more expensive than a memory write.
Mostly because of caching. The writes either go to the same address as a previous one or move only a small increment, so most writes are likely going to hit L1 cache. If it wrote to a random memory location after every iteration the cost of a misprediction would probably disappear in the noise.
That was an unrelated issue from an audit that had been done before the heist.
One of the theories right after the heist was that the thieves where former security guards. France had just laid of most of the museums security, the alarm triggered just fine, there just wasn't anyone left to respond.
> If some architecture traps on unaligned access, then the compiler can and should simply generate the correct code so that it loads the integer piece by piece instead.
Wouldn't the compiler have to assume that every pointer access might be unaligned and do the slow "piece by piece" access every time? It can hardly guess the runtime value of a pointer during compilation.
> produced one of the largest open source ecosystems in use (.NET)
Are they going to ship an official cross platform UI library any time the next century? Decades after the Java lawsuit they still ship only a crippled copy of their scrapped Microsoft JVM for other platforms.
> Microsoft is a huge open source contributor now
Aren't almost all of their contributions for integration with their proprietary technology?
> Sorry to say, but believing nothing with MS has changed is deranged.
Yes, they got worse. They maintained Windows XP for ages and you could actually feel the improvements they shipped. Windows 11 meanwhile makes me wait for them to add a robotic arm with a knife as hardware requirement, to improve the backstabbing experience.
I am not a facebook user, but going by that post they seem to go a step further and outright block any links pointing to news sites. The article mentions some provisions in the Italian law that prohibit restricting visiblity of the news sites, at least during negotiations, so that kind of salted earth move could backfire .
The C compiler also isn't allowed to do all of them. However some people use fast-math or compilers that default to fast-math to break the rules. Some older targets also may use the 80 bit fpu, which is its own mess and any sane compiler will default to properly sized SSE instructions instead.