|
Bloody posted:c is a beautiful language I sure hope I'll start appreciating C more in case I get this new job
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
Bloody posted:c is a beautiful language sure, in the same way that lightning is
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:I sure hope I'll start appreciating C more in case I get this new job it has a wonderful personality
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
it's fantastic in the very narrow case of "i care a lot about exactly what the hardware is doing"
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
if your using it in any context beyond that i must ask wtf you doin bruv
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
I actually never really got C until I learned assembly. it was like I needed to build up my abstraction all the way from semiconductor physics to software
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
Hed posted:I actually never really got C until I learned assembly. it was like I needed to build up my abstraction all the way from semiconductor physics to software a lot of things made a lot more sense after we got deep into the weeds of just exactly how a mips core works
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
thats not surprising, as one of the motivations for C was that systems programmers wouldn't have to use assembly any more
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
I think Marble Madness was the first game written in C instead of assembly
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Barnyard Protein posted:thats not surprising, as one of the motivations for C was that systems programmers wouldn't have to use assembly any more pdp-11 assembly is surprisingly close to C the indexing operator ([ ]), pointer dereferencing (*foo) and nested dereferencing (**) are all addressing modes in pdp-11 asm. as in, you can apply those operators to registers/memory locations for pretty much all instructions C's null-terminated strings are an 11-ism, too. it was the native string format for the dec assembler's string literals + string-handling macros. assembly was a lot less unpleasant to write in the age before risc. load/store registers? gently caress you i'll reference array elements directly in memory and have the cpu calculate the offsets on the fly 
Notorious b.s.d. fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Feb 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
i do a lot of dsPIC/PIC24 assembly work, it is quite enjoyable. comparing its ISA against the PDP-11 i'm left with the impression that the dsPIC core borrowed a lot from the PDP-11. it makes sense that C works well with PDP-11, as the wiki page tells me that C was developed on the PDP-11. XC16 for the dsPIC almost always does what you'd expect. it falls apart for 8-bit though, where the concept of a pointer is a single indirect register
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
Barnyard Protein posted:dsPIC/PIC24 assembly ISA PDP-11 dsPIC PDP-11. C PDP-11C PDP-11. XC16 dsPIC single indirect register wrong thread buddy
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:assembly was a lot less unpleasant to write in the age before risc. load/store registers? gently caress you i'll reference array elements directly in memory and have the cpu calculate the offsets on the fly still pretty good in this age after risc
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:wrong thread buddy embedded stuff has lots of terrible programmers, no reason for web people to hog the whole thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
if you know assembly and post in this thread you're like a cismale posting in the women chatting thtreadi n gbs
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:if you know assembly and post in this thread you're like a cismale posting in the women chatting thtreadi n gbs the very idea that knowing assembly means you aren't terrible. still, right thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:if you know assembly and post in this thread you're like a cismale posting in the women chatting thtreadi n gbs i didn't imply i was good at assembly
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i didn't imply i was good at assembly oh so you're genderqueer also jk everyone is free to post in this thread as long as you're nice to people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:10
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:I think Marble Madness was the first game written in C instead of assembly that was a fun game
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Bloody posted:c is a beautiful language
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:assembly was a lot less unpleasant to write in the age before risc. load/store registers? gently caress you i'll reference array elements directly in memory and have the cpu calculate the offsets on the fly still miss the 68K if only IBM had used it instead of an Intel chip...
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
fritz posted:that was a fun game fun fact: the guy who wrote it later went on to be one of the founding members of Sega Technical Institute, their US studio that made Sonic 2 among other things, and after that he was at Universal and was on the staff for all 3 crash bandicoots
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
marble madness 2 is a good game and i think my only possible claim to nerd fame is having beaten it on the only known existing machineBloody posted:c is a beautiful language and then you implement a dynamically-typed tableview in it and you stop having this delusion
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
This was last page but I just had a heated discussion with one my co-workers because he refused remove the ability to enter a --password in our "./program --user foo --password bar --thing blah". I already added in optional reading from ENV last week, which he "didn't see the point of" but he's solidly against anything that removes functionality and I'm pretty sure the boss agrees. Fuuuuuuuck I didn't think this would be where my stand would be made
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
bucketmouse posted:and then you implement a dynamically-typed tableview in it and you stop having this delusion just because you are struggling to chop down a tree with a hammer does not mean the hammer is faulty
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:This was last page but I just had a heated discussion with one my co-workers because he refused remove the ability to enter a --password in our "./program --user foo --password bar --thing blah". I already added in optional reading from ENV last week, which he "didn't see the point of" but he's solidly against anything that removes functionality and I'm pretty sure the boss agrees. gently caress programs that don't take a password flag. your boss and your coworker are right. it's up to the user to know wtf
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
to be fair the tree looks liek a nail
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:gently caress programs that don't take a password flag. your boss and your coworker are right. I don't think we can be friends anymore. I want to strip it down to a flag so you have to type it in interactively or use the ENV, I think that's p. reasonable
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:I don't think we can be friends anymore. I want to strip it down to a flag so you have to type it in interactively or use the ENV, I think that's p. reasonable i think you're an rear end in a top hat who's going to make me use 'expect' to wrap your lovely script you should also include the ENV and interactive switches, but removing --password is not the fuckin answer
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
might i recommend you to use http://expect.sourceforge.net to automatically test your interactive program
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
don't forget to delete the password from the process table entry tho
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
And I think you're an rear end in a top hat who's going to get your password exposed the second someone runs ps on the box, this isn't a trivial script, it chugs and can be running for minutes at a time. ha, beat me. I actually looked into that, I really have no clue how to do it on ruby but I might spend an hour on it tomorrow, maybe we can both be happy
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:And I think you're an rear end in a top hat who's going to get your password exposed the second someone runs ps on the box, this isn't a trivial script, it chugs and can be running for minutes at a time. yeah don't loving put the password in the process table entry. that part is all you, man
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
hmm yase lets have my password displayed on screen when i type it in, and in my bash command history
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
otp yeah, you know me
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Bhodi posted:I don't think we can be friends anymore. I want to strip it down to a flag so you have to type it in interactively or use the ENV, I think that's p. reasonable agreed, but ur boss / coworker do have a case as you;re removing somethign that used to work, that might cost your customers or whoever if they have to change their ways. then again if they are dumb it could force them to have better security.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
bobbilljim posted:hmm yase lets have my password displayed on screen when i type it in, and in my bash command history those are much easier problems to work with. if you can read my tty or my bash command history, you've already escalated privileges. process table entries are not like my command history. they are totally public. it would be really, really bad to leak pw data there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:yeah don't loving put the password in the process table entry. that part is all you, man We don't have a TON of users using this yet, it's basically in beta, which is why I want to make the change now before it gets wide adoption.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
im assuming you would have to fork with a less passwordy cmdline then kill ur original but that still lets it into the process table however briefly so i guess you're going to have to write a wrapper program in C or w/e that does some arcane bullshit to keep itself out of teh proc table gl with that
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
aren't all the /proc entries derived from the usually-mutable argv as mapped in the process' memory? lots of programs manage this feat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 05:01
|
|