|
for years i thought gradle files for android projects were some weird bespoke config-file language created specifically for gradle. nope turns out it's standard groovy code
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
Share Bear posted:if you can go to java 8 then refactoring a lot of legacy groovy stuff is easier, but yeah, the syntactic sugar of it isn't as strong of a selling point in 2019 as it might've been in 2012 I'm currently stuck on Java 7 because too many of our applications are using Grails 2.x and therefore refuse to come up under Java 8.  Meanwhile, apparently enough plugins we're using didn't make the leap to Grails 3.x to make simple upgrades impossible!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
i dont understand how groovy of all languages ended up being Blub for so many people at my company. im trying to update and fix some gradle scripts with janky plugins that do magic undocumented things and i will finally admit that maven is better. gently caress groovy, gently caress spock, gently caress gradle
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
groovy begat gradle begat gradlew which I pronounce "grad loo", which makes me chuckle then I think "my son is also called gradlew" and chuckle again therefore groovy is ok with me (also I never have to use it)
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 04:09
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juHgQBB2tLU&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 04:24
|
|
|
wish they'd add ?. to java. it's such a simple thing, why do they resist adding simple things and then go and add complex things like modules instead
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 11:04
|
|
|
Soricidus posted:wish they'd add ?. to java. it's such a simple thing, why do they resist adding simple things and then go and add complex things like modules instead lawyers at the wheel and in the wheelhouse
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2019 12:07
|
|
|
ive unironically thought about porting our jenkinsfiles from groovy to kotlin or something gently caress groovy is bad even for “declarative” (note: not actually remotely declarative) build systems
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2019 01:39
|
|
|
the shameful collection of yaml and chmod+x scripts that every other ci system uses is so much better than loving groovy
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 01:10
|
|
|
groovy is so bad that i actually feel bad for the people who made it. like i worry about their self-esteem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
the creator of groovy has more or less publicly disowned it, saying they wouldn't have created it if they knew scala existed at the time
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
that's not much of a reason
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 03:11
|
|
|
groovy is fine btw
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 03:12
|
|
|
also here's a platinum upgrade code for the first taker: ADE752B-9C6ED1B73C-CD9C3
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
why dont you use it yourself
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 03:37
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:also here's a platinum upgrade code for the first taker: ADE752B-9C6ED1B73C-CD9C3 yoink 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2019 03:57
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:groovy is fine btw hello post from 20 years ago
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2019 02:21
|
|
|
Feisty-Cadaver posted:hello post from 20 years ago speaking of 20 years ago, y'all like microkernels with message passing???
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:50
|
|
|
i prefer marco kernels
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
as someone who is pretty uninformed, microkernels have always naively seemed like the better design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
a kernel is a kerneloid in the category of endofunctors
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
microkernels are super fun in an academic, computer science-y point of view when you're
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
"oh my gosh, latency matters??" - every microkernel ever
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
i don't know a ton about this stuff but i like in some modern oses how they push some of the stuff from kernel into user space. so you get the "this part can crash and it won't take everything else along with it" benefit, but the rest of the kernel can still be fast and less complicated than a "real" microkernel
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:"oh my gosh, latency matters??" - every microkernel ever yeah it seems like a case of a good design not working at all in practice
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
DONT THREAD ON ME posted:yeah it seems like a case of a good design not working at all in practice physics / engineering
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:"oh my gosh, latency matters??" - every microkernel ever and that's why microsoft put the font renderer in the windows kernel!
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
didn't they put a whole bunch of GUI stuff in there during the 90s to make the system feel faster for users? i wonder how mad dave cutler was about it e: also it looks like they might have recently changed font rendering to a more secure design https://www.petri.com/microsoft-quietly-moved-font-parsing-appcontainer-anniversary-update Lutha Mahtin fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Mar 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:didn't they put a whole bunch of GUI stuff in there during the 90s to make the system feel faster for users? i wonder how mad dave cutler was about it they put the entire gui renderer into the kernel (gdi) they also put the entire http implementation for the web server into the kernel
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
for all i know putting all of gdi and iis into the kernel actually made architectural sense, though maybe the ~*~ microkernel ~*~ made that a really dumb and easy thing to do i'm not a windows nt expert
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:they put the entire gui renderer into the kernel (gdi) hypertext transfer pwnage
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
on the one hand memory protection/safety within the kernel was such a core part of the microkernel proposition originally that it is hard to argue that things are microkernels without it, and it has never panned out performance/flexibility-wise otoh that is then used as an excuse to not try to have kernels *logically* split into processes, to not introduce useful ipc, and some flexibility in how things are configured (e.g. like above just moving stuff in and out of kernel space according to the needs of the usecase, which is a lot easier to do with a design which defines how such components should work and interact with the system)
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 23:20
|
|
|
kernelspace font rendering may cause a lot of cves, but it also makes windows flicker slightly less, so, it;s impossible to say if its bad or not,
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 23:29
|
|
|
DONT THREAD ON ME posted:yeah it seems like a case of a good design not working at all in practice see L4, it works if you aren't bad at it
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
I recently had a meeting with a bunch of microkernel devs and they were extremely conscious about the performance to the point where their wallboard was a series of repeating tests checking the speed of the kernel on various hardware matched up to git commits to demonstrate how it was getting faster all the time It was very cool but essentially entirely academic. They definitely had valid use cases but every practical example was prepended with "...and we got it working, but it was a huge amount of work for an entire team of people" even if the use case was "be a very basic http server"
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 00:03
|
|
|
How many of the recent security issues in our favourite monokernel would have been avoided in a microkernel? The various RCE exploits in network stacks would have been a problem, because from the network daemon you'd be able to sniff all my traffic and send the interesting bits to Russia anyway. For that matter, if you have RCE in a server that runs in userspace under my user account, you can use the usual mechanisms to read all the data I care about (/home matters, the rest of / does not). It would be great if I could mount dubious USB filesystems in userspace, but for the big filesystems (like /) a crash is just as bad as a total kernel panic, because it's not like I'd be able to continue working, and I might lose data. Same with a crash in the display driver. So I'm not sure there are many security benefits to a microkernel, and the stability benefits are probably not meaningful when the system as a whole is still as tightly coupled as a modern desktop system. It might still be a good design for drones and robots and such (isn't the vxworks on the Mars rovers a microkernel?).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
Subverting a microkernel's network driver (or TCP/IP stack) doesn't immediately give you full control of the kernel and therefore complete access to all of the filesystem or process memory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 08:09
|
|
|
i still think that particular discussion misses a lot of the point. it is not like a pl having a good module system and parallelism primitives will guarantee the lack of security problems, but it is obviously very helpful the philosophy of kernel design often being reduced to "well, we have access to all memory so from here it is just as well we smear ourselves in poo poo and write a monolith in overly clever c and dumb-as-hell assembler" (in this type of conversation if only rarely in practice) is really outmoded security thinking, a case of the old approach of figuring that we'll build one inpenetrable barrier perfectly and attempting any other mitigations is a thoughtcrime undermining the one inpenetrable barrier. whenever performance permits it is also very nice if you can e.g. unmap memory suitably for the task at hand, but having a properly architected structured system to do so within is not just a prerequisite but also hugely useful in itself
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 14:03
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:didn't they put a whole bunch of GUI stuff in there during the 90s to make the system feel faster for users? i wonder how mad dave cutler was about it
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 14:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
"stable kernel driver interface" oh goody i love IHV-maintained drivers that have some mandatory garbage winamp skin interface that marketing says has to show up as much as possible and its own updater don't forget that why not add a little light spyware while we're at it os-level protection is very important particularly to protect against the user not paying a monthly subscription fee for absolutely loving everything i mean yeah linux and the whole posix model in general have a somewhat discredited design at this point but fuschia is a land grab and nothing more. it is in nobody's business interest other than google's, qualcomm's, and cell carriers' for it to succeed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 19:22
|
|