Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Activity for Lundin
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #281539 |
There's yet another aspect to keeping comments in private. A whole lot of users _don't_ want to be moderators. They don't want to teach random people on the Internet how to spell, how communicate with other humans, how to use the site and so on. They just want the crappy post gone from "their" site. ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281539 |
"or being dog-piled privately by six" The way SO does it: get down votes, wait a few minutes, get the first public comment, wait a few minutes, more negative comments, wait a few minutes, close/down votes keep coming, wait a few minutes, lots of negative comments half of them repeating what's already... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281528 |
@luap42 There were many such discussions on the old forums, though I'm not sure if we came up with any consensus. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281305 |
I get it every single time I do an edit now. It seems to be getting worse. Can we just disable this whole crap until it gets fixed? This is going to scale incredibly poorly when the sites grow. Then you'll have hundred posts like this per day. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281519 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281528 |
Also related, what happened to the [Arbitration & Review Panel](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/277346)? I guess it is meant to handle more serious issues than deleted comments, but similarly to my idea above, criticism against moderator decisions needn't necessarily be posted on public meta. It cou... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281528 |
Related to this - in them early discussion stages of Codidact, I proposed that all feedback about bad questions should be given privately, rather than using the public comment field, since it is a well-known source of anger and drama. People are prone to respond bad to criticism in general, but espec... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281519 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281520 |
@dmckee Smart pointers aren't necessarily smart in a multi-threaded context though. Because that makes heap allocated objects behave as if they have local scope. Not what you want - suppose you create a thread from another thread, then the creator finishes and goes out of scope. The smart pointer wil... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281520 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281520 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Write to same file from multiple threads Writing to the file on the HD is your massive bottleneck no matter how many threads you throw around. The limit is the physical memory access speed, not processing power. And since it is such a bottleneck, you should have a thread solely focusing on this job, similar to what @dmckee suggested. N... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281305 |
It's still there, more frequent than ever it seems. Just got it again after posting [this answer](https://software.codidact.com/posts/281518). Maybe it's related to formatting or how long you spend typing the answer? That one was very long, so I kept the browser upon for a wee while. By the way, may ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281519 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Is strcpy dangerous and what should be used instead? Summary (TL;DR) - Using `strcpy` directly on non-sanitized user input is bad, otherwise it's fine. - `strncpy` is a dangerous function that should be avoided. Its presence in your source is a much greater danger than buffer overruns. - If portability and backwards-compatibility are no concer... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281518 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Is strcpy dangerous and what should be used instead? I heard rumours that the `strcpy` function is dangerous and shouldn't be used. Supposedly it can be exploited to create buffer overflows somehow. And indeed when I compile my C code in the admittedly non-conforming Visual Studio C compiler, it warns me about using `strcpy` among other functions, ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281511 |
What's the question? Is there a software development problem you are trying to solve? Are you designing a web browser? Are you reverse-engineering one? (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281484 |
I guess they mean that you didn't have to declare the type because you are handed a default size integer. This was at least the case of B, BCPL and very early pre-standard C. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281474 |
@qsmodo Indeed there are lots of applications where the primitive types are never used and it is common to ban their use in coding standards. Proper introduction courses will address stdint.h. Alternatively you could use the peculiar rules from _Modern C/Gustedt_, where the recommended types to use ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281474 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281255 |
Seems like it is more prone to happen when you edit your own answers. I just got it too while logged and have to do it twice as well. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281475 |
(Using Firefox). (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281475 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281475 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281475 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Question | — |
Code formatting of previews I just noticed that I'm not getting code formatting in the preview window when I write an answer or make an edit. This is very useful to have. Not sure if it's a bug so I'm posting this as a feature request. I'm not getting code formatting when I use language-specific formatting tags: ```c++ t... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281474 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281305 |
Link to the post that prompted for Captcha before I could post the answer: https://software.codidact.com/posts/281464#answer-281474. This contained code, but C (with C code formatting tags), not PHP. I'm always logged in to Codidact. Using Firefox. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281305 |
This keeps happening, it is very annoying. I just got this after a post where I was writing an answer, then went to edit the question post using the same browser window. Since I didn't trust the site to save the draft I was writing, I made a copy/paste of it first. When I returned to the answer, the ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281474 | Initial revision | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Warn of implicit cast in a function's arguments with GCC? You can use `-Wconversion` but you should be aware that it is very prone to false positives. It's a good flag to turn on during code review etc to shake out a few minor issues, but it's not a flag you should leave on permanently. gcc isn't very good at so-called static analysis in the first place.... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281464 |
Post edited: |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281464 |
Please note that there is no such thing as "implicit casting". There are implicit and explicit _conversions_. A cast is always an explicit conversion done by the programmer, by using the cast operator (). There is no casting present in your example. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281434 |
Your question is about gaming terminology, not software development. If I'm writing a microcontroller program for a dishwasher, then that doesn't mean that it's suddenly ok for me to start asking questions about dishwashers here. Such questions are about the functionality of the specific application ... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281434 |
This has absolutely nothing to do with software development. Kindly stop asking blatantly off-topic questions. (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281434 | Question closed | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281308 | Question closed | — | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281308 |
It would be fine to ask this on meta. But currently, "asking to explain what a certain code does, unless they are small and an attempt to understand them is also added" is listed as off-topic for this site. https://software.codidact.com/help/on-topic. The meta discussion thread can be found here: htt... (more) |
— | almost 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #279578 |
@Incnis Mrsi Well it depends on if the braces would surround both gotos or just one. It wouldn't have passed manual code review either. If they had any resemblance of a quality coding standards, then none of the code from that link would be allowed. Not just the brace issue, but goto itself, assignm... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #277488 |
@Incnis Mrsi It means either 2's complement, 1's complement or signed magnitude. C unfortunately allows all of these still. In practice, the vast majority of all real-world computers use 2's complement. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281020 |
@Estela There's a place for macros and even function-like macros, but not in this specific case. Avoid them when you can. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280999 |
So as I see it there are 3 options: 1) either we'd create a "Beginner" category and make it default. 2) Or we turn the current "Q&A" into the beginner-friendly one and create an "Advanced" category (the name and scope would have to be debated separately). 3) Or we outlaw beginner questions, in which ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #280999 |
We've discussed this to-and-fro since the early stages of Codidact, for example [here](https://forum.codidact.org/t/how-to-treat-debugging-and-easy-to-google-and-very-basic-questions/1122/3). A separate category was proposed then too. And as indicated in that discussion (by experience from SO), such ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #278896 |
@Ayxan Haqverdili I'll try to replace it with another, please try again now. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #278896 |
Post edited: Updated link |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Comment | Post #281020 |
@Ayxan Haqverdili If it is a subclass, then the original code would have handled it differently than `std::runtime_error` yeah? Or otherwise there's no need for a dedicated `catch` block. (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #281020 | Initial revision | — | about 4 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Multiple catches with almost the same code. There are many things we label as bad when programming, for various reasons. Repeating code is slightly bad. But writing function like-macros is extremely bad. You should not try to replace something slightly bad with something extremely bad. As it turns out, the programmer putting out fire with ... (more) |
— | about 4 years ago |
| Edit | Post #280966 |
Post edited: Added some tags that suit the question |
— | about 4 years ago |