Pebble Watch software is now open source
ericmigi.com
Most Stable Raspberry Pi? 81% Better NTP with Thermal Management
austinsnerdythings.com
Unpowered SSDs slowly lose data
xda-developers.com
Human brains are preconfigured with instructions for understanding the world
news.ucsc.edu
How the Atomic Tests Looked Like from Los Angeles
amusingplanet.com
Show HN: I built an interactive HN Simulator
news.ysimulator.run
Build a Compiler in Five Projects
kmicinski.com
Cool-retro-term: terminal emulator which mimics look and feel of CRTs
github.com
How did the Windows 95 user interface code get to the Windows NT code base?
devblogs.microsoft.com
Implications of AI to schools
twitter.com
What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality
nytimes.com
Show HN: OCR Arena – A playground for OCR models
ocrarena.ai
What you can get for the price of a Netflix subscription
nmil.dev
Three Years from GPT-3 to Gemini 3
oneusefulthing.org
Chrome Jpegxl Issue Reopened
issues.chromium.org
Rethinking C++: Architecture, Concepts, and Responsibility
blogs.embarcadero.com
The Bitter Lesson of LLM Extensions
sawyerhood.com
Google's new 'Aluminium OS' project brings Android to PC
androidauthority.com
Shai-Hulud Returns: Over 300 NPM Packages Infected
helixguard.ai
Dumb Ways to Die: Printed Ephemera
ilovetypography.com
Moving from OpenBSD to FreeBSD for firewalls
utcc.utoronto.ca
I get the feeling author would just like to use a better language, like F# or Ocaml, and completely misses the point what makes C++ valuable.
C++ is valuable, because the existing tooling enables you to optimize the runtime peformance of a program (usually you end up with figuring out the best memory layout and utilization).
C++ is valuable becaus it's industry support guarantees code bases live for decades _without the need to modify them_ to latest standards.
C++ is valuable because the industry tooling allows you to verify large areas of the program behaviour at runtime (ASAN etc).
I simply don't understand what type of industrial use this type of theoretical abstraction building serves.
Using the metaprogramming features makes code bases extremly hard to modify and they don't actually protect from a category of runtime errors. I'm speaking from experience.
I would much rather have a codebase with a bit more boilerplate, a bit more unit tests and strong integration testing suite.
The longer I use C++ the more I'm convinced something like Orthodox C++ is the best method to approach the language https://bkaradzic.github.io/posts/orthodoxc++/
This keeps the code maintainable, and performant (with less effor than metaprogramming directed C++).
Note: the above is just an opinion, with a very strong YMMV flavour, coming from two decades in CAD, real time graphics and embedded development.