What really frustrates me about that, is that someone put in a lot of effort to be able to write these things out using proper words, but it still isn’t really more readable.

Like, sure, unsigned is very obvious. But short, int, long and long long don’t really tell you anything except “this can fit more or less data”. That same concept can be expressed with a growing number, i.e. i16, i32 and i64.

And when someone actually needs to know how much data fits into each type, well, then the latter approach is just better, because it tells you right on the tin.

Oh man, a zero byte long unsigned integer? Lots of languages represent it as an empty tuple these days (the “unit” type), but from quickly scanning the documentation, it looks like HolyC doesn’t support tuples, so I guess you gotta get creative…

I’m open for counterarguments, but I always felt this was a silly way of looking at things. You cannot measure stuff at the quantum level without significantly altering what you measured. (You can never measure without altering what you measured, since we typically blast stuff with photons from a light source to be able to look at it, but for stuff that’s significantly larger than photons, the photons are rather insignificant.)

As such, you can look at measuring quanta in two ways:

1. Either the quantum had the state that you end up measuring all along. It is only “undetermined”, because strictly nothing can measure it before you do that first measurement.
2. Or you can declare it to have some magical “superposition”, from which it jumps into an actual state in the instant that you do the measurement.

Well, and isn’t quantum entanglement evidence for 1.? You entangle these quanta, then you measure one of them. At this point, you already know what the other one will give as a result for its measurement, even though you have not measured/altered it yet.
You can do the measurement quite a bit later and still get the result that you deduced from measuring the entangled quantum. (So long as nothing else altered the property you want to measure, of course…)

The analogy that makes most sense to me so far, is this:
You rip a photograph in half and put both halves into envelopes. Now you send one of the envelopes to your friend in Australia. You open the other envelope. Boom! Instantaneous knowledge of what’s in the envelope in Australia. Faster than light!!!

In quantum terms, you “rip a photograph in half” by somehow producing two quanta, which are known to have correlated properties. For example, you can produce two quanta, where one has a positive spin and the other a negative spin, and you know those to be equally strong. If you now measure the spin of the first quantum, you know that the other has the opposite spin.

Never used one…

Used to drive along a road where you would always get stuck behind a truck sooner or later, with no way to overtake for many kilometers. Whether it was sportscars or suicidal van drivers or me keeping a steady pace, everyone always got stuck behind the same damn truck.

Really would’ve liked a radio intercom thingamabob, to tell people that we can save fuel by going 10 under and still get stuck behind a truck in due time.

Capsaicin (the chemical that causes the heat sensation in chilis) is soluble in oil, so it can definitely play a role.

In my experience with maths, there’s a whole bunch of different conventions all over the place, so it might’ve genuinely been how they were taught, even if you were taught differently…

Oh yeah, that was my assumption, for sure, too. I was just playing devil’s advocate for the trenchcoat theory, because it’s funny.

I mean, probably happens a lot that the bones of different dinosaurs end up next to each other.

Would it happen for every T-Rex fossil in the same way? Well, less likely…

Sort of in the vein of Pixar movies is also Big Buck Bunny, which I had to think of. (With the caveat, that I’m the opposite of a movie person. 😅)

But well, it’s only 10 minutes long and freely available, so IMHO definitely worth watching.
You can do so here, for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Buck_Bunny#Plot

Not entirely sure, if ReactOS would count. Its documentation has a section on WiFi and one of the screenshots on their webpage shows Firefox, but that looks to be a rather old version of Firefox, so no idea if modern versions of it work, too, well, and how well the whole WiFi business works, too.

Well, and one could argue that it’s part of the Windows family.

https://reactos.org/

Yeah, similar to VR, they have their use, but compete with technology that pretty much everyone already has, so when push comes to shove, people will use what they have.

I mean, for the bugs in the screenshot, it is more than plenty, if even just 1% of bad code slips through.

And AI-generated code is extremely time-consuming and tricky to review, because you can’t assume there to be rhyme and reason to the changes, so I would be surprised, if they actually put in all the effort to properly review.

ඞ

Well, there might’ve been some change that made it even more like the original, which could’ve prompted such a title either way…

I mean, there’s already Starbound…

A few years ago, I found Kaffeine and was so surprised that I never saw a video player before with controls in a collapsible sidebar.

Old screenshot, but this is what it looks like when a video is playing:

It seems like a rather obvious idea, but I guess, it doesn’t get copied much, because most video players don’t have a ton of controls to begin with…

Yeah, and you don’t have to know which fork to choose. Only the compatible fork will show up in the search.

(I was going to recommend that, but had something in the back of head, that you needed a manual step to enable the configuration. But I just saw that this is described in the Plasma 5 version, not the Plasma 6 fork, so I guess, it’s not necessary anymore…)