Atemu

joined 5 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

For merge you end up with this nonsense of mixed commits and merge commits like A->D->B->B’->E->F->C->C’ where the ones with the apostrophe are merge commits.

Your notation does not make sense. You're representing a multi-dimensional thing in one dimension. Of course it's a mess if you do that.

Your example is also missing a crucial fact required when reasoning about merges: The merge base.
Typically a branch is "branched off" from some commit M. D's and A's parent would be M (though there could be any amount of commits between A and M). Since A is "on the main branch", you can conclude that D is part of a "patch branch". It's quite clear if you don't omit this fact.

I also don't understand why your example would have multiple merges.

Here's my example of a main branch with a patch branch; in 2D because merges can't properly be represented in one dimension:

M - A - B - C - C'
  \           /
    D - E - F

The final code ought to look the same, but now if you’re debugging you can’t separate the feature patch from the main path code to see which part was at fault.

If you use a feature branch workflow and your main branch is merged into, you typically want to use first-parent bisects. They're much faster too.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Merge is not the issue here, rebase would do the same.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

Waitwaitwaitwaitwait, haha Intel did us dirty again. There is no performance improvement whatsoever, they just lowered the internal resolution. The 10% "performance improvement" is simply the difference between 2.0x and 2.3x upscaling. Malicious fuckers.

There may be a quality improvement but that cannot be determined by anyone affiliated with Intel as they're clearly using every opportunity to lie about this. WTF?

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

That's the hard part: Who has claims to how much of the license fees. That's an extremely tough question to answer because it necessitates quantification of code contributions which is far from a solved problem.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By the fact that none of the apps I use day-to-day on my Android phone have viable alternatives on non-Android Linux.

I'd have to run Android inside a container on the mobile Linux which isn't the best experience and if I need to have Android running anyways, might aswell use regular android.

While it'd be cool to have, I don't really need a proper freedesktop userspace on my phone if I'm honest.

Android is also simply leagues ahead in mobile UI things.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, they've got the same information as us. That's why they explicitly say:

when Covid pandemic lockdowns and social distancing appeared to have halted circulation

It is still speculation, not data.

I'd tend to agree with the speculation but it's still speculation.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I consider those measures to be included in "lockdown" but it's besides the point: The paper contains no evidence that those measures made it disappear, just that it disappeared.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It wont take years. You'll be able to hack basic stuff together in a week max.

What takes years of experience is time efficient programming aswell as producing maintainable code.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Sorta.

You still need to trust a full Linux kernel and x86 hardware system.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exodus shows all permissions the app could use or request. You have denied all of those.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

That article is interesting and important but it does not show any causal links between lockdowns and the disappearance.

It is, for example, also possible that it was merely displaced by SARS-CoV2.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Non-android mobile Linux is not mature enough yet.

view more: ‹ prev next ›