There's Always A Surprise Waiting For Us At The End

Content Re: Regression - prockmsg does not ... From Jukka Ollila Greg KH Jukka Ollila Alan Cox Linus Torvalds Tallen Allie. Sent On Jul 6, 2012 10:45 am Jul 6, 2012 10:54 am Jul 6, 2012 11:45 am Jul 6, 2012 12:34 pm Jul 6, 2012 1:30 pm 1ul a 3019 2.05 nm Subject: Re: Regression - prockmsg does not (always) block for 1-byte reads From: Linus Torvalds (torvlinux-foundation.org) Date: Jul 6, 2012 1:30:01 pm List: org. kernel. vger.linux-kernel Kay, this needs to be fixed. Suggested fix: just use the 'seg printf0' interfaces, which do the proper buffering, and allow any size reads of various packetized data. Of course, I'd also suggest that whoever was the genius who thought it was a good idea to read things ONE FCKING BYTE AT A TIME with system calls for each byte should be retroactively aborted. Who the fck does idiotic things like that? How did they noty die as babies, considering that they were likely too stupid to find a tit to suck on? Linus

Look at this absolute masterpiece of error handling. When things go wrong, just ask OpenAI to fix it and eval() whatever it returns. Because nothing says "I trust the process" like blindly executing code from an AI in production. The cherry on top? Generating random passwords for users who probably wanted to use their own. Security through confusion - it's the new standard.

Content IF DEBUGGING IS THE PROCESS OF REMOVING SOFTWARE BUGS, THEN PROGRAMMING MUST BE THE PROCESS OF PUTTING THEM IN.. - EDSGER DIJKSTRA TechWorm

Content - ballbase 72 points 1 day ago What does sacrifice child mean in this context? permalink source embed save save-RES report give award reply hide child comments -J Schnickatavick 234 points 1 day ago (last edited 1 day ago) I don't know the term "sacrifice", but generally killing a child means that a parent process needs to terminate a secondary (child) process that it started. I would assume based on context that a sacrifice is just ending a child process to save memory? Regardless, threading has some of the most messed up terminology for seemingly no reason. It's the only place where "killing orphans" or "zombie children" are normal terms permalink source embed save save-Res parent report give award reply hide child comments - TechCubeTetrabyte us 61 points 1 day ago Zombie children? Like, unaccounted for by the OS? permalink source embed save save-RES parent report give award reply hide child comments - Schnickatavick 128 points 1 day ago - It's a child process that finished its task and closed, but the parent process hasn't acknowledged it yet. It leaves it in this awkward state where it's terminated (dead) but it still has to hang around in memory (like a zombie) until the parent process can receive the child's "return" values, which let's the OS wipe it from memory, which is called reaping. Which is another messed up term, the OS is literally a "reaper" for dead processes? Who named this stuff? permalink source embed save saveRES parent report give award reply hide child comments - TerrorBite 55 points 1 day ago - The child itself has already died or been killed at that point; what isn't released yet is the child's entry in the PID table, as the return code (which the parent needs to read) needs to be stored somewhere. So the only thing the zombie process is taking up at that point, is a PID number and a few kB at most of metadata in the kernel. You can't kill a zombie process, because it's already dead. The only way to get rid of it is to kill the lazy parent; the zombie will then be re-parented to init, which will clean it up immediately. Dermalink source embed unsave parent report give award reply hide child comments - Schnickatavick 69 points 1 day ago The only way to get rid of it is to kill the lazy parent The child itself has already died or been killed the zombie will then be re-parented See! What's with this phrasing?! But yeah, that's exactly right Dermalink source embed unsave parent report oive award rediv nice child comments

Nothing quite matches that special moment when you realize you've spent 40+ hours debugging a variable named userInput while the actual problem was in userImput . The existential crisis hits hard as you contemplate whether your CS degree was worth the student loans. The best part? This isn't even your worst debugging story—it's just Tuesday.

Oh how the tables have turned! In the first panel, he's all calm about a sad movie while she's emotional. But when a runtime error hits? The man is DESTROYED while she's like "whatever, just another Tuesday in code land." The perfect role reversal that captures the soul-crushing moment when your code breaks for the 47th time today and you're left wondering why you didn't become a farmer instead. Runtime errors don't care about your feelings or your deadline—they just want to watch you suffer.