Last time I called Virgin media to get from the loyal customer (extra high) rate to something closer to what new customers get they just said no.
I switched to Vodafone which is cheaper and double the speed and got me IPv6.
I think it might just be Virgin sitting on a large amount of IPv4 addresses and not wanting to spend any money on supporting v6 when they can just overcharge their loyal customers.
Sometimes there is nothing you can do when there is an error, in that case there is no point in adding several layers of error forwarding until you ignore it somewhere higher up.
Is… NOT ignoring errors just not an option? I don’t get it. If you propagate errors up but not all the way to being handled, haven’t you failed in a very simple, easy to fix way? Should you have a linter catching these things?
In this case the issue is that defer is a very good way to ensure you don’t forget to close the file in any branches, but a bad way to return values (you have to set the value of a named return variable, which is one of Go’s odder features).
> Should you have a linter catching these things?
JetBrains’ GoLand will in fact warn you of this. If the error truly is immaterial you can instead do
defer func() { _ = f.Close() }()
which is verbose but explicit in its intent to ignore the error.
> […] you have to set the value of a named return variable
Ahhhh okay I see it now. I definitely prefer to not use that feature as well, and I’m surprised it’s even there given how well the rest of the language adheres to “only one way to do things”. Doubly agree that it’s a strange “hack” for forwarding the deferred return value… oof
> JetBrains’ GoLand will in fact warn you of this
Heh yeah that’s what prompted me to ask, as I noticed (and very much appreciated) these hints. 100% agree with the verbose-but-explicit example you gave, and do that myself.
I think AI could be useful in MUD clients, to show a picture of where the player is, and in the future that might even be a moving picture showing the combat moves.
That's similar to what Discworld MUD ran on back then, although that needed frequent MUD reboots to keep the MUD and server somewhat useable (every 45 minutes or so).
Today it is on a 8GB VM and only reboots for bigger game updates. We're looking at moving it onto a PI5.
The added bloat can no longer keep up with hardware getting better :)
no, there has not been a single run of shor for even the number 6 as far as I know, in the link you give apendix A shows they did not in fact use the 5 bits needed for factoring 21. Every experiment I know about used short cuts to get an answer, you'd think 6 would be easy enough, it fits in the 4 bits they did use!
these days it's more in the 40-70 people range.