So…like an old fashioned camera iris?

All the others are not very butthole-ish, though.

There are definitely more experienced programmers using it. I can’t find the post at the moment, but there was a recent-ish blog post citing a bunch of examples.

Personally, I don’t use AI much, but I do occasionally experiment with it (for instance, I recently gave Claude Sonnet the same live-coding interview I give candidates for my team; it…did worse than I expected, tbh). The experimenting is sufficient for me to recognize these phrases.

It’s not in C, if that’s what you mean.

It’s a “stream manipulator” function that not only generates a new line, it also flushes the stream.

Probably moreso for expressing the opinion so strongly without actually knowing any of the three languages.

Edit: I’m just guessing why a different comment got downvotes. Why am I getting downvotes?

Doesn’t the first edition use K&R style parameter lists and other no-longer-correct syntax?

I think generally C compilers prefer to keep the stack intact for debugging and such.

Okay, yeah, I was indeed reading your original reply as a criticism of one of the people involved (presumably the security researcher), rather than as a criticism of the post title. Sorry for misunderstanding.

Apparently GCC does indeed do tail-call optimization at -O2: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Optimize-Options.html#index-foptimize-sibling-calls

But in that case, I’m not sure why the solution to the denial of service vulnerability isn’t just “compile with -foptimize-sibling-calls.”

…what is your point? Some software (in a language that doesn’t have tail-recursion optimization) used recursion to handle user-provided input, and indeed it broke. Someone wrote to explain that that’s a potential vulnerability, the author agreed, and fixed it. Who here is misunderstanding how computers implement recursion?

What about Julia?

Is Fortran really your favorite language?

neeeeeeerd

That one actually seems plausible, if he ever learns about that whole thing

Nope. I can’t find that exact screen, but you can find registration for the webinar here: https://go.oracle.com/LP=130256#On-Demand-Webinars

Unless you work for the committee or for ISO somehow, then I don’t think that really follows. C++ and JavaScript were both used in production for decades before they had standards, and the dissolution of the standards committee wouldn’t cause compiler vendors to stop developing compilers.

Wait, which one leaves you unemployed?

I agree that it’s a “cop-out”, but the issue it mitigates is not an individual one but a systemic one. We’ve made it very, very difficult for apps not to rely on environmental conditions that are effectively impossible to control without VMs or containerization. That’s bad, but it’s not fixable by asking all app developers to make their apps work in every platform and environment, because that’s a Herculean task even for a single program. (Just look at all the compatibility work in a codebase that really does work everywhere, such as vim.)

My point is that the claim in the comic and in other comments that this corrupts your repo or loses work simply isn’t true.

It’s not even actually that bad, at least not since January of 2020: https://stackoverflow.com/a/59687740/1858225