Trump emboldened a lot of racists. You don't need to make any logical sense, just show off your true racist inner self to the world. I guess having a hyphen in your name is woke now.
I think UB doesn't have much to do with this bug after all.
The original code defined a struct with two bools that were not initialized. Therefore, when you instantiate one, the initial values of the two bools could be anything. In particular, they could be both true.
This is a bit like defining a local int and getting surprised that its initial value is not always zero. (Even if the compiler did nothing funny with UB, its initial value could be anything.)
The entire "its initial value could be anything" is one of the possible consequences of UB. It is not the most dire but in C and C++ it is an outcome from an UB.
Could a language define un-initialized variables as readable garbage? Sure, but that would be a different language with different semantics, and such languages can also define declaration such that
> defining a local int and getting surprised that its initial value is not always zero.
is in fact reasonable. That is what Java and Go opted to do, for instance.
> The original code defined a struct with two bools that were not initialized. Therefore, when you instantiate one, the initial values of the two bools could be anything. In particular, they could be both true.
Then reading from that struct like in OP constitutes UB.
I've browsed reddit long enough to know that human drivers don't just stop in the middle of traffic for no reason, they will stop in the middle of a railroad intersection, block a highway exit, reverse from a highway exit, drive into a highway exit in the wrong direction, drive into another vehicle, reverse into another vehicle, and spew fume at pedestrians and bikers, all the time.
Or at least frequently enough to supply multiple subreddits dedicated to these people.
> As a taxpayer I'm tired of funding everyone's project.
Some Americans took a hard look at the state of America as the world's leader in science, technology, and industry, with a ton of cutting-edge research attracting the smartest from all over the world, and decided "This sucks, can we go back to the simpler times where everyone had a factory job and they all looked and spoke like me?"
...And they might just get their wish, from how it looks.
Those factory jobs are, to a first approximation, gone for good. Either they are being done by humans in other countries that not only have a cost of living less than 1/5 of ours, but also have massive supply and logistics chains built up to support them, or they have been automated. Sure, there will be a few much-ballyhooed factories built and staffed, but compared to the period after WWII, which is what most of them are thinking of, it's going to be less than a drop in the bucket.
And, for the vast majority of people, that's an unalloyed good. Factory jobs are hard on the body. Office work may have less of a nationalist mythos built up around it, but it's genuinely better for most people.
Ehh... I was just making a crass joke that MAGA might end up making America so poor that Americans would be willing to work for terrible factory jobs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That just seems like the straightforward maggot plan though, once you read past the marketing hopium? Assuming our new Chinese owners will be willing to let us have factories, of course.
Have been in California for 10+ years and I've never seen anyone describing California's electricity infra as reliable. It shows the same kind of failure that's too familiar to many Americans: a vital service is managed by a corporation that has no incentive for better services, and market forces do not work due to the nature of the service. (If the power at your home in SF goes out all the time, it's not like you can find another provider - the best you can do is move to, say, Nevada, which is not realistic for most people.)
I lived in California until 2018; I think I missed the beginning of the premptive outages during high winds/fire danger, but the grid sections I lived in were much more reliable where I live now, near Seattle with PSE as the utility power supplier. I was also out of CA in the post-Enron rolling blackout era.
The PNW has a more challenging environment with respect to trees pulling down lines than suburban California; I expect two nines of utility power availability here; some years will get three nines. When I was in California, many years had no outages and I don't remember any years where I had less than 99.9% availability. Even when I did eventually decide to get a UPS, it was just because one day there were several brief interruptions.
Obviously, local conditions vary, and I managed to avoid the two recent periods of larger scale grid instability, but at least in my bubble, nobody talked about grid reliability, because it was just there. Plenty of complaints about rates and how long it would take to get service changes.
Chomsky Hierarchy pertains to "languages" defined in the theory of computation: i.e., it is a subset of the set of all finite sequence of alphabets (for some fixed notion of "alphabets"). If a sentence (a particular finite sequence of alphabets) is in the subset, then it is a "valid" sentence of the language. Otherwise it is invalid.
It should be already clear from this that this notion of language is rather different from natural languages. For example, if there is a formal language that contains "Good morning" and "My hovercraft is full of eels" as valid sentences, then nothing distinguishes these sentences any more. (Of course you could add annotations and build semantic values but they are not essential to the discussion of formal languages.)
It gets a bit more ridiculous when you try to connect LLMs to the Chomsky hierarchy. Modern LLMs do not really operate on the principle of "is this a valid sentence?" yet provide vastly superior results when it comes to generating naturally sounding sentences.
I think LLMs have put an end to any hope that formal language theory (in the style of Chomsky Hierarchy) will be relevant to understanding human languages.
> For example, if there is a formal language that contains "Good morning" and "My hovercraft is full of eels" as valid sentences, then nothing distinguishes these sentences any more.
Mind explaining a bit? Because I've no idea what you mean.
That's like complaining at names like Jesus, Paul, Moses, or Peter (with their English pronunciation) because that's not how those biblical figures pronounced their own names.
After the present Pope had given his inaugural speech in several languages except for English, apparently someone (on Fox News?) complained, "what? no English? It was good enough for Jesus why doesn't he speak English!?"
The horrible part of this story is that it's so believable.
reply