"For trivial relocatability, we found a showstopper bug that the group decided could not be fixed in time for C++26, so the strong consensus was to remove this feature from C++26."
[https://herbsutter.com/2025/11/10/trip-report-november-2025-...]
"For trivial relocatability, we found a showstopper bug that the group decided could not be fixed in time for C++26, so the strong consensus was to remove this feature from C++26."
[https://herbsutter.com/2025/11/10/trip-report-november-2025-...]
Seems that most of it's novelties were eventually added into LISP proper.
The article then goes into some examples of CRDTs and their merge operation, and the examples are pretty straightforward: take the maximum of two values, or take one with a more recent timestamp, etc.
But what about the motivating example? What should a merge function do with the inputs "change the third word from 'affect' to 'effect'" and "delete the third word"? In other words, how does the function know which of these operations "wins"? It could ask a user for a manual resolution, but is there a reasonable way for a function to make this determination itself? Maybe deletes are more powerful than word changes, so the delete wins.
That tradeoff is fine for some things but not others. There's a reason why git et al require human intervention for merge conflicts.
The article is doing a classic bait-and-switch: start with a motivating example then dodge the original question without pointing out that CRDTs may be a very bad choice for collaborative editing. E.g. maybe it's bad for code and legalese but fine for company-issued blog posts.
Now you just need and Oculus and you can turn yourself into Johnny Mnemonic.
Growing up, a friends dad would use this as a ‘feature’ on his Datsun to move the car out of traffic when it wouldn’t restart.
Put it in first, release the clutch, crank the starter, and move the car out of the way.
Surprised this station seems to post-date that? Seems like it would have been handy to have in the Cold War. Then again, Russia has long had a mining presence on Svalbard so maybe that has something to do with it.
Maybe you all knew that factoid already, but I learned the name of shape only recently.
Another interesting factoid about the catenary: Robert Hooke proved that it takes on the shape (though inverted) of the ideal arch, in terms of supporting loads above it. La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona is filled with them.