high_na_euv

whats the feature?

cmon, it is time move on.

it has been discussed bilion times

which compiler?

in compare to c and cpp? it is

but teams that developed and reviewed it do

partial and full understanding is still understanding.

there are ppl who spent decades on this topic either in academic or practical setting and their knowledge and experience is very valuable

>This argument is so silly against reality, and already, almost nobody understands the things they put in their body to any significant degree, beyond the effect produced.

he isnt saying that person who puts stuff into their body should understand it

it is that someone (expert) should understand it to the point he can vouch for it

What a mess

Have you considered that there could be other reasons for that like better hw at the time

Or even mac or its ecosystem could be better while windows isnt unstable!

I think your experience has been unusual.

Windows has hundreds of milions direct users worldwide.

If it was that unstable as HN tries to make it, then a outrages would be in news every week

>There is a race condition: The prescan may show that all the functions are safe to patch, but then somebody might patch a function after the prescan completes. In that case, the patcher will get halfway through and then discover the rogue-patched function, and now it’s kind of stuck. It can’t continue forward, and it can’t reliably roll back (because the rollback is probably also going to fail because the patch got overpatched). You’re stuck with a binary in memory that is half-patched, and who knows what’ll happen now.

Ehh :) scenarios like this are the best

So, barely no benefit?

More expensive?

Not really

I do find them useful when querying like "how todo xyz in abc"