nas

I've always considered local escalations to be possible in Linux (i.e. having user access almost certainly means you can get root). However, 948 vulnerabilities is kind of shocking. Hopefully we are getting to the end of the part where it "gets worse before it gets better".

Just an FYI, for people looking at the low pass rates for mypy and ty and concluding they must not be very useful. These test suites are checking many odd corners of the typing spec.

For "normal" Python code, I find mypy does pretty good. Certainly I find it helpful, especially on a large code base and when working with other developers of various experience levels.

The reason I prefer pyrefly over mypy is mostly because of speed. Better accuracy is nice but speed it the killer feature. Given the quality of uv and ruff and the experience of the team working on ty, I'm quite confident it's going to be great in that respect as well.

My CS college used Turbo Pascal as a teaching language. I had a professor who told us "don't turn the range and overflow checking off, even when compiling for production". That turned out to be very wise advice, IMHO. Too bad C and C++ compiler/language designers never got that message. So much wasted to save that less than 1% performance gain.

I get:

3.9: 2.78

3.14: 3.86

3.14t: 3.91

This is a silly benchmark though. Look at pyperformance if you want something that might represent real script/application performance. Generally 3.14t is about 0.9x the performance of the default build. That depends on a lot of things though.

Every PyObject structure has a ob_type pointer.

The key enabling tech is thread safe reference counting. There are many other problems that Sam Gross solved in order to make it happen but the reference counting was one of the major blockers.

There are a whole set of problems, IMHO. The code-of-conduct working-group (CoC WG) members are self selected. There is no effective oversight mechanism. No matter if you think they are currently doing a good job or not, it's not a proper way to organize such a group. The steering council (SC) did a poor job in communicating and their tendency towards secretiveness does not inspire confidence that the machinery regarding these things is working correctly. Part of the justification for secrecy is that they are protecting the banned person. That is hard to believe since it's trivial to figure out who they are talking about given their initial ban announce posting (X number of posts in a certain topic points to exactly one person). So it looks more like the secrecy is to avoid answering uncomfortable questions about the decision making and the process and not about actually protecting the accused.

Someone made a great analogy about what is happening here. You have a machine that is supposed to make toy dolls. One day you notice the dolls coming out the machine are deformed and weird looking. So, you say to the doll factory manager:

> I think something is wrong with the doll making machine.

They say

> No, this is a very high quality doll making machine, look at the specifications on the great looking dolls it will make. Don't you trust that this machine will make proper dolls? The manufacturer and people running the machine are all very trustworthy

You say:

> That might be true but I see the dolls coming out are deformed, something must be wrong.

Tim does not get a free pass to behave badly just because he is a long-time Python contributor. However, given his literal decades of civil behavior in many public forums, it is hard to believe he did something that was justifying a ban. Based on looking at what the CoC WG shared and what Tim shared, I don't see anything that justifies it. So, I don't think the "machine" is working correctly.

Very encouraging news!

I think it means it could be a title from a Monty Python skit, not that it necessarily is taken from one.

darktable is still being developed. There are pretty regular releases. I use it as my main photo processing software (raw-based workflow).

As I said in my other comment, Aurélien has strong opinions. He felt he could not effectively work with the other darktable devs and decided to fork the project.

This is the work of a former "darktable" developer (Aurélien Pierre) who decided to fork the codebase and go it alone. He has strong opinions about the correct way to do things. I like some of the cleanup on the UI that he has done. For now, Ansel and darktable are compatible in terms of the underlying database. So you can easily switch back and forth between them. If the fork diverges significantly, it would be more difficult to maintain the compatibility.

darktable has seen some major changes in the past few years, moving away from a "display-referred" to a "scene-referred" workflow. Aurélien contributed a lot of code to make that work, most significantly, the Filmic module. darktable is not as user friendly and as polished as other commercial tools (Lightroom, Affinity, Capture One) but it is capable if you take the time to learn it.

You can make due with only a couple of good knots. Very short list: the reef knot (square knot, avoid the granny version) and the alpine butterfly (don't use reef knot for joining two ropes, i.e. a "bend"). The alpine butterfly is more useful to know than the bowline, IMHO.

If you want to expand your list a little, here are some additional useful ones: double fisherman's, adjustable grip hitch, sheet bend, trucker's hitch.

Edit: I suppose this is more useful with a little additional commentary. The reef knot is so common that you should know it and know how to avoid the granny knot and also when not to use it (e.g. as a bend). You can use the alpine butterfly as a bend and also for quite few other things. It is more versatile than the bowline (e.g. if you need a loop that doesn't slip) and works fine as a bend (very smiilar to the Zeppelin bend).