Per questo post Meta ha disabilitato l'account di Vanni Santoni.
Uncategorized
1
Posts
1
Posters
1
Views
-
Per questo post Meta ha disabilitato l'account di Vanni Santoni. Sempre di più i social sono strumento organico all'attacco alla democrazia
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vanni-santoni-185a7b6_ren%C3%A9e-nicole-macklin-37-anni-poetessa-activity-7415032084869840897-FYW7?utm_source=screenshot_social_share&utm_medium=android_app&rcm=ACoAAAUsABoBcDEMuntrdOFPzxs3qFzVNxKF0jY&utm_campaign=share_via -
undefined filobus@sociale.network shared this topic on
undefined g3rt@mastodon.uno shared this topic on
undefined simonemartelli@livellosegreto.it shared this topic on
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@oblomov @GustavinoBevilacqua @ALFA Avrei detto meno! Ho trovato anche delle indicazioni di spessori più bassi, può darsi che il numero si possa dimezzare
-
-
@oblomov Having foo be a class and not a struct would make some things a lot more complicated. If there's no other way, I'd probably prefer to generate automatically the procedures that take struct bar *, invoke the converter explicitly, and then call the hand-written procedures, over doing multiple inheritance.
-
@ananas You're thinking about something weird.
I want to do something like this, which, as you can see, is so perfectly cromulent than it compiles and runs:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
struct bar {
int paydirt;
};
struct foo {
int some_field_here;
struct bar cheap_dirt;
operator bar &() {
return cheap_dirt;
}
};
void work_on_paydirt (struct bar &object) {
printf("Teh paydirt is %i\n", object.paydirt);
}
struct foo the_foo;
struct bar the_bar;
int main () {
work_on_paydirt(the_foo);
work_on_paydirt(the_bar);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}I just want work_on_paydirt, for historic compatibility reasons, to take struct bar * rather than struct bar & as its argument. Logic-wise, maintenance-wise, there's no difference. Even the generated code is exactly the same (modulo the mangled names). But C++ syntax is only happy to let me define an explicit conversion operator for a struct-to-struct-reference, and not for the same struct's pointer to a struct pointer. I'm not trying to do anything exotic here, or type punning or obfuscatory stuff; I just want the translator to implicitly invoke my type converter for a pointer-to-struct type, just like it can for a referenced-struct type.
-
Hudson Valley vs ICE: no al detention center a Chester
@anarchia
Juan è in America da diciotto anni. Viene da Puebla, Messico. Ogni mattina scende dalla collina dove sorge Chester per raggiungere le serre a valle, dove raccoglie i frutti che finiranno sulle tavole di New York City. Tutti lo https://www.rivoluzioneanarchica.it/hudson-valley-vs-ice-no-al-detention-center-a-chester/
-
Our latest blog post has all the information and updates about the program:
➡️ https://www.sovereign.tech/news/2026-fellowship-applications-open
Spread the word, share this post, and tag each other in the comments. We look forward to receiving your applications!
#SovereignTechAgency #DigitalInfrastructure #FOSS #Maintainers #Hiring #FOSSJobs
(2/2)
-
A lovely person shared about this company Apipana in #Granada when I asked about an internship for a friend.
Gonna check it out
-
🎉 Applications for the Sovereign Tech Fellowship are officially open!
What’s new? For the first time, community managers, and technical writers can apply alongside open source maintainers until April 6, 2026, to become Fellows.
The #SovereignTechFellowship invests directly in the people behind the code, supporting key experts whose work underpins the health and stability of critical components in the #opensource ecosystem.
(1/2)
