Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jiveturkey's commentslogin

Right, a PR is "just" a set of commits (all must be in the same branch) that are intended to land atomically.

Stacked PRs are not breaking up a set of commits into divisible units. Like you said, you can already do that yourself. They let you continue to work off of a PR as your new base. This lets you continue to iterate asynchronously to a review of the earlier PRs, and build on top of them.

You often, very often, need to stage your work into reviewer-consumable units. Those units are the stack.


You "just" need to know the original merge-base of PR B to fix this. github support is not really required for that. To me that's the least valuable part of support for stacked PRs since that is already doable yourself.

The github UI may change the target to main but your local working branch doesn't, and that's where you `rebase --onto` to fix it, before push to origin.

It's appropriate for github to automatically change the target branch, because you want the diff in the ui to be representative. IIRC gitlab does a much better job of this but this is already achievable.

What is actually useful with natively supported stacks is if you can land the entire stack together and only do 1 CI/actions run. I didn't read the announcement to see if it does that. You typically can't do that even if you merge PR B,C,D first because each merge would normally trigger CI.

EDIT: i see from another comment (apparently from a github person) that the feature does in fact let you land the entire stack and only needs 1 CI run. wunderbar!


> MySQL, arguably the world's most popular database management system,

It may not have the popularity it once did, but MySQL still powers a huge % of the internet.

Is there a problem with that?

Not the original commenter, but I thought sqlite had that title.

sqlite is arguably not really a DBMS, just a DB

It's technically a DBMS, but I can see why you wouldn't compare it to MySQL.

The database is the file, the management system is the api to use the file.

a blog about traceroute in 2026. imagine that. hard to believe it could possibly be of any interest at all, especially written by someone that only just discovered it. but i'm oh so glad i stopped in, to learn about trippy! it looks amazing.

Trippy looks so cool. I'm glad I wrote this article, if just to find out about Trippy.

2002 - Estimating Router ICMP Generation Delays[0]

2015 - Characterizing ICMP Rate Limitation on Routers[1]

[0] https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~suman/courses/640/papers/govindan...

[1] https://inria.hal.science/hal-01111190/document


I guess you haven't actually implemented anything in eBPF.

Can you elaborate? I thought eBPF was created to be used in high performance scenarios, so I am confused why this shouldn't be posssible.

eBPF runs in an extremely constrained environment, in order to protect the kernel. indeed, it's quite high performance. but not high flexibility.

I have, but in the scopes of Kprobes non-network but memory. Here, I am sure you haven't at this point. I also provided projects you may check prior stating another nonsense. Instead, you could also provide some more evidence you disagree with.

They sell aggregated information.


And targeted information.


surely, the security protocols and radio modulation techniques of the day did not consider a modern-day internet threat landscape. i'm a bit surprised no one has sent their own command signals to Voyager. i'm guessing massive transmit power must be required.


TFA doesn't say -- does anyone know if this applies to 5k and 6k monitors? On my 5k display on a M4 Max, I see the default resolution in system settings is 2560x1440. Which is what I'd expect.

If the theory about framebuffer pre-allocation strategy is to hold any water, I would think that 5k and 6k devices would suffer too, maybe even more. Given that you can attach 2x 5k monitors, the pre-allocation strategy as described would need to account for that.


I believe it will, it won't be until you push up to an 8k display that you'll get the old level of scaling back (could be wrong though as I don't have a way to test this).


Not in the Apple world, and this article is centered on Apple.

https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

  - 24" you need 4k
  - 27" you need 5K.
  - 32" you need 6k.
Windows subpixel aliasing (Clear Type) manages a lot better with lower pixel density. Since Windows still has a commanding market share in enterprise, you might be right about the industry standard for HiDPI but for Apple-specific usage, not really.


Totally agree with those resolution suggestions. Personally I have a 32" 4k, I wanted a 5k or 6k back then (just too expensive) - but now I wish I had just got a 27" which is better suited to 4k - regardless it was a LOT better on the M2 Max with HiDPI working.


This still baffles me. Never mind Windows; I can get sub-pixel font rendering with the ability to fine-tune it on virtually any major Linux distro since around 2010.

Meanwhile, Apple had this but dropped it in 2018, allegedly under the assumption of "hiDPI everywhere" Retina or Retina-like displays. Which would be great...except "everywhere" turned out to be "very specific monitors support specific resolutions".


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: