frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Motorola announces a partnership with GrapheneOS Foundation

https://motorolanews.com/motorola-three-new-b2b-solutions-at-mwc-2026/
733•km•5h ago•271 comments

/e/OS is a complete "deGoogled", mobile ecosystem

https://e.foundation/e-os/
172•doener•2h ago•104 comments

Making Video Games in 2025 (without an engine)

https://www.noelberry.ca/posts/making_games_in_2025/
177•alvivar•3d ago•71 comments

Show HN: Omni – Open-source workplace search and chat, built on Postgres

https://github.com/getomnico/omni
50•prvnsmpth•2h ago•10 comments

How to talk to anyone and why you should

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2026/feb/24/stranger-secret-how-to-talk-to-anyone-why-yo...
111•Looky1173•4h ago•311 comments

U.S. science agency moves to restrict foreign scientists from its labs

https://www.science.org/content/article/nist-moves-restrict-foreign-scientists-its-labs
33•JeanKage•2h ago•9 comments

Jolla phone – a full-stack European alternative

https://commerce.jolla.com/products/jolla-phone-sept-26
92•spinningslate•1h ago•41 comments

If AI writes code, should the session be part of the commit?

https://github.com/mandel-macaque/memento
293•mandel_x•11h ago•268 comments

Neocaml – Rubocop Creator's New OCaml Mode for Emacs

https://github.com/bbatsov/neocaml
30•TheWiggles•2d ago•1 comments

Mondrian Entered the Public Domain. The Estate Disagrees

https://copyrightlately.com/mondrian-public-domain-controversy/
46•Tomte•2d ago•5 comments

Computer-generated dream world: Virtual reality for a 286 processor

https://deadlime.hu/en/2026/02/22/computer-generated-dream-world/
114•MBCook•7h ago•15 comments

Microsoft bans the word "Microslop" on its Discord, then locks the server

https://www.windowslatest.com/2026/03/02/microsoft-gets-tired-of-microslop-bans-the-word-on-its-d...
45•robtherobber•1h ago•16 comments

WebMCP is available for early preview

https://developer.chrome.com/blog/webmcp-epp
310•andsoitis•13h ago•172 comments

How to record and retrieve anything you've ever had to look up twice

https://ellanew.com/2026/03/02/ptpl-197-record-retrieve-from-a-personal-knowledgebase
75•Curiositry•7h ago•29 comments

Right-sizes LLM models to your system's RAM, CPU, and GPU

https://github.com/AlexsJones/llmfit
165•bilsbie•12h ago•35 comments

An interactive intro to Elliptic Curve Cryptography

https://growingswe.com/blog/elliptic-curve-cryptography
47•vismit2000•5h ago•9 comments

Show HN: Timber – Ollama for classical ML models, 336x faster than Python

https://github.com/kossisoroyce/timber
137•kossisoroyce•10h ago•27 comments

Process-Based Concurrency: Why Beam and OTP Keep Being Right

https://variantsystems.io/blog/beam-otp-process-concurrency
45•linkdd•6h ago•27 comments

Pluralism and the Modern Poet

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v48/n03/seamus-perry/pluralism-and-the-modern-poet
6•Caiero•3d ago•0 comments

Ghostty – Terminal Emulator

https://ghostty.org/docs
760•oli5679•23h ago•321 comments

Everett shuts down Flock camera network after judge rules footage public record

https://www.wltx.com/article/news/nation-world/281-53d8693e-77a4-42ad-86e4-3426a30d25ae
281•aranaur•7h ago•78 comments

Tove Jansson's criticized illustrations of The Hobbit (2023)

https://tovejansson.com/hobbit-tolkien/
183•abelanger•2d ago•89 comments

Enable CORS for Your Blog

https://www.blogsareback.com/guides/enable-cors
49•cdrnsf•2d ago•22 comments

Evolving descriptive text of mental content from human brain activity

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260226-how-ai-can-read-your-thoughts
24•ggm•6h ago•20 comments

Little Free Library

https://littlefreelibrary.org/
129•TigerUniversity•13h ago•66 comments

Decision trees – the unreasonable power of nested decision rules

https://mlu-explain.github.io/decision-tree/
497•mschnell•1d ago•77 comments

Why does C have the best file API

https://maurycyz.com/misc/c_files/
122•maurycyz•16h ago•100 comments

When does MCP make sense vs CLI?

https://ejholmes.github.io/2026/02/28/mcp-is-dead-long-live-the-cli.html
393•ejholmes•18h ago•250 comments

Next-gen spacecraft are overwhelming communication networks

https://atempleton.bearblog.dev/how-next-gen-spacecraft-are-overwhelming-our-communication-networks/
78•korrz•2d ago•26 comments

Microgpt explained interactively

https://growingswe.com/blog/microgpt
282•growingswe•1d ago•41 comments
Open in hackernews

Detecting if an expression is constant in C

https://nrk.neocities.org/articles/c-constexpr-macro
62•ingve•10mo ago

Comments

Y_Y•10mo ago
If C23 is why not use constexpr?

https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/constexpr

lpribis•10mo ago
This is not for declaring constexpr variables, it is about how to implement a checker function that verifies an inline expression is constant. Plus some of the examples work back to C99 instead of C23, which I would wager close to zero people are using in real-world code bases.
cmptrnerd6•10mo ago
You'd probably still win the wager but I do want to say there are some of us using C23. We even use it in our embedded systems running on arm based microcontrollers. Though we still do maintain some C89 code :(
pantalaimon•10mo ago
C23 on embedded ARM is entirely painless as it’s all upstream GCC these days anyway.

The problem is if you want to also still support esp8266 which is forever stuck at GCC 8.4

Y_Y•10mo ago

  #define C(x) ((constexpr typeof(x)){ (x) })
Aardwolf•10mo ago
The article mentions C23, but what they're trying to do is detect if something (possibly declared by someone else?) is a compile time constant, not to declare it as such
re•10mo ago
Is there a use case for such a macro, or is it just a puzzle for its own sake?
uecker•10mo ago
Probably not. The Linux kernel has one.
apple1417•10mo ago
I've seen something related, which returned a bool instead of failing compilation, be used to switch between a path the optimiser could inline and some assembly. You could probably use this to make sure it was always inlined.
kevingadd•10mo ago
If you're writing code that needs to behave deterministically and not have side effects, you could use this to make violations of determinism/side-effect-freeness fail fast, I guess?
variadix•10mo ago
The use case that comes to mind is doing manual compile time optimization based on macro arguments. E.g. you have some assembly block that is fast but requires some immediate arguments, and you have a fallback path for the dynamic case, and you want to determine which one to call at compile time based on whether the arguments are constants or not.
JacksonAllan•10mo ago
I use something similar in a container library to warn the user if he or she supplies an argument with potential side effects to a macro that evaluates it multiple times:

https://github.com/JacksonAllan/CC/blob/42a7d810274a698dff87...

Specifically, if (arg)==(arg) is not a constant expression, then it could have side effects.

However, this mechanism does generate some annoying false positives, as shown below:

  // Create a map with int keys and values that are vectors of floats:
  map( int, vec( float ) ) our_map;
  init( &our_map );
  
  // Create a vector of floats:
  vec( float ) our_vec;
  init( &our_vec );
  push( &our_vec, 1.23f );
  
  // Insert the vector into the map.
  insert( &our_map, 456, our_vec );
  
  // Generates a warning because get checks its first argument for side
  // effects and the compiler can't tell that the first argument of the
  // outermost get has none:
  printf( "%f", *get( get( &our_map, 456 ), 0 ) );
  
  // The "proper", albeit cumbersome, way to achieve the same thing without a
  // warning:
  vec( float ) *itr = get( &our_map, 456 );
  printf( "%f", *get( itr, 0 ) );
rurban•10mo ago
The macro should be called IS_CONST(), not C()
immibis•10mo ago
To determine if an expression is constant in C, one must determine if an expression in C is constant.
atiedebee•10mo ago
I agree, but for a blog post it is more concise (IS_CONST or anything that is long would take up a lot more screen real estate on my phone).
mrgriffin•10mo ago
Would you expect IS_CONST to evaluate to the constant? With a name like that I would expect it to evaluate to true/false.

C here is asserting that the value inside is a constant and then evaluating to that constant.

rurban•10mo ago
Uh, you are right. C is the right name. It throws.

I mixed it up with a similar compile-time constness check in some of my libraries, where I decided if const of not. gcc throws, only clang could give me a proper answer.

uecker•10mo ago
One can use _Pragma inside macros
listeria•10mo ago
Apparently the static_assert trick doesn't work with GCC, it just compiles it with a warning if it's not a constant expression:

  warning: expression in static assertion is not an integer constant expression [-Wpedantic]
Instead you can use the sizeof + compound literal with array type, use the comma operator to preserve the type of the expression and cast the result of sizeof to void to suppress the warning:

  #define C(x) ( (void)sizeof( (char [(int)(x) || 1]){0} ), (x) )
The only problem is that it doesn't support floating point expressions
hermitdev•10mo ago
> And I'd rather keep the library warning free instead of telling the users to switch warnings off.

Thank you! Separately, but related: fuck you, Google! (every time I have to deal with protobuf in C++, I curse Google and their "we don't give a shit about signed vs unsigned comparisons").

fluoridation•10mo ago
I just turn warnings off for protobuf stuff. In general I do that for any code I don't own but have to compile.
anyfoo•10mo ago
And I don't think there's an excuse not to. I work on giant projects with tons of people, that still manage to use -Werror.

Yeah, some warnings are turned off, but not as many as you'd think, and usually for good reasons, which also includes deliberate design decisions. For example, we don't care about pre-C11 compatibility (because we won't build for pre-C11), so that warning is off. We also like 0-sized arrays, so that warning is off as well.

It's a moving target, because compiler engineers add new warnings over time. Adapting the new compiler means taking care of the new warnings. There's almost always a way to do so instead of turning a new warning off.

immibis•10mo ago
The person who writes the library isn't using the same compiler as you.
anyfoo•10mo ago
True, so?
pabs3•10mo ago
So turn on -Werror in your CI builds, but don't turn it on for all builds.
anyfoo•10mo ago
I mean, yeah, obviously that a)only works when we build our projects ourselves, and b) for external libraries you have less control over that.
immibis•10mo ago
Fuck projects that ship conpile scripts with -Werror.
anyfoo•10mo ago
I don't understand this discussion. What I said was that for our big projects internally, we keep them warning-free, and -Werror obviously helps tremendously with that. Nobody said you need to ship externally with -Werror, or anything about external libraries the project may be using.

By keeping your own project warning-free in your environment, you are doing a service to everyone.

pabs3•10mo ago
Sounds like you are doing the right thing (-Werror internally, not externally). So this discussion is probably just based on a miscommunication. Happens pretty often on HN unfortunately.
jcelerier•10mo ago
3rdparty libs should be treated as -isystem. Otherwise you're just needlessly paying for other's mistakes.
hermitdev•10mo ago
The problem is: it's infectious into the generated code, as well. Is that 3rd party or not? Yes, it was generated by a 3rd party tool, but from, ostensibly, _your_ protobuf file.

edit to add: and yes `-isystem` is absolutely a useful tool. If memory serves, though, it doesn't protect from macro or template expansions, though.

variadix•10mo ago
__builtin_choose_expr can be used instead of a ternary to avoid the type conversion rules that require the typeof cast
fuhsnn•10mo ago
It's great of programmers to aim for portability, but frankly it's kind of a stretch that an arbitrary C compiler that is limited in standard support would the same time be sophisticated enough to process these tricks as intended.

In my fork of chibicc (a small C11 compiler) there are plenty of additional logic that were implemented solely to play nice with C tricks from real world projects that could have been easier if they target later standards. The most recent being how curl's build script determines the size of primitive types: they use (sizeof(T) == N) as a case index and expect the compiler to error on case-duplication[1], I had to add a backtracking loop to check exactly that[2]. I'm not complaining as more error checks isn't a bad thing, however, I'll advise programmers willing to invest in obscure tricks to actually test them on obscure compilers (instead of just flipping -std).

[1]: https://github.com/curl/curl/blob/339464432555b9bd71a5e4a4c4...

[2]: https://github.com/fuhsnn/slimcc/blob/54563ecae8480f836a0bb2...

listeria•10mo ago
If the goal of testing on obscure compilers is to enhance such compilers then I'm all for it. But I don't see much value in having to dance around implementation details to support a compiler which isn't standards compliant. Ideally standards conforming code should just work, that's the point of conforming to a standard.
immibis•10mo ago
Depends if you want people to be able to use your library with those compilers or not. If it's free software, fine. Don't fire well-paying customers though.
anyfoo•10mo ago
curl is one of those projects that's probably meant to be ultra-portable, though, working across an incredibly wide range of platforms, some probably with comparably ancient compilers.

I don't actually know any details so I don't want to presume, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if targeting later standards simply isn't an option for the curl project due to portability. It may be that the (sizeof(t) == n) trick may just be what consistently works across all targets. (Until yours came along.)

I do remember when configure etc. still had to check whether ANSI prototypes (as opposed to the original K&R style declarations) were supported... I hope that check isn't much of a thing anymore.

dandersch•10mo ago
>And I'd rather keep the library warning free instead of telling the users to switch warnings off.

Why not push/pop warnings to ignore in the library?

  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic push")
  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic ignored \"-Wshadow\"")
  int a = 1;
  {
      int a = 2;
  }
  _Pragma("GCC diagnostic pop")
kevin_thibedeau•10mo ago
This sort of thing is better set in CMake or equivalent with file specific flags to disable diagnostics. Then you don't have non-portable cruft littering the code, you don't have to touch third party code, and there is a more centralized accounting of what marginal code you're hacking around. The loss of specificity is rarely going to be a problem.
cperciva•10mo ago
If you disable warnings in your makefile, you'll lose them for the entire C file. Pragma warnings as above allow them to be disabled for just the problematic code in question.
einpoklum•10mo ago
> with file specific flags

But you don't want to disable warnings throughout the file, just locally.

> Then you don't have non-portable cruft littering the code,

You can make it perfectly portable, with a little macro work. See, ,for example:

https://github.com/eyalroz/printf/blob/013db1e345cbb166a7eb7...

(this is from the standalone-no-libc-printf-family-implementation I maintain; the library is C, the test suite is C++ but it doesn't matter for the purposes of my point here.)

and that you only need to do once in your project (you can make it your own header). Even when it comes to use - you can place your warning-disabling within another macro, so that you end up only using a simple single macro for your actual code.

o11c•10mo ago
This probably isn't relevant anymore, but for now-old (4.x I think) versions of GCC, there are a couple of caveats:

* Some versions can only change compiler options at top level, not within a function.

* I had problems with trying to push/ignore/pop a warning around an expression in a macro, since the entire thing expands at a single location.

gitroom•10mo ago
This takes me back - all those compiler hacks just to keep stuff portable kinda drive me nuts tbh. I love seeing people push for warning-free code, though.
jesse__•10mo ago
> And this cannot be silenced with #pragma since it's a macro, so the warning occurs at the location where the macro is invoked.

I seem to remember there's actually a solution for this .. at least on clang and I think MSVC .. you can programmatically turn warnings on/on with the _Pragma() macro. I don't remember exactly what you put in it, but it's designed specifically for this kind of macro nonsense

_sbrk•10mo ago
gcc will not let you actually define a negatively-sized array. Check it with some simple code -- I did. Even with -Wall -Wextra -O1 -std=c11 -Wpedantic, if I actually try to create foo[-1], on the stack or in BSS, I get the proper error: error: size of array 'foo' is negative
o11c•10mo ago
Semi-related: given an expression which is an integer constant, convert it to a statically-allocated char array. With appropriate sigils this can be extracted via `strings(1)`, even when cross-compiling.

If you don't know what type of integer your preprocessor is using for arithmetic, you can still do right-shifts by up to 14 at a time, since `int` must be at least 16 bits and you can't use the sign bit.

pjmlp•10mo ago
Meanwhile in C++ land, use if consteval, unless not able to use recent standards.