Honestly, at a glance, the library design is horrible. A mix of C macros and global variables. The project is really small, to fix it all you need is a single struct pointer that gets passed to around.
I think calling this "horrible" is pretty harsh. I wish programmers wouldn't be so eager to put down each other's code instead of taking the time to understand the reason why it is written that way. In this case, I think the library accomplishes its goal quite well: to provide a straightforward, logo-esque syntax for procedural drawing.
the library allows to define and undefine the macros at any point so that you don't pollute your namespace too much. Without the macros, you would have to prefix all the commands, like SQUARE(n.X, 10, x.S, 0.5), etc...
Code has different design constraints depending on where the code should run, how large the codebase is and what the project structure around the maintenance work is. Had this been a middleware component library and were there any reason for the routines to run in parallel threads I would have agreed.
Here, however I find your critique in bad taste and poorly thought out for code whose main value is the art generated by code, where brevity and simplicity of the code base is a value in itself.
There is no one true way to write code. Global state is not an evil in itself unless it causes hidden side-effects. For small single threaded programs a large global state can simplify things a lot.
It's like a lumberjack grumbles to an artisan wielding a penknife that it's far too small to cut down a tree.
Windows now broadcasts and collects information about what you type in when you search for programs (in charm/modern shell).
That doesn't mean it goes 'upstream'. But it is startling how far we've come. I remember the days when nobody trusted the internet - not even with their credit card.
Now its hard to trust your Operating System to run a program.
TS//SI//REL) Currently CASTLECRASHER is the only production quality Windows execution technique that Payload Persistence techniques have. Another mechanism to execute DNT payloads is needed. Most pre-boot Persistence techniques only have the ability to influence an OS through modifications to the target file system. Work needs to be done to investigate other ways to get execution inside of Windows
Just like monitor manufacturers don't offer prescription glasses along with the purchase, Oculus won't offer lenses.
Corrective eye-wear is very individual and requires some amount of expertise( exam, specialist ), so it doesn't make sense, and it isn't very feasible, for Oculus to provide that for you. Also contacts are very cheap.
Monitor manufacturers don't make a device that straps onto your head. Apparently wide frames are an issue[1]. When I was playing airsoft, I had ESS goggles. ESS also sold prescription lenses[1] designed to slot into the air holes in the goggles, all you had to do was send them your prescription.
Contacts may be very cheap, but even with dailies, I wouldn't want to put in contacts just to game. I prefer glasses in general.
Imagine a world where Wikipedia isn't an encyclopedia, but a crowd-sourced collection of all code meticulously indexed and documented that could be written for one language.
No, the code is still copyrighted by Networks Layer8 or Airtel.
Publishing or delivering it on request doesn't make it public domain.
Here is one definition of public domain: the status of a literary work or an invention whose copyright or patent has expired or that never had such protection.
Fwiw, some foreign-born numbers: 15% of the Swedish population is foreign-born. Of those, about 1/3 were born in another EU country, who are immigrants but not really what the current controversy is about (the largest single foreign-born group in Sweden are from Finland, constituting about 1.5% of the population). The remaining 10%, born outside the EU, are what "immigration politics" is mainly talking about. (The comparable figure for Denmark is a bit lower; around 5-6% of the population are born outside the EU.)
