Matches for spec, 583 total results Sorted by newest | relevance
Tue Feb 03 19:57:43 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> not that a spec arrived at via the usual idiot committees is any better
Tue Feb 03 19:57:14 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> mircea_popescu: that's how you end up with 'the spec is the implementation' crapolade
Tue Feb 03 19:56:39 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> that's the main task of spec work : avoiding doing anything as much as humanly possible.
Tue Feb 03 19:56:27 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> complex specs are in no sense better. the only thing a very complicated spec shows is that the designer did not understand the overwhelming importance of not specifying.
Tue Feb 03 02:11:46 UTC 2015 <asciilifeform> decimation: i can't be arsed to wade through spec, but didja find who generates key?
Tue Feb 03 02:07:06 UTC 2015 <decimation> but I don't know if the spec is open
Thu Jan 29 00:56:15 UTC 2015 <jurov> &> file (aka >& file) is not part of the official POSIX shell spec, but has been added to many Bourne shells as a convenience extension (it originally comes from csh).
Wed Jan 28 20:37:19 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> nubbins` it's forever on the router dude. that was the spec. for a box to plug into your spare router hole and sit there forevert.
Wed Jan 28 05:06:03 UTC 2015 <decimation> mircea_popescu: well, the way it works now, to my understanding, is that there's a kind of wot among high-spec clocks
Mon Jan 26 04:02:11 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> standards are racist. the spec is the code. WE ARE BRINGING STUFF TO AFRICA
Sun Jan 25 06:50:25 UTC 2015 <ben_vulpes> spec a node, i guess.
Sun Jan 25 01:30:31 UTC 2015 <jurov> well mircea, then make a spec. many people unsuccessfully tried various mixing proposals that were supposed to do what you propose
Sun Jan 25 01:29:39 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> <mircea_popescu> jurov i thought we were discussing bitcoin as a spec, rather than bitcoin as a hack. <<
Sun Jan 25 00:51:34 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> jurov i thought we were discussing bitcoin as a spec, rather than bitcoin as a hack.
Thu Jan 22 03:51:09 UTC 2015 <decimation> whether they want to create it or not, there is a spec
Wed Jan 21 18:17:55 UTC 2015 <davout> gavinandresen: "okey dokey, then we might not have much to talk about if you want to stick with OpenSSL bugs that were included in the protocol by mistake." <<< actually i distinctly remember mike hearn telling me how that particular bug was part of the protocol and how it somehow justified not putting any effort towards actually specifying anything, in a spec, not in code
Mon Jan 19 18:42:50 UTC 2015 <mircea_popescu> <davout> just wondering if there was a specific reason it wasn't mentioned in the spec << so people can have fun.
Mon Jan 19 17:57:10 UTC 2015 <davout> just wondering if there was a specific reason it wasn't mentioned in the spec
Mon Jan 19 17:27:54 UTC 2015 <davout> BingoBoingo: sure, but if your timestamping respects deedbot's spec just get it included along