clodboy cowdsire @wallhackio@cat.family

@Lady is a burrito not a wrap?

It works on my phone app but not the web

Is the Gmail webapp down for anyone else?

@vaporeon_ I forgot to mention that, to access the hastebin, you need to enter The Truth as a password (clodsireisawhale)

@coriander apparently Battlefield 1 has been unplayable on PS4 for weeks because the Servers are not doing their Server Things

@Lady i mean, i consider any sexual activity fucking so that would count as fucking to me

@Lady your choice. i would recommend fucking.

which is the sexiest

@vaporeon_ Before the 2011 update to the C++ specification, lvalues and rvalues could have been thought of as "addressable expressions" and "temporary expressions", respectively. Any expression whose value was stored in an address in memory that was made available to the programmer was an lvalue ("addressable expressions") while expressions that cannot be accessible in subsequent lines of code (say, a + b = 3 in an if statement; the result of a + b can't be used again in any context other than the if statement) were referred to as rvalues ("temporary expressions").

Note that when we say that a value is addressable we mean that it is addressable from the programmer's point of view. Many rvalue expressions have results that must be stored somewhere (a function call which returns an object is an rvalue, for example) but if the programmer cannot access that address with the & operator then it is is not an lvalue in the pre-2011 C++ standard.

But the introduction of the rvalue reference cast in C++11, used to enable move semantics, created an expression that does not fit neatly into the old lvalue/rvalue dichotomy. Casting an object into an rvalue reference is a temporary value (if I don't store it in a variable the result of the cast won't be accessible in subsequent lines of code) but since it is a reference it is an explicit address in memory that is made available to the programmer. The C++ standards committee resolved this problem by introducing a third value category and changing the meaning of the word "rvalue":

• most of what we used to call rvalues are now called "prvalues" ("pure rvalues"),
• what we used to call lvalues are still called lvalues,
• an rvalue reference cast expression is of a new value category called "xvalue", which is like a prvalue in that it is a temporary expression but it is also like an lvalue because it is essentially a memory address made available to the programmer,
• rvalue is now an umbrella term; xvalues and prvalues are specific types of rvalues.

There also exists the less useful umbrella term glvalue, short for "general lvalue", which refers to either xvalues or lvalues. The new term xvalue was originally introduced without any meaning and has been retroactively defined in the standard as being short for "eXpiring value". I prefer to think of xvalue as being short for "cross value" since an xvalue contains a cross of some characteristics from lvalues and some characteristics from prvalues.

There are many details I'm leaving out, here is a "pastebin" containing additional notes I left out of what I wrote here: https://hastebin.com/share/feqoyilaqo.vbnet

@coriander not yet sure I forgive you for your Blighttown slander

@vaporeon_ I'll get back to you later this evening 🫡

@coriander it also helps when the characters are Hot

@amy hiiiii 🤠

@vaporeon_ in C++ the left value/right value definition used to be mostly correct (it's not exactly right) but the 2011 update to the specification fucked everything

@aescling I would show you the video but it has too many spoilers but after you reach act III it's a must-watch

@Lady @aescling I forgot to report you for this

Shout outs to the woman who said she wants to fuck a cheese wheel from Baldur's Gate 3

@aescling From an email sent to all Grosse Pointe Public Library accounts:

"You may have heard about the Executive Order (EO) that adversely affects the only federal agency that provides resources to our nation's libraries, museums and archives.

The latest EO "Continuing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy" directs the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) to eliminate non-statutory programs and reduce its functions and personnel to the minimum required by law.

We've received numerous questions about this and I wanted to share some of the facts and impact it will have on us locally.

Impact on Michigan

Michigan receives modest federal funding from IMLS, but our 397 public library systems, 87 academic libraries, nearly 3,000 school libraries, 650 museums and hundreds of historical organizations pride themselves on using these resources efficiently and innovatively to deliver outstanding programs and services. The changes to IMLS ordered in the EO would be devastating to the cultural and literary landscape enjoyed by all Michigan residents.

While funding for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2025 (ending Sept. 2025) has been appropriated to the IMLS in the newly approved Continuing Resolution, we have no guarantees of funding for IMLS in the Fiscal Year 2026 budget.

Impact on the GPPL

One of the key services that would be eliminated is the Michigan Electronic Library (MeL and MeLCat). The GPPL is one of the top 25 libraries that participate in this lending system across all types of libraries in Michigan. In fact, sharing is one of the key tenants of libraries. Last year alone, we loaned over 19,500 items to other libraries. And since our participation in MeL in 2008 we have shared 442,495 items. I personally, don't want to see this service eliminated. Do you?

If you feel so inclined, please reach out to the Michigan representatives in Washington DC to let them know how important libraries are to you and your community."

A recent execute order is probably going to kill the Michigan Electronic Library :(