Reuse used in a sentence

Reuse in a sentence as a verb

Think password reuse is a problem? So is screen name reuse.

This is an AES CTR nonce reuse bug in Colin's software from 2011. Colin knew about this class of bug long before he wrote Tarsnap, but, like all bugs, it took time for him to become aware of it.

Or if you for some reason need to reuse the behavior. But if all your controllers look like this, with one "interactor" model per action, you're doing it wrong.

I want to mention the significant curtailing of fair use in Europe, which would train young artists not to remix or reuse others' ideas. However, it might take up to 5 years to feel the effects.

People use it, people reuse it, people rewrite it. Next think you know, he's being insulted on the internet because he released something he wrote to serve his needs and not passing on some sort of figurative mantle or blessing.

Given the large amount of password reuse and poor password choices it is not improbable that this is the complete password file. Evidence against that thesis is that password of one person that I've asked is not in the list.

It may well be that many set their banking password as the first account they ever used on the Internet and then reuse this same password for subsequent systems.

These features, horrors, reuse each other's capabilities. Solution: Use something that has no features.

We may reuse them in multiple jobs and so may warehouse them for future use. Me: So before every production job, someone goes to the warehouse, looks for a stack of printed labels in the racks by Item# / Bin#, and brings them back to the production room?

What are the OS-level abstractions that will make it easier to build, combine, and reuse our own hardware tools? The current methods for using device drivers, detecting wireless devices, or sharing them across a network are not very open to reuse and sharing.

It allows to reuse the wall textures for all levels, and to differentiate the bosses from the normal ennemies, at no cost, etc. His playsound function creates a new thread every time it is run.

This model seems to scale fairly well; Google has a big codebase with a lot of reuse, but all my git operations execute instantaneously. Many projects can "shard" their code across repositories, but this is usually an unhappy compromise.

The central authority is the code because all the data must ultimately enter or exit through the code, and the code has more flexible abstractions and better reuse characteristics. The reason for the disagreement comes down to disagreement about what a database is about.

Code reuse through composition not inheritance. Polymorphism through interfaces not inheritance.

My primary way of achieving reuse, as a developer, is through templating and partials and helpers; they're what I use to avoid runaway repetition of styles, which means that redundant Bootstrap class usage isn't often a pain point. But keeping classes inline does make it easier for me to debug layout problems at a glance, where relationships between elements are clear.

I'd hope that the company that runs Google Books, that saw the value in ReCaptcha, that has cached the majority of the public-facing internet, that has mapped most regions of the world, and that provides satellite images of most of its surface wouldn't erase that data simply because they'd like to reuse the harddrives.

Quote Examples using Reuse

They write code with no thought at all for the future, and then shortly have nightmarish debugging sessions in spaghetti code that's impossible to extend or reuse. All in the name of a rather extreme "worse is better" philosophy. I've certainly experienced this with some of the people I worked with recently. Anything you win in the short term gets lost several weeks--if not days--later when everything is a horrible mess. Don't even think about coming back to that code months later! I've found that putting in a little bit of care for the future pays off even in the short term. Perhaps not on the scale of hours or days, but definitely weeks. Which is still pretty immediate. However, how you do this is also very important. The handy rule I've been using is simple: simplicity. Improve your code by making it do less not more. If you can make code more maitainable or general by simplifying, do it. If it would require adding new concepts or mental overhead, reconsider. Try to reuse existing abstractions as much as possible.

Anonymous

This is an AES CTR nonce reuse bug in Colin's software from 2011. Colin knew about this class of bug long before he wrote Tarsnap, but, like all bugs, it took time for him to become aware of it. To be fair, that was not a crypto bug in the sense of "got the crypto wrong" -- you can see that in earlier versions of the code I had it right. It was a dumb software bug introduced by refactoring, with catastrophic consequences -- but not inherently different from accidentally zeroing a password buffer before being finished with it, or failing to check for errors when reading entropy from /dev/random. Any software developer could have compared the two relevant versions of the Tarsnap code and said "hey, this refactoring changed behaviour", and any software developer could have looked at the vulnerable version and said "hey, this variable doesn't vary", without needing to know anything about cryptography -- and certainly without knowing how to implement attacks. Unfortunately, the population of people who can spot bugs like this in 2010's-era crypto code is very limited, because, again, people don't learn how to implement attacks. Taking my personal bug out of the picture and talking about nonce-reuse bugs generally: You still don't need to learn how to implement attacks to catch them.

Anonymous