LaLaLand122

> You shouldn't replace Docker with a shell script

True. You should replace it with podman!

Not Gitlab specific.

The main page of a repository configuration in GitHub let's you enable/disable:

- Allow merge commits

- Allow squash merging

- Allow rebase merging

for PRs.

And under branch protection there is a "Require linear history" option.

If the PR is small enough to naturally fit into a single commit the rebasing vs squashing multiple commits discussion disappears (just please don't merge it!)... there is a single commit.

Nobody cares about the underwear... until people create a PR explicitly saying "look at my underwear".

All my commits build, so I can do a bisect and see the problem is... somewhere in this huge commit? It doesn't seem better to me than "the problem is in one of these two small commits, I don't know which one because they don't build".

> if someone makes changes since the last time I reviewed and then they force push I can’t see the difference from the last time I reviewed

You need better tools. Even in GitHub you can click on "force pushed" and see the diff.

> there’s no guarantee they would all pass CI

There wasn't any guarantee before, either. If you want that guarantee, make the CI build every commit.

FWIW a few years ago I found the my-country-Amazon is not another-country-Amazon. I had a problem with a phone after 6-12 months and they just sent me a replacement. A similar thing happened a couple of years later, I contacted support like at 1am from another European country and apparently I was sent to Amazon US support, which were useless... On the way back to the UK (still in the EU), I contacted support again (at a normal time) and this time they gave me a refund.

I guess it isn't, because it's just a transitory state until you "eres (ser) viudo"? :-p

No, we don't.

add_numbers() doesn't need ownership of the data, so you would never give it ownership of the data. If you happen to have the data in a reference-counted type you would get the data from it (https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memry/unique_ptr/get / https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/shared_ptr/get), and pass it to add_numbers(). The data would still be guaranteed to exist because the caller of add_numbers() is going to hold a reference at least until add_numbers() returns.

I would not be trying to solve the problem forever. I would be trying to effectively control it.

The alternative was to send police to fire rubber bullets, with somebody losing an eye (https://www.spainenglish.com/2019/10/01/eye-rubber-bullet-ca...), against people that wanted to... vote.

Rubber bullets happen to be a weapon invented by the British to use during The Troubles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_bullet). But even the British, the inventors, stopped used them. In fact, the Catalan local police were also banned from using them and were shot in Catalonia only because it came from the non-Catalan police (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/catalonia-pr...).

(Not to mention all the other images of police violence).

Being able to say "I have given them the referendum, they are not taking it" vs giving the other party such a great narrative "That's why we want independence. We are more civilized than them. They are aggressive animals." changes something.

If I were in the Spanish government, I would give Catalonia a legal binding referendum. But splitting a country is not something you do in a weekend, we can't have Catalonia splitting with 50% + 1 of the votes just for "+1" to change his mind next week and Catalonia joining again.

So I would give Catalonia a legal binding referendum... with a requirement of at least a 66% vote in favour. For each person that wants to remain, there would be two that don't; and if you are at that point, it's probably better just to let them go. Being a politician, I would surely try to at least round it up to 70%.

They would never get 66% of the vote. If it looks risky, I could send the police in the Looney Tunes ship again... to vote!

And if they refuse my offer... well, it's way easier to argue "I have given them the referendum, they are not taking it". Right now, Catalans have the easy "freedom" argument.

Fall apart? The whole thing relies on being inconsistent! It's basically the most popular Spanish form of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense.

They may have relied on "traditional custom" to get here. But they are using "art" when asking "Are you saying culture is bad?". Forget logic, any complaint to bulls is now obviously coming from uneducated idiots. Any "cultured" person will surely agree that culture is good and ergo bulls are good.

What I'm saying is that, at least in Spain, it's common practice to overextend ANY meaning of "culture" to then use the "art" meaning as a joker card in any argument. It's used in bar conversation, and it's used in the Parliament.

I don't know if it's specific to Spain. But Spanish people have a problematic relationship with "culture".

"Culture" has this double definition of, on one side, "customs", and in the other as basically a synonym for "art". With extra points for "art" being this abstract thing nobody knows what exactly is, but everybody agrees that -whatever it is- it's "good".

So in Spain there is this national sport in which you take something, no matter how horrible, try to include it in the definition of "culture" and... since "culture is good" -> "thing is good".

Bulls? Yes, I hear you, you are making great logical arguments but... they are "culture" (purposely being ambiguous about whether you refer to "traditional Spanish custom" or "form of art"). And that's it, that's the end of the argument: Bulls == culture == good. Whatever you say, the answer will be "culture". And you are not going to argue culture is bad, are you?

And it's not only bulls. You can use it with whatever you want to support, and somehow in Spain it works quite well!

To each their own. But for lots of us, USA is like the last place in the world we would like to move to. You just don't hear our epic stories of how we thought for a second about it, decided strongly against, and never looked back. Not much of a story to tell.

The thing is that the blog entry mixes up, as too frequently happens, the two often used meanings of "stable":

- Rock solid/reliable/"good"

- Not changing

And they are completely independent!

- Windows 95: It's definitively not rock solid. But is it "stable"? Sure! You will have a hard time finding something more "stable". When was the last time it received an update/changed? It's "stable", but not "stable".

- RHEL: Rock solid? I don't really have a lot of experience with it, but let's say yes. And its whole business model is about changing as little as it can. It's "stable" and "stable".

- Fedora: Rock solid? Let's say yes. Does it change? All the time. It's not "stable", but it's "stable".

- Linux in 1991: No idea. But I'm guessing it was crashing all the time. And it surely was changing fast. It was not "stable" and not "stable".

"Stable" software can be not "stable" on purpose. You may want to avoid changing so much that you may want to keep the bugs, people rely on that buggy behaviour!

Not "stable" software may have shitty QA and not be "stable"; or it may be so well tested that even changing all the time, it never fails.

If I have a contract with the government for a software that needs to provide a service for the next 5 years, I surely will target RHEL X. Not because I think it's specially good, but because I don't want to find myself in court about whether the contract said I need to keep supporting them every time they update the OS. I will deliver something working better or worse today and once accepted... it will keep working the same, bug by bug, relying on the same CentOS X bugs, in 5 years because the underlying system has not changed a bit.

I didn't give you only "the title of a video" (which sure, tries to be "cute"), I gave you the link to the video, in which no other than Sean Parent gives you the arguments.

The summary is in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bLkxj6EVoM&t=1275s

Sure, inheritance is fine, I use it all the time. If it were that bad we would already have Virtual Concepts in the standard. But duck-typing is better, if only because the argument you already gave: "lets you treat things that aren't from the same class hierarchy as if they are from the same hierarchy". It's a lie that I want something that inherits from my class, I simply want something I can draw() with, but we keep telling that lie all the time... which sure, is not the end of the world.

It's a strictly better solution. You don't do it because the standard library doesn't give you tools to do it easily, but if it were the same effort everybody would do it.

After all, Inheritance Is The Base Class of Evil (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bLkxj6EVoM).

And if it were in the standard there wouldn't be at least five well known libraries implementing it (including from Adobe and from Facebook): https://github.com/boost-ext/te#similar-libraries

As far as I know (I don't really follow the committee work) the latest attempt to introduce run-time duck-typing in the standard was https://github.com/andyprowl/virtual-concepts, which seems dead.

I never got offered private health insurance in Spain by an employer. I have it in the UK. When I was a kid I had access to private health insurance in Spain, so I know it a bit.

I find the NHS I have today is slighty worse than the Spanish equivalent I left a decade ago. Maybe because of the austerity policy of the Conservative government during the last decade, I don't know. In any case is not too bad.

Funny enough the private health insurances in Spain, which have to compete with a better public system, are WAAAAAAAAAAAAY better than ANY available in the UK.

At first I used the UK private insurance from my employer thinking "if they are being paid let's at least use them, saving resources to the NHS for people without an alternative". But not anymore...

- It's more complicated

- I have an uncomfortable relationship with my doctor when there are financial incentives involved (specially after one specific case)

I actually need to pay a 40% of the price of the insurance in income tax. The only reason I have not asked my employer to stop it is because the NHS cancer treatment times are getting longer than they should. That's the only benefit I see in them: a potentially shorter time to treatment in cases where time may make the difference between life and death.

Neither my wife or me are native, our child started school last year. When we were introduced to the concept of "Tricky words" our reaction was: sorry, do you mean every single word?

- You don't trust so much complex logic, taking untrusted input, written in C and want to rewrite it in Rust.

- You want to code it all again using an API that doesn't expect to get its input from a blocking read() function.

- ...

I think the main reason there isn't any alternative is that it supports soooo many formats that the task seems impossible to anybody thinking about it.

Not sure what's the difference between read and understand here. And I would argue the language doesn't even have the biggest effect on whether code is easy to understand or not, some people have an incredible ability to structure code in an easy/impossible to understand way. Also something close to every single language in the universe is going to argue that's one of its goals.

But you don't need to go too far to find something you can argue has such a goal:

- RAII: it's easier to read and write a function when it's not full of resource deallocation code.

- Exceptions: It's simpler to understand code when you move the error handling away.

- algorithms: simpler to read and write than your for loop.

- ...

It's such a vague goal that you can argue it about anything from any language.

In my country there is no really the concept of the "school bus". Google Maps says I walked exactly 1.0 miles... climbing a mountain, because my school was in the freaking top of a mountain. In some parts climbs were so steep that nowadays there are escalators on the streets.

I did that from 4 to 18 yo. It did never bother me, sometimes I literally did the whole way back running non-stop for fun, it was kind of like a roller coaster. But:

- Weather was generally good

- I obviously didn't walk alone when I was 4 yo.

We don't even know the age of those kids. Maybe they will walk to school alone... when they are older.

Either you are into it, and you know, or the need to create a VM has just arose and you want to quickly do it. In the later case from my Fedora 31 system I search for "Vir"(tual), it tells me about "Boxes", I open it... and it can't be simpler. I end up with a Virtual machine with QEmu/KVM without ever having to know what QEmu/KVM is, as far as random user knows "yesterday I had problems with VirtualBox kernel modules, so I created a VM with Boxes".

This!

And as I did mention in another comment I still can barely believe the cases of bullying people describe here, they are horrible! I don't think bullying at such a level is a global problem. I suspect such huge bullying problems must be just a symptom of a deeper society issue. We had a kid with Down syndrome in class for 8 years of primary school and nobody did EVER put a finger on him. By 12 years old I had known my classmates my whole live, quite a few of them also from activities outside school. I didn't like all of them, we had arguments which were not always handled diplomatically, but we had some basic decency towards each other.

Bullying and whether kids should be separated by ability are two orthogonal problems.

Having been educated in probably a different country, with a different school system, I am surprised to read all these comments.

Not saying my country school system is perfect, it isn't. And there are cases of abuse, bullying does exist. But 30 years ago I was the good, shy, student in a poor neighbourhood of a big city and never suffered or witnessed anything too bad (and from 4 to 12 year old we had a kid with Down syndrome in our class). And nobody would even think about splitting kids by ability, we don't have "advanced"/"honours" classes.