avgcorrection

It’s not tangential. Technologists seem to be equally drawn to any arbitrary dictionary word, which is why these problems come up again and again.

I thought the same thing until I remembered that there’s this concatenative something that is called Joy.

Some authors just shamelessly admit that they clickbaited. Then implicitly give themselves a well-played and ask you what you think about the submission.

But it’s a moot point anyway as long as the moderators don’t allow “editorializing”. (EDIT: editorializing makes sense since this title wouldn’t be clickbait on a conc. programming blog but on a news aggregator it gets confusing.)

Gmail has this annoying preference which you can set: set email to read if viewed for x seconds. Mine was set to 3 seconds. Which is I guess why I sometimes would get a reply on a thread and I had to refresh multiple times to get rid of the unread status.

Maybe that’s related?

Among Us comment char.

The closest I’ve come to APL is the default `.XCompose`, which has a lot of mappings to APL codepoints.

> In C-derived languages, you can stick variable definitions anywhere.

ANSI C89 requires that variable declarations only occur at the beginning of the scope.

Yeah. I don’t understand why we keep submitting ourselves to this way of working.

Most immediate use: I have to google less shell syntax.

We tried to rip you off but you called us out. We’re sorry about that.

I haven’t looked hard into this issue but that’s the more likely explanation in these kinds of situations. So you have a terrible kind-of dictator and you have a seemingly charismatic opposition. In a country stereo-typically ruled or co-ruled by oligarchs. What’s the most likely explanation? That the opposition is a selfless saint who only wants to liberate Russia (or tone it down to: wants reform, democracy, is kind of an egotist but is using his ego for good ends)? Or that he’s another shade of dark who is aligned with other factions close to or inside the power elite of Russia? And that Russia wouldn’t fundamentally change with one or the other at the helm—it’s still the same corrupt country.

Of course we The West jump to the fantastical conclusion that he, an opposition leader in Russia, wants everything that we want and would be the seedling of prosperity of Russia but also (most importantly) wants to be friends and buddies with The West.

Not surprised to see your comment at the very bottom of this thread by the way.

Reminder that the enemy of your (evil) enemy is not necessarily a good person. I have seen nothing to suggest that he was a force for good.

I can’t express how unreasonable it is to demand real identities in internet discussions. You can chit-chat with your mouth among a group of people and be mostly fine. You don’t have to weigh every word. At worst what you say will be spread in a small radius, becoming ever less reliable for every level of hearsay. But on the internet? That’s potentially omnipresent and forever.

People have different personas in real life. While going under the same name. It’s how people operate.

Reads like a “The Birth & Death of JavaScript” ripoff with a random transgender jab thrown in for some kind of measure.

Stodgy C++ opinions (standards!) dressed up with a veneer of irreverence by using adjectives like “retarded”. Bonus points for using Tiobe but like being so ironic about it, dude, which makes it cool.

> With worktrees you can have different branches in different working directories and work on them at the same time. But practically, there is very little difference to just cloning the repo twice and working on different branches in the two checkouts.

With clones you have to fetch everything N times. You have to gc everything N times. You have to do `git config --local` N times if the config matters/affects all clones. If you need a local branch in two clones you need to synch. between them. The repository needs to be managed, which means that every clone needs to be managed. With a worktree there is nothing extra to manage.

And when you’re done you remove it via the subcommand and it’s gone.

For whatever reason this makes me think of having multiple worktrees in the same directory tree :) like .git (normal), git-1, git-2… so you have X HEADs. But that is probably way off anyway because of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39374140

The listed cons of “changelists”:

1. Not part of Git at all—not committed

2. Can’t be shared because, duh, not part of Git

That sounds like a fail to me. The whole point of using Git commits is that once committed, it’s just there. And things can be shared. The point of collaborative version control.

I can manage multiple changes at the same time—that’s the index, e.g. selectively apply changes to commit in Magit. I can commit and shuffle things around—that’s rebase, cherry-pick. I can push and pop commits with some third-party stack management tool that integrates with Git.

In other words: I can use Git or I can use Git + whatever rinky-dink non-database patch management (?) tool that Intellij (IDEA) has implemented. One tool is simpler than two.

This feels like we’re back in 2002 and having to use a patch management system on top of the rigid centralized VCS in order to get some local freedom. But we already have that…

But Intellij’s thing is probably more nimble for managing a lot of unrelated things at the same time. Not that I want to do that though because of increased chances of merge conflict and just the sheer brain-overhead of it all.

If you need to change to an older commit and avoid the thrashy, unreliable indexing of Intellij (IDEA): use git worktrees.

It’s hard to get sold on a Git workflow tool that proposes a new (or not supported by git(1)) way of working outside of a long-form article. I see a lot of little paragraphs here and there on the website, like “faq” answers about specific things. But I can’t just piece together “virtual branches” and “doing things at the same time” (or something) and get what this is about. The GitHub blog does as good job of presenting new git(1) features: (1) explains the problem or context, often using several paragraphs and then (2) presents how git(1) can now solve that, concretely.

I would need a concrete case. Maybe how I am working on five different “features” that all depend on each other, maybe serially. And how I can work with a pull request (forge) somewhere and get those merged and at the same time get those virtual branches updated and managed for me. Or at least that’s what I imagine that this is about. Also how existing solutions (there are many of them) fall short or have different tradeoffs.

PS: Including “git butler” in the title... would have been useful.

> Tell me you have never rented out without telling me you have never rented out something.

To suffer the indignity of collecting rent by sitting on property. How do you live like that?

> I'm happy if restricting single use plastic like plastic straws helps even a small amount to reduce plastic pollution.

Then well, okay. A small victory for you, a huge loss for the focus on solving the problem.

Is it a coincidence that the Media focuses on trivialities that are all about “consumer choice”? No. It’s so that we lose focus on the greater picture. Things like restructuring society.

Oh, everything in this store is wrapped in plastic? Nevermind that, shopper—use our reusable bags that cost way more energy and plastic to manufacture. Don’t be a plastic-sinner.

And you’re just gonna lose that battle. The Media can churn out thousands of concern-troll articles about plastic straws for every little nudge of care in a plebian comment section somewhere on the Internet.

The only reason the Media has to care a little bit about it is because of the absurdity of taking a private jet to Davos or whatever to discuss climate change.

Focus on solving real issues in real ways.

Commuting 1 1/2 hours a day in rush hour traffic because you live in suburbia in order to work in the city center where the “good jobs” are, the great lifestyle dream.

Yeah this is too much marketing speak to be able to relate to concretely.

> I would assume by making decisions that push people towards technologies or lifestyles that have massive negative externalities but high profits (e.g. Car culture, unrepairable technology) or lobby for businesses/laws that are net negative for society (e.g. Oil & Gas, Pollution regulations for farming, energy and manufacturing).

See? “Pushing” and “lifestyles”. Clearly the framing is still centered on the “consumer” (apt word) even when the whole paragraph discusses the role that the rich play.

Yes. The rich helped build a country (or countries) of car-dependence. You can’t vote-with-your-wallet for country-wide road networks. Same with suburbs. And high-priced apartments in areas where the jobs are.

So you get the so-called suburbia lifestyle which is committed by the so-called consumers.

I don’t understand the impasse. Do rich people have power or not? Are we complaining about them affording and using private jets and at the same time not believing that they have a large hand in shaping and ruling society as well?

Well I’m assuming that we are complaining about all the rich people and not just spoiled trust fund kids.

Rich people cause climate change by architecting society (just look around).

Their private jets don’t matter in the grand scheme of things.

I use `cat $(which ...)`. Makes sense to have a dedicated script for it. Cheers

I believe you. :) That’s I guess what most of us do; quickly look at a single file. Not really concatenating multiple files.

So the feature makes perfect pragmatic sense.

That’s the same as bat:[1] one of the features is syntax highlighting. Kind of unexpected to find a concatenation program… which also does that.

[1] https://github.com/sharkdp/bat

This could be pretty useful for writing shorter commit messages (even up to a subject + paragraph). Like a more powerful `cat`.

Then nothing I say is gonna make you understand.

There’s a delete statement. I hope the where-clause is mandatory? :)