db65edfc7996

Windows support has been a target since 2013. That's too long for me to put any credibility in projections on when it will be generally released.

I am happy for most software to move from C into almost anything else. Something unlikely to have memory exploits, or with standardized tooling for dependency management and compilation.

You would also need a Notebook equivalent REPL for fast iteration.

Nim and Crystal feel like they are in exactly the same space? GC, fast, single executable compilation without runtime (I would also throw Go into this list).

It is a resource strapped project. I doubt they have the bandwidth to throw in additional languages. Plus, Lua is perfect for this niche: small, easily embeddable, fast, and simple enough to pick up in an hour. There are even a variety of languages which can transpile down to Lua.

Ditching some of the POSIX missteps is half the appeal of fish.

So many great features in this release. Love the .args and subprocess support. I have been toying with redbean on and off, and I have been wanting to see if I could kludge together a poor man's long running job (scheduled) runner (something like Celery).

Also, why is redbean.dev not ported to 2.0?

I am still waiting for a seL4 based router, firewall, DNS server, file server, etc. Even better if we could get it into critical infrastructure (water treatment, electricity, etc). Something that is exposed to the insanity of the internet, but may not necessarily have high performance requirements. We have super computers in our pockets, we can take some performance hit if it eliminates large security concerns.

Specifically targeting compounds is an active area of research. Example: all oncotherapies are essentially just poison. The trick is to deliver the toxin to the 0.001% of cells in the body that are cancerous.

It is amusing you should say ways that avoid reaching the brain. The blood-brain barrier impedes a large number of therapeutics from entering the brain. It is incredibly difficult to engineer the constraints of something that: is potent enough to have an effect, can survive in the blood, cross into the brain, targets the cells of interest, has a meaningful half-life, does not decompose into something toxic, etc.

Does the snap store server process still still use 300+ MB of memory? That alone would seem to disqualify it for IOT or other embedded use cases.

Linux barely works as it is. I no longer have any interest in debugging my desktop technical problems. Which means my best option is to use the most popular environment so when I do encounter an issue, there is likely to be someone who has already encountered the same issue and reported a solution.

Until Ubuntu switches to KDE, I am stuck in the Gnome-lets-remove-desktop-icons-because world.

Ehhhhh, I'm a Python guy, and I find all of the Python Shiny alternatives lacking. Shiny delivers an incredible amount of value per line of code. My experiments with Dash and Streamlit required a lot more boilerplate to get something running vs the R equivalent.

Perhaps not everything you want, but in Python land there is pipx [0]. Pipx will create a virtual environment per binary program so that they are all isolated from each other and put things in a consistent location (~/.local/pipx). Then it is easy enough to do `pipx install black`, `pipx install cookiecutter`, whatever. Also has nice upgrade option in `pipx upgrade-all`

[0] https://pypa.github.io/pipx/

The Hawaii government page [0] list a goal of getting to 100% renewables by 2045. If I am reading the report correctly, the 2020 number was already at 36% renewables.

[0]: https://energy.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/HSEO_20... ( pdf warning )

So what happens if you takeoff in state A with fuel requirement X and land in state B with fuel requirement Y?

You may disagree with how they develop it, but I am very much a happy user of Bottles (other than how needlessly hard it is to search). It has made configuring wine and friends so much easier than before. Previously, I would just give up on about the second random forum post indicating this was the magic configuration required to run program X.

I will eat the disk space and heavy updates if it means I have an easier time of running windows applications.

There are accounts of people drinking mercury (13.5 g/mL) to feel it sloshing around in their stomach.

Janet starts incredibly quickly. Here was a microbenchmark someone produced comparing various Lisps[0].

[0] https://github.com/janet-lang/janet/issues/324#issuecomment-...

>The only real problem with passwords is that humans are extremely bad at those without an aid of a password manager (when they’re no longer words but turn into pre-shared tokens)

Human are also bad at not losing/breaking their magical security totem. I need to know that I can easily backup codes to any of these hardware tokens for if/when one is lost. Ultimate security be damned.

Wait until he hears about the efficiency of an ICE. 5% losses for fixed infrastructure feels like not a big deal?

>What's the point of this? Why would I want a single-file version of Python?

If I want to deploy a Python program on a Windows machine, my current workflow is roughly:

  - Install Python system wide
  - Ensure there is Python venv + pip + (QoL) virtualenvwrapper
  - Create virtual environment per program
  - Load up my code

Not horrible, but if I could package Python + extra code into a zip file, I could just create foobar-v20220512.zip send that to anybody, and have them unzip the entire program into the same directory every time. Then they could do it without admin privileges and with the most minimal of user training. Easy versioning to boot.

PyInstaller, Nukita, etc probably already make this possible, but I have never taken the plunge to explore them. I have assumed there are some rough edge gotchas (C libraries) that would make me regret the decision.

Maybe if SQL was a better language at the start, there would be more incentive to follow the spec.

It was unclear to me after a superficial reading - is there a story for packing non standard-library dependencies? Let's say I need library X + my own code. Is there currently possible to ship pyoxy + a tar file of all the extra code? What about libraries with C (numpy and friends)?

Very cool, even if it standard library only. I am frequently annoyed at the hoops I jump through to distribute Python onto Windows machines.

I have grown fond of using miller[0] to handle command line data processing. Handles the standard tabular formats (csv, tsv, json) and has all of the standard data cleanup options. Works on streams so (most operations) are not limited by memory.

[0]: https://github.com/johnkerl/miller

That sounds a lot like testing in production. Move fast and break things when the stake are human life. I will accept a slower pace of aircraft development, thank you.

Don't we already have oil pipelines criss-crossing the country? Why would water be any harder? Enough capacity to ensure the populace has enough to drink (ie not replace agricultural requirements) seems like a reasonable goal.

He represents such an extreme case, it is hard for me to draw any broad conclusions from his life. The man never had a healthy relationship with food.

Right? I do not understand why the comparison of Python is always, "But when you hit 10 million daily users, you are really going to be feeling the scaling pain." You can hit a very serious audience size before ever having to worry about performance characteristics at all. Computers are fast.

Hear hear. I already have enough to worry about besides this little magical security wand failing/getting lost. I require a bullet proof method-of-last-resort mechanism in place for the inevitable day when the fob is no longer available.

Not the GP, but a pound of fat = 3500 kCal. If you use the standard 2000 kCal / day basis, that gets you to .57 lbs fat loss per day.

Also, the 450 pound (204 kg) man who did not eat for an entire year [0] lost 0.72 pounds / day.

[0] https://pmj.bmj.com/content/49/569/203