hn-acct

There is a two parameter onChange modifier btw

Everything probably already is or should be

Remind me in 6 months.

But they don’t really when some compilers silently remove code without mentioning it.

The author points out near the bottom that “performance” was not one of the original justifications for its UB decisions, afatct.

Your example is a slippery slope but I get your point. I agree that there needs to be a “reasonable UB”

But I’ve moved on from c++.

The copyright notice mismatch is suspicious and the missing items is a dead giveaway away and should have made it ineligible alone.

I live and work with mostly conservatives and none of them supported the truckers nor do they even mention it. Their grievances are more typical - inflation, taxes, and immigration.

I think we need to be careful when reading these opinions to not mix up Americans’ views, Russian trolls with legitimate Canadian discourse.

> I'm not on the pulse of Canadian politics, so I don't really know what sins or political circumstances have led Trudeau to this point, or if he has any redeeming qualities. Personally, I'm glad to see him gone.

Uh really? Is this another version of “Both sides” claiming you don’t know the pulse whilst amplifying a more right leaning, niche, view?

Break up the view and you’ll see much better performance with SwiftUI.

Most of the time you just need to break up the view into smaller pieces. Eventually you realize you have a syntax error ;)

It is code though. It’s a bunch of nested closures with an implicit return

Except it is. var body is a variable declaration. some View {…} is nested closures with a single statement each so the return keyword is implied. Just add return in your second example

Could be stored in keychain.

But I agree. The user should be asked if they want to clear it on app delete