janderland

Why is boasting about this gross?

Grammar checks are somewhat like compilers. When I type prose or code into my text editor, both are underlined with squiggly lines if they are grammatically incorrect.

Furthermore, I compose both types of text in an iterative process where I got the general ideas down first and then improve the precision and completeness of the piece.

Lastly, I think deeply about the human meaning of the text before I consider it complete, at least for my side projects. I refactor the code so that it matches my human model of the problem as well as I can.

Your mileage my vary, but coding and prose feel similar in my experience.

This isn’t based on any data, just my intuition…

I don’t think humans usually choose the “best” solution. They use solution that are a combination of readily available, easiest to get started with, and popular.

Why do you dislike code gen?

There is obviously an improvement in type safety. This would transform silent HTML typos into Go compile errors. Though I could understand some thinking this is not worth the extra syntax.

I’ve used ranger for years, even fixed a bug I found while using it.

For my work patterns it’s too feature rich. I only use it for browsing directory structures. Everything else just gets in the way because I haven’t taken the time to learn the other features.

Because BASH’s string splitting rules, concurrency tools, and variable scoping are nightmarish.

I’ve written build scripts in BASH, Python, and JavaScript and can definitely say BASH scripts produced the most difficult bugs.

I welcome another option for my glue code.

There is also something like this accessible on the light web: https://m.psychonautwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page

Just a reminder that you don’t need to be patronizing to get your point across. Calling someone “cute” is a bit much.

I also know it as “swapping” variables and I’m a native speaker.

What? You must be confounding route of administration with safety. Sure, oral administration is technically the safest because of first pass metabolism, but the choice of drug is a MUCH bigger safety factor. Snorting caffeine is much safer than snorting cocaine by every metric.

I think they mean we’d have to modify existing features. There are probably assumptions made in code and tests around how GET will be used. Instead of breaking those assumptions and potentially implementing new bugs in an old feature, you can use a completely new HTTP method with completely new code paths. Older feature remains unchanged.

The progression you’re outlining here sounds perfectly acceptable to me. I encounter many problems per day and they aren’t always worth understanding and solving, especially if there is a 10s bandaid for it. When the bandaid becomes expensive, that’s when I’ll put in the effort to fix it.

Generally speaking, I only use notes for at most a week after I wrote them. Anything beyond that and I type up a document. So while I do wish it had search capabilities, it doesn’t really bother me.

As a rule of thumb, I never assume a Hacker News article was recently published. XD

Lots of old gems being posted after years.

When I moved from Win to Linux (as a beginner programmer), nano was my go to for quick edits in the terminal. Then I found vim….

At risk of sounding like a jerk, this post is just raw data. The “implication” you brought up and the rejection of said implication was all done by you.

Because it’s enjoyable to build things. It’s like solving a puzzle or riddle: there’s no purpose other than the experience of solving it.

I bought mine new. As someone who keeps there todo lists hand written, I use it every day several times a day. It’s also my e-reader for PDFs of research papers.

:shrug: I’ve tried doing it both ways in other languages and found that code gen is less fragile than I expected, though I needed to carefully consider the interface between generated & manually written code.

In many circumstances, yes I am. :)

I’d assume it’s more about the tooling and libraries for JS. If I want to build an HTML based UI, I have thousands of JavaScript libraries alongside thousands of developers who know how to use them. If I want to build HTML that calls into C# I’ll need to do a lot more work myself.

I didn’t get the impression they were saying never to do it (maybe I missed that bit in the text).

I think they specifically said, when piping, don’t force functions to handle the error of the upstream function.

Because each error needs to be handled differently, the downstream function’s implementation becomes tied to the upstream function. Then the downstream function is only usable with said upstream function.

What is your point and how does it relate to this project? Seeing as this controller is used in a browser-based simulation, this seems like a perfectly valid use of JavaScript.

Currently reading about agriculture throughout human history. It made me wonder how many people failed to domesticate a single kind of crop and assumed crop domestication as a whole isn’t a good idea.

I realize that people need to make decisions based on their personal experience, and I don’t have a good rule-of-thumb for when to try a variation of a “bad” idea.

I still play the Movie Battles mod for Jedi Knight 3, which uses this engine. https://www.moviebattles.org

When I worked on military autonomous vehicles (which I’d expect to be similar to these) we always had at least two system on board: 1) A real-time flight controller, 2) One or more Linux computers, networked via an on-board LAN which performed all the other tasks.

Are we seriously comparing people who aren’t upset about some bad software policy to people who want to colonize Africa or deny the Holocaust?

Also the dosage can be unreliable. LSD tabs aren’t regulated (obviously) and mushroom can vary wildly in their potency.

They are subjective in the degree to which they are measurable. How would you measure how well a text editor “integrates with a programming language”? There are many ways to measure this, making any single measurement choice subjective to a degree.