munchbunny

> how do I store state in the application

I can’t speak for all of the challenges you might be dealing with, but this one in particular seems like something specific to native development. You have a wealth of options, and at the same time because of that fact there is are fewer defaults compared to web dev and you have to do more work to make the decision. Personally I default to two options unless performance requires otherwise: SQLite or JSON stored in files.

Sort of. It includes the ability to hook up to a docking station and pass USB, video, and Ethernet through the plug.

I use the dock for my Surface Book. With the dedicated GPU it comfortably drives two extra screens through the dock. If you don’t plan on using the dock though, it’s just another proprietary power plug.

Definitely agree with that.

My own personal experience with difficult bugs is that there is no substitute for taking the time to understand the problem domain, the systems involved, and the code itself. Getting to that point takes significant investment though, and I tend to trust engineers who are willing to do that much more than engineers who don't.

I don't think it's that software engineers don't value it. I think we all understand, to some degree, that building resilient, simple software that solves the problem thoroughly requires incredible investment into carefully thinking through the problem and constant upkeep. It's just that we don't want to believe it because getting from 80% to 100% requires boring grind that we'd rather spend building something new and exciting, or because getting from 80% to 100% requires time we could spend building 80% of something else we want to sell.

> Yes I know the art theory stuff about never using black because it doesn't appear naturally.

I think the underlying reasons for that are underappreciated.

When you pick #000000 for your text color, people won't see it as pure black anyway. Imperfections in your screen's backlighting aside, your screen reflects the ambient lighting, or, if you're outdoors and pointed the wrong direction on a sunny day, your screen reflects sunlight that is orders of magnitude brighter than the screen itself (measured in cd/m^2). #000000 never shows up as actual black either.

So if you're going to put black text on white background, just use #000000 on #ffffff. Nature doesn't need any more help to make text on screens hard to read.

Thanks for sharing the comparison!

I think I agree, the edited version conveys the meaning and intent well. I assume the links were removed as a matter of form factor/medium.

Sometimes a tree or graph really is the right way, but if you want memory locality, you could have an array of nodes and an array of edges that reference the nodes by index. That’s effectively what the author is proposing (pooling), rather than allocating all of the nodes and edges individually.

Yes and no. Popularity or user base and number of engineers looking at the code are probably correlated, but there are definitely exceptions, like:

* small NPM packages depended on by popular ones

* video game mods and tools

* open source end user utilities

> Do the security benefits of going Open Source outweigh the security costs?

Only if there are enough eyeballs. In practice that's only true for bigger projects.

I think in general there is a difference between being good at something and being a good teacher of that thing. Not all masters are good at teaching, and not all good teachers are masters.

And not all masters/good teachers are entertaining or engaging enough for Youtube.

> KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if they're hard to use or find.

I'm not so sure that we're saying different things. I didn't mean it as a compliment, more as an explanation. In general developers aren't good at designing UX (not their job), and in general developers are used to often byzantine UX, including falling back to terminal rituals, and both UI's feel (to me) like they're 80% of the way there and left that way because of the tacit understanding that there's always the terminal and text configs.

I think it's just a matter of people adapting to the tools that are easily available. Almost 100% of the time I've seen someone use an actual basic tabletop calculator, they've been tallying prices and slapping on a sales tax. At that point it's just a learned ritual and they're not thinking about order of operations. If they needed parentheses, they'd just memorize that the parentheses go around the prices.

Once the computations get complex enough that you have to write down the formulas, then it makes a lot of sense to treat the computations as algebraic expressions, meaning PEMDAS.

I've used both Gnome and KDE based UI's, and yeah, I don't feel strongly about the differences, but also I've never felt like either one was actually good. They both get the job done, but they both feel designed by developers for developers, on the assumption that anything you can't figure out in the UI you'll Google or open a terminal and text editor to deal with it. Compared to, say, the iPad 2 which felt clearly designed for lay users down to the settings UI. (I feel like the later versions of iOS got more complex and harder to parse, so I'm picking the iteration I liked the most.)

But then again, it's Linux, I'm a developer, I'm used to Googling how to do things, and I play my video games on Windows, so 90%+ of my time in Linux is in the terminal, text editor (or IDE), and browser anyway. So no complaints - the presence of a fully featured UI isn't why I use Linux.

It's probably a concession to skeuomorphism. Most physical calculators I've seen that look like the standard mode ignore PEMDAS as well, whereas pretty much all scientific calculators will respect PEMDAS.

If you took one of the people who still use old fashioned "standard" calculators and put them on a standard mode that followed PEMDAS, they'd probably be confused, at least initially. I've seen that a lot at cash registers in restaurants, dry cleaners, and other small businesses.

I think this is one of those conventions where your team agrees on one convention, and you just try to follow it consistently. If that's looking at the test in code to find descriptive comments, great. If that's long test names, cool. Just do the same thing consistently.

> Ultimately it's then GNU tools I'm after, the kernel isn't particularly interesting for my use cases.

That’s an interesting take, and it makes sense that some people need properly hybrid setups. I personally used Cygwin mostly to have access to a Linux dev environment inside Windows, not so much to apply GNU tools to Windows development. As a result I’m pretty happy with WSL just for the sake of having a Linux dev environment within easy reach, and I typically don’t feel a need to do much with the shared file system.

WSL2 is basically the same as WSL1 for the comparison you're making, though the upcoming GUI stuff will mean that you don't have to fiddle with the X server, it'll "just work".

The main difference I encounter between WSL1 and WSL2 is that accessing files across the OS divide happens through a networked filesystem instead of a natively shared filesystem, so it's not as seamless/performant, but the upside is much better filesystem performance when it's Linux doing Linux things. Which I'm happy about when it comes to containers. (I run both WSL1 and WSL2 on different computers.)

Docker for Windows also now has WSL integration so that you can launch Linux containers directly into WSL. I don't think it's configured by default just because you have to choose to install WSL, but once you've flipped the requisite switches it's seamless.

I have a full blown Linux install on dual-boot, but for my purposes (gaming and some development on Windows, some development on Linux) it's honestly just easier to have WSL1/WSL2 around so that I can have both OSes around always, rather than having to reboot to switch.

Blue teaming in big company cyber security teams will get that for you. Not everything is a true positive but it’s always urgent. Pay is decent too.

As someone who jumped on the C++ train with C++98 and did my best to keep up since then, at some point around C++17 I gave up out of the sheer headache of having to reread entire manuals about how to avoid pitfalls any time I have to do more C++. None of the other languages I use exact such a heavy toll when you're rusty and need to reacquaint yourself.

I've written more C++ since C++17 because that in those cases it was the best tool for the job, but, man, every time I do it I feel a strong urge to just burn it all down.

It's real, but it's rarely ever just one or the other. There's no situationally objective criteria for whether someone has victimhood mentality or is actually a victim.

When you get into the territory of microaggressions and subconscious bias, which are real problems but aren't necessarily clearly benign or bad on a case by case basis, the lines can get very blurry depending on who the observer is. Generally you should give the benefit of the doubt, because part of the nature of the social problems we talk about come from blaming the weak for being weak.

I think the discrepancy mostly comes down to context and judgement. It's too tempting to forget to apply context and judgement because doing so requires substantially more research and mental effort.

Language and culture are intertwined like electricity and magnetism. Clear causality is only approximate because it always goes both ways, and solutions have to tackle both fronts.

Yes. Just think of it as a formalism - it's the currently culturally accepted term if that's the group you're trying to reference.

Lots of languages have a fuzzy formal/casual split where usage is both context-based and a matter of respect, though I think the US is more unique in (1) the degree of energy focused towards coming up with formal names for demographic groups and (2) making them out of words that are also used casually.

I think the spirit of it is pretty clear.

If you grew up with access to upper middle class (or higher) wealth, which is what your parents would need to be to match today's early career Silicon Valley software engineer incomes, you probably don't know what it's like to not have access to many of the institutionalized resources you grew up with, because you probably never lived that experience.

That might be an overly broad test, but the underlying point is pretty clear.

> But when you actually see the process from the inside you see how optical and ridiculous it is. The entire program is a joke. No matter what one does the top of the funnel is so ridiculously non-diverse that it's excruciatingly difficult to hire a diverse person.

I agree based on my personal experiences.

One of the concrete suggestions by the author of the blog post really strikes me as a step that we could implement, but we don’t: drawing from non-traditional backgrounds. And it’s because it’s an uphill battle. Much easier to do some low hanging fruit.

I’m not a minority in tech, but coming into my current job I had a semi-traditional background. Even getting first rounds was a struggle, only ameliorated by having a professional network of tech people, which is very much not something that you can expect a non-traditional candidate to have.

Seriously, my “get to phone screen” rate without network referrals was around 2-3%. With referrals was about 60%. That’s how bad it gets. So now when it’s in my direct control I go out of my way to look for non-traditional backgrounds in the pipeline and give them the benefit of the doubt during resume screening, paid for in hours I spend interviewing instead of programming

Yup it was something like that. I think it was the opacity property. IE6 required a custom property so in order to do opacity you had to set at least two CSS properties, might have actually been more because Safari/Firefox/Opera/IE mostly had opacity as a CSS extension.

I don’t miss those days.

> To folks who mount these cultural hills, racism, classism, and sexism are adjacent to murder in severity.

If you're going to assume everyone who thinks those things are real problems believes something pretty much nobody actually believes, more power to you I guess? Seems problematic. By which I mean "intellectually dishonest", maybe a bit of posturing for likeminded people, maybe a shibboleth to organize and rally like-minded people.

> The correct answer is that it’s a shibboleth to organize, and rally, like-minded people.

Well, you've clearly already made up your mind.

It's the diplomatic synonym for "racist"/"classist"/"sexist"/etc. but it allows you to try to make the claim without having to do the work to specify the claim.

In this case, I think the commenter meant "xenophobic", based on the parallels to Trump's rhetoric.

I see ingredient purity as a cultural thing. Every culture has some version of it, especially as a form of conspicuous consumption. Wine, tea, and coffee immediately come to mind.

Chinese people can be absolute snobs about tea, but the same people like bubble tea which isn't made with high quality tea because you wouldn't taste the difference through the milk and sugar. Both are delicious in their own way.

Just speaking for my own diet (mostly Chinese), it's common to steam a fresh fish with a bit of salt, ginger, and scallion, and let the fish speak for itself. But the very next meal might be a curry or some other dish that relies heavily on the sauce. But then none of that carries over to making steak (buy high quality, cook neurotically), or making gumbo (get a few specific parts right but otherwise it's a high-tolerance dish), or making coffee.

There are definitely different paradigms for food, and I think if someone is unable or unwilling to appreciate that, it's their loss.

I wasn't assuming that they were particularly savvy at anything. I was just pointing out that the parent(s) being gamers likely means there's a decent change the parent(s) know what they're throwing at the child by handing them Minecraft or Roblox.

I know at least one parent who used Minecraft as an opportunity for both the parent and the child to learn to code.