ulbu

3 counts of “jquery” in the text. once again, which one of them glorifies it?

i guess they needed to release all that pent up backwards incompatibility

tabs is just not the correct abstraction for focused work.

we tend to talk about type composition, but values too are composed. this suggestion makes the composition clear and, imo, is strictly better that a hardcoded resulting value. even more so if we assign it using some blocks-with-returns feature, if the language has it: we can clarify that the value’s components are not used elsewhere and thus reduce complexity of the namespace. without such feature, I’m not sure complicating the namespace is worth it, and a comment may actually be better.

you don’t know up front how much memory you’ll need, but you know up front how much memory you have.

most people poop but some do cholera poop

for anyone moaning the plight that it's not accessible to you: they are historians, I think they're more educated in matters of historical mistake than you or me. playing safe is simply prudence. it is sorely lacking in the American approach to technology. prevention is the best medicine.

alcohol, cigarettes?..

I wanted to use it to capture my musical ideas. They usually come unexpectedly and in bundles. There's a problem though – one of them is 0:40-1:30 min in duration; the ring wouldn't last half a year for me.

I'm sure other musicians would love it as well, but are disqualified completely from the userbase. That's a shame as I think for us it would be really, really useful.

(The first iteration of a musical idea usually emerges somewhat spontaneously from an emotional state, and repetition always loses some important part of it. This ring could be an always-on photocamera for these spontaneous, naturally arising states.)

i know zig, i’ve been using it for a few years, i have multiple small projects as well. zig ref is fine, but i’m critical of std and i've grown to be critical on the disposition of the team itself.

the source code has always been the main source of truth and documentation. which means no documentation. std is littered with undocumented behaviours, the build system is still something many people use half-blind. and while i’m fine with breaking changes, but the way they’re just dropped onto our laps with, it seems, almost zero thought put into how to acquaint the users with it. (i started to feel almost as if patience in introducing the concepts and interfaces is one of those things that is below andrew)

while i admit that zig’s authors’ claim to technical excellence is deserved, communication has never been excellent. i’m sure there are people who would gladly involve themselves in documentation efforts, but the chances of receiving andrew’s ire and demeaning disposition are so great that it might be paralysing such efforts leaving it to the Guy himself who's not too wont to educate others.

and yet there’s questions on the semi-official forum on how to read from files properly.

no, the docs really don’t cut it.

it is strongly opinionated about the correct way to do things but it leaves you to your own devices to piece together an understanding from source code, ziggit, and discord.

i don’t (and won’t) have npm installed. i do have cargo.

strange thinking!

that, and instead of increases of productivity reducing people's need to work, what might (I think, will) happen is that we will actually have to work more for worse results and lower incomes, for the whims of the executive class and increased energy requirements for LLMs. compound this control over channels of communication (google, facebook, xitter), means of production (microsoft, amazon), with force of social-emotional manipulation of LLMs and we have a really "winner" technology.

I do not think the executive class is actually in on the power of AI to increase productivity, but rather to increase reliance.

maybe akin to how faster conputers bred programs that are slower than before.

And a tu quoque without even knowing my opinion on the matter and calling me an enabler for calling out the irony of your responses, hiding your personal aggressiveness behind a veil of moral superiority. I will refrain from continuing on this thread, good luck with this pain you carry, I hope you find something positively creative to alleviate it.

wow, and you’re still defending yourself with a lecture on how your words should be interpreted in such good faith. in this situation. and, to add to that, comparing to two dictators who separate children from their parents and close people in labour camps.

keep believing you fit the moral standard and insight to emotional nuance to impart your judgments onto others.

and this vision is enough to excuse targetting a person as “rotten”. in all your professed moral acuity.

others are shaming. many could, if not agree, at least understand that. you’re calling “rotten”. wtf man.

people already go psychotic on LLMs lol

someone called some indeterminate anonymous corporate group of people who actively participate in enshittification of a product “losers”. you call that specific private individual “rotten”.

i’m really twisting my finger at the temple here.

why not AI integrations that are not built-in but rather externalized like LSP?

or is it low levels of choline tied to anxiety disorders?

closed as not planned :)

philosophy, i find, is one of the forms where the shapeless thinking described in the article does a lot of the work for me. especially the phase of internalization. you take a sentence you don’t quite get, and then spend a bunch of time just meditating about it, rejecting the temptations to think elsewhere. and then, in time, it just clicks into making all sorts of sense.

it’s definitely not “purely linguistic” – one form of it is about letting the idea engage you to shape your inner vision.

because everything that Russia-aligned news sources say about the war in Ukraine makes a grand and indivisible amount of sense.

note to those interested: no apple silicon support.

and so why should he be forced to not do so? he can cook his own thing outside of what most people using this language will do, and they will just not use it, and nothing's wrong with that.

the question remains – why would they choose to?

sure they can. but why would they choose to?

authors of the library

We = Americans. typical.