Yeah, road wear scales with mass⁴ afaik, so if the average bike with biker weighed 100kg (it doesn’t) and the average car weighed 1000kg (it doesn’t) you’d need 10000 bikes to make as much impact as that one car. Since cyclists are generally lighter and cars heavier, the ratio is much higher.
I would also imagine that the lower speeds and acceleration a cycle is involved in contributes—the tyre just isn’t subjected to as much force.
I’ve been using neovim for years (and the vim family for decades), and I guess with LSP it’s pretty much an IDE these days.
No, we shouldn’t, and yes, you’re overthinking, but I am finding myself inching closer to the GNU argument for the desktop/server OS, as I now not only use phone/Linux, but also a bunch of Kubernetes/Linux, with distroless images. It’s all using the Linux kernel, and possibly glibc, but it’s not Linux as we know it. The desktop/server OS meanwhile might not have GNU coreutils in some years.
But realistically we’ve been using Linux as the name for the family of desktop and server OS-es for decades now, and if you need to refer to the Linux kernel you call it “the Linux kernel” or just “the kernel”.
Earlier GNU wanted HURD as an alternative to the Linux kernel—same GNU OS, different kernel. What instead is happening is that we’re keeping the Linux kernel but replacing the GNU part of the OS.
Generally you just need to give as much information as the recipient needs to understand your message. Excess signals that don’t add information are what information theory calls noise.
It’s also likely a bit of cost-benefit analysis for self-hosting vs using a managed service.
Codeberg would be more in line with Mozilla’s ideals IMO, but GitHub is a pragmatic choice anyway.
Phabricator was an alternative for a development platform of sorts; development ceased in 2021. They’re still running here and there, but I expect them to be in the process of being deprecated.
Yeah, I think my sway config is around five years old now. The Wayland experience hasn’t been entirely without warts, but as someone who kind of just uses the desktop to drive a browser and a bunch of terminals, there’s not a whole lot of problems to run into either.
Also not having used Java for decades I’ll not comment on the state of their abstractions, but
IMO at the extreme being unable to shed the past means negatively hindering progress. I think modern Java versions show a budding shift in mentality
both reminds me of similar complaints against C++ (and with a sizeable amount of users wishing for an ABI break), and how weird it is to get both complaints like that and over the fact that so many shops are on ancient versions. They’ve moved slowly, but it doesn’t seem like anything was slow enough for a lot of shops, which indicates they likely could’ve moved faster without changing which versions users would be at today.
This sounds like the antithesis to parse, don’t validate. It is possible to use just maps and strings and get a “stringly typed” program, but there’ a bunch of downsides to it too:
dict[str, Any]; most of us want the typechecker to help us write correct code.get from a map is Optional; you need to be constantly checking and handling that rather than being able to have methods that return T, or even direct field accessUltimately while Hickey has a good point in the distinction between easy and simple, his ideals don’t seem particularly aligned with the programming world at large: For one thing, Clojure remains pretty small, but even other dynamic programming languages like Javascript and Python have been moving towards typechecking through Typescript and typing in Python.
Doing a json.load into some dict[str, Any] is simple, but actually programming like that isn’t easy. Apparently a lot of programmers find value in doing the extra work to get some stdlib or pydantic dataclasses. Most of us get a confidence boost from using parsed data, and feel uneasy shuffling around stuff that’s just strings and maps.
Yeah, the left generally considers it a “fighting day” similar to March 8th. The right does gardening (to make it visible that they’re not marching). Others do whatever they feel like; not uncommon to spend the day hung over.
Yeah, one problem here is that global container circulation needs to, well, circulate. People don’t ship empty containers, that’s stupid expensive. So container hire is going to get way more expensive as global shipping needs to rebalance. Happened under covid, too.
Uh, we historically had some rather repressive regimes, and some countries were ruled by dictators until the 90s. People like Franco and Ceausescu and Tito weren’t that long ago.
But it’s generally been pretty good in the millennial lifetime.
If ssh has a security issue and you permit root logins then hostiles likely have an easier time getting access to root on the machine than if they only get access to your user account—then they need multiple exploits.
Generally you also want to be root as little as possible. Hence sudo, run0, etc.
Kokoro.
Also have vague plans to reread Der Zauberberg
Likely also will reread V. and the Count of Monte Christo at some point.
Isn’t that sort of just the cost of doing business in C? It’s a sparse language, so it falls to the programmer to cobble together more.
I do also think the concrete example of emails should be taken as a stand-in. Errors like swapping a parameter for an email application is likely not very harmful and detected early given the volume of email that exists. But in other, less fault-tolerant applications it becomes a lot more valuable.
It is pretty funny that C’s type system can be described pretty differently based on the speaker’s experience. The parable of the Blub language comes to mind.
Parsing is a way of “validating early”. You either get a successful parse and the program continues working on known-good data with that knowledge encoded in the type system, or you handle incorrect data as soon as it’s encountered.
I used Ratpoison for well over a decade, and only replaced it with sway once I had a new machine and figured it was time to try Wayland. Apparently that’s some 4-5 years ago already.
I feel I gotta point out it’s a pretty funny example—email comes up so frequently as a thing that you’re recommended to neither parse nor validate, just try to send an email to the address and see if it works. If you need to know that it was received successfully, a link to click is the general method.
But “parse, don’t validate” is still a generally good idea, no matter the example used. :)
Afaik they’re hoping to land it on nightly in 2025H1.
Between that, work on the next-generation trait solver and promoting parallel frontend, there’s some stuff to look forward in the compiler this year.
That depends on when it appears. Some tasks kind of have to feel instantaneous, and there might be a pretty slim margin between okay and frustrating.
But yeah, that’s the kind of savings that mostly matter on the scale of regional or national grid planning.
Yeah, the author seems to lean too hard into the “programming is electronics” model, where the opposing end is “programming is math and formal logic”; most of us take some mixed view. And most of us have higher correctness requirements than what a reasonable effort in memory unsafe languages like C and C++ gives us, so we trade away some machine efficiency. In the authors parlance, most of us aren’t interested in the demoscene circlejerk; we need to make tradeoffs between maintainability and everything else. Write-once code isn’t good enough.
There have been attempts at establishing a third pole of “promptgramming is natural language” or whatever ever since COBOL promised programming in plain English, but the ambiguity of natural language when used to encode a business logic machine means that a “sufficiently advanced compiler” will have to be extremely advanced, on the order of including the manager and the entire engineering methodology.