allknowingfrog

If your developer machines behave differently from your CI environment, how do you reproduce issues? If you can solve one, can't you solve the other?

I love the idea of TUIs, but I honestly don't have a lot of experience with them. There's a lovely Go library called Wish that I keep looking for reasons to use. https://github.com/charmbracelet/wish

It's a perfectly cromulent word.

The Wish library for Go tries to provide a similar experience for the modern world (using SSH). It may be worth a look for anyone feeling nostalgic about the decline of telnet.

https://github.com/charmbracelet/wish

I rather doubt that George is concerned with attribution at this point, but I freely admit that I was probably misquoting somebody.

I think we're saying the same thing. My intention was to point out the subjective nature of the original comment, not to kill the discussion.

Have you ever noticed that everyone who drives faster than you is a maniac, and everyone who drives slower than you is a moron? I think code abstraction fits a similar pattern.

I've had success using sql.js (https://sql.js.org) for small, hobby projects. It's just SQLite compiled to WASM. They have a link to an online demo at the top of the homepage, which may be the exact tool that you're hoping for.

Thank your for the explanation! The modulo was a big piece that I was missing.

I still need to spend some time understanding how the math guarantees unique combinations of values, but I did figure out how to generate the series now (in Ruby).

  (0..4).map do |b|
    (0..4).map do |a|
      (0..4).map do |x|
        (a * x + b) % 5
      end.join(" ")
    end.join("\n")
  end.join("\n\n").then { puts _1 }

EDIT: To make this line up with the document, I actually had to offset a by the value of b. I'm still not totally sure why this is necessary.

  (0..4).map do |b|
    (0..4).map do |a|
      (0..4).map do |x|
        ((a - b) * x + b) % 5
      end.join(" ")
    end.join("\n")
  end.join("\n\n").then { puts _1 }

"Best minds of my generation" is a pretty specific phrase which appears in the Ginsberg quote and not in the Banksy one. I would argue that famous quote are more often related by structure than context. Most quotes about "the smell of <something> in the morning" are not about the Vietnam war, for example.

Is there a pattern to how the dice grids are constructed? I'm not finding an explanation in any of the documentation. If they are generated in some deterministic way, it would be possible to memorize the pattern and rebuild the grid on-demand. That would create some fun possibilities for passing messages to other people who are familiar with the system.

To be clear, I'm talking about these grids:

  0  0 0 0 0
  0  1 2 3 4
  0  2 4 1 3
  0  3 1 4 2
  0  4 3 2 1
  0  re-throw

My team of 5 synchronized our hybrid schedules (same two days in the office together). We love the mix of in-person collaboration days and remote "leave me alone so I can accomplish something" days. We're a small startup in the Midwest, so I have no idea how it would scale to FAANG-level problems, but it's the best of both worlds for us.

I'm not surprised to learn that Martin Fowler has a relevant book. Thank you for the recommendation.

Ha. I guess finding your own solution is the joy of software. It's good to know I wasn't way off on my caching instincts.

I briefly dabbled in financial ledgers in a previous job. We made plans to do what you seem to be describing, which is to store the transactions themselves and calculate a balance as needed, but we frankly lacked expertise. I always wondered what would happen if we scaled to millions of transactions in that system.

Is there a standard strategy for optimizing balance queries against a series of transactions? I assumed that we would eventually have to cache some kind of snapshot for each account to avoid the overhead of totaling every transaction on every balance check.

Oh sure, it's all about knowing your requirements. I write raw SQL when performance or complexity call for it. My intention was to argue that both have merits, not that ORMs are the one true solution.

I don't want to live in a world where I can't pop into a Rails console and run something like `Foo.joins(:bars).any?`.

More concretely, performance is on my list of "good problems to have". Businesses die in the time it takes to write raw SQL.

You extrapolated "I will just be pickier about who i sell it to" into an argument about regulations. If your contention is that sentiment obstructs progress, it seems totally fair to argue that the opposite is also true. Accusing someone of "whataboutism" isn't doing much to move the conversation forward.

Well, if you never get around to releasing the feature, you'll never have production issues. Ruby embodies "perfect is the enemy of done" in a way that I tend to appreciate.

The "Storage Fault Model" section is about halfway down the page.

https://github.com/tigerbeetle/tigerbeetle/blob/main/docs/DE...

It took slightly longer than expected for me to track down an explanation of their business model. I think it boils down to "run cheap until we have one". https://developers.revolt.chat/faq/monetisation

That's not a very constructive response. UUIDs do provide global uniqueness, which can occasionally make mistakes more obvious. Do you have a counter argument to support your strong objection?

ROI should always be a consideration. It's reasonable to argue the merits of documentation. It may even be reasonable to argue that most projects would benefit from increased documentation. Without knowing how long it will take to write it and how many people will use it, you cannot reasonably insist that writing more documentation should be a priority for every project.

Much like automation, the question should be phrased in terms of how long it will take and how much time it will save. https://xkcd.com/1205/

I switched to Dvorak a couple of years before I learned VIM. I made the decision not to remap anything in VIM, because it seemed like every key already had a job, and I was afraid of upsetting the balance. I'm still a Dvorak/VIM user 10 years later. My directional navigation keys are in strange places, but it's just muscle memory at this point.

If I had learned VIM first, I'm not sure how the switch to Dvorak would have gone. My fear of breaking an unfamiliar editor may have accidentally steered me into success.

Oh, it's not a stated set of requirements. I would describe it as more of a culture. The review board didn't hand me a standardized test or anything. They just asked a lot of questions about my personal outlook on the field of education. I already mentioned this in another comment below, but what they really want to hear is "it's a mission".

Yeah, pretty much this. It's all part of the "it's a mission" mentality that leads to teachers being over-worked and under-paid. Everyone else has a job. You have a calling!

This was exactly my experience. I had to pass a review board before I began my senior year, and it was essentially an "ideological indoctrination" examination. I said what they wanted to hear. What else was I going to go with the 3 years of education that I had already purchased? I was fortunate to study at a college that emphasized field-based experience, because it was the only degree-related value that I left with.

In the end, I spent more hours earning my degree than using it. I work in software now.

I don't personally need a lot of pressure to keep me focused on delivering business value...but I think that's how I ended up managing people who do. Finding that "motivation without urgency" balance is both difficult and necessary.

Possibly, although the official explanation is that it's "just a word with no phonetic pronunciation". There's a "What does XKCD stand for?" section on the About page. https://xkcd.com/about/

Did you read the article? It's a fairly balanced evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of LLMs in general, and ChatGPT in particular.