alphanumeric0

What's the benefit of this versus a time series database?

I've got a Kona EV subscription from Hyundai. I just took a trip to Crater Lake and was able to charge every night I was there.

At least one person had brought their extension cable and was charging via their cabin's electrical outlet.

I have a coworker who creates work tickets for me and a fair bit of my work time is spent deciphering what they meant in their tickets.

It's not uncommon for me to interview him on almost every ticket, writing extensive notes with clarifications on his instructions and to fill in gaps.

I don't see anything necessarily wrong with having to write notes. I think that's part of a healthy work process. I just think it happens too often.

It's partly due to the fact we do not have a very organized system, but also due to him not valuing writing as a tool to enhance his work.

I'd like a device kit to measure the amount of these chemicals in my body.

"With so much evidence refuting the five excuses, hopefully it is clear that they are ridiculous. They are completely invalid reasons for the average developer, in the common case, to dismiss concerns about software performance. They should not be taken seriously in a professional software development context."

I believe the average developer should care somewhat about performance, and depending on their industry they might need to care a lot, but I'm not so convinced for the average case.

The average developer is not working on FAANG-sized codebases. Also, I'd imagine any large systems built up over the years that are refactored would likely see great performance gains. That's just the nature of long-term software.

Why do you think there was a mass surveillance of American domestic communications since forever ago, as leaked by Snowden? This technology has been available since then and can effectively summarize millions of pieces of communication.

I'm attempting to recall an analogy from a paper about this subject. One of the authors gave the analogy of time being like a river. If we are traveling down this river, and the river is changing speed ahead (maybe due to rocks or a sharp bend), then it is correct to say that the river is changing the past (our present location in the river), since our speed would then start to change as we approach the new point.

That's a good point. This would rule out SQLite for me.

Nice, that is what I was looking for. Of course, it'd need to point to production data as well, so maybe test_case is null, in that case:

  CREATE TABLE data_a AS (SELECT 'a' AS test_case, 1 AS value);
  CREATE TABLE data_b AS (SELECT 'b' AS test_case, 2 AS value);
  CREATE TABLE data_prod AS (SELECT NULL AS test_case, prod_table.value FROM prod_table);

  CREATE VIEW data AS (SELECT * FROM data_a UNION ALL SELECT * FROM data_b UNION ALL SELECT * FROM data_prod);

  CREATE VIEW complicated_query AS (SELECT test_case, value+1 FROM data);

  -- when testing
  SELECT * FROM complicated_query WHERE test_case = 'a';
  SELECT * FROM complicated_query WHERE test_case = 'b';

  -- when in 'production'
  SELECT * FROM complicated_query WHERE test_case IS NULL;

What if I wrote a very long, complicated query that I'd like to test against different tables (like test tables), and let's say I can't use stored functions or procedures. How could I pass different tables to my query?

Furthermore, stored procedures/functions are not queries.

I just applied for an Elm job a month ago. It's not dead, it's just super niche.

I actively avoid it. The SQL languages have no default libraries for testing. Furthermore, SQL cannot be easily composed, or abstracted into modules, so there is no sense in testing it. It is not designed to be tested.

I will definitely use this. I've been looking for something like this to quickly share my ideas with other students.

Does anyone know if they've fixed the AI and ATC?

I distinctly remember in previous versions watching the AI aircraft bounce off the ground repeatedly in an attempt to reach an incorrect flight level given to them by the ATC. That kind of ruined the illusion for me.

It's a great sim, overall, I think it has a different set of priorities from MSFS, which is totally fine. I only wish I could have the best of both worlds.

Today, car ownership is a horrible value proposition. The car lobby has been all too successful in making America car-centric, which is a shame, because cars are great, but they aren't the only form of transportation out there.

I've been car-free for at least five years. To be fair, I live in a city that is friendly towards alternate transportation. I bike or use my own electric scooter. I plan ahead and book a rental when I know I'll need a car. So far it's been cheaper than owning, and has saved me thousands of dollars.

It's these sorts of shenanigans that I'm glad I don't have to deal with. Paying outrageous amounts for insurance is another. Not to mention parking headaches, the constant threat of high-speed, potentially fatal, accidents, or expensive maintenance.

My idea is you wouldn't have to cut and paste implementations like this. You would be able to just call the function with a column name and table name.

Yes but for 99% of your needs, aren't types going to help you? Sure I can write some types that don't terminate but in practice is this really an issue?

I think I see what you're saying, and in my idea I'm suggesting the same - sending the function(s) to the data.

I'm not familiar with Ecto, dplyr, or DBT, but I would love an ML-like language to replace SQL. I'm imagining being able to pass a table (or any table-oriented data, like a sub-query) to functions that would type-check columns and would return table-oriented or scalar data. I'm not sure if this is actually possible in practice, but one can dream.

For instance, a "top 10" function that could be re-used on any table (apologies for my pseudo types and code):

  selectTop10 : Column -> Table -> Table
  selectTop10 orderByColumn table =
    SQL.selectAllFrom table
    |> orderDescBy orderByColumn
    |> limit 10

  limit : Int -> Table -> Table
  limit n rows =
    SQL.limitBy n rows

  orderDescBy : Column -> Table -> Table
  orderDescBy orderByColumn rows =
    SQL.orderBy [orderByColumn] SQL.Ordering.Desc rows

This sounds like it might be playing a role. A while back someone posted an article about jet stream changes forcing commercial flights to land.

https://www.theweathernetwork.com/gh/news/article/stronger-j...

"Software testing doesn't work".. and "No matter how hard we try, it just sucks." then the next sub-heading: "I want simpler testing".

Okay, well, you just said it doesn't work, but you still want (simpler) testing?

I created a little DIY web-based dashboard that displays on my TV. I have a tiny bit of Python that runs on startup that turns on my TV via an API, then launches Chromium in kiosk mode and loads my webpage written in Elm.

I have nicely tiled widgets with CSS grid that displays real-time bus arrivals and current hourly weather forecast. I'm going to add live streams from my IP cameras around my place. Some kind of calendar widget would be nice too, to remind me of important events at a glance.

I think people care more about correctness, in general. I think we used to just be happy that code worked at all.

Okay, great. You are a maintenance programmer. You have a 1000-line program all in one file. You need to update the e-mail functionality of this program. You aren't following a stack trace or following a particular code path. There are 15 or 16 different e-mail related functions. How do you find the e-mail function you need to update? Do you memorize line numbers? Use regex search? Do you have vim marks setup?

Jumping around is the nature of code in general, whether its in a 1000-line file or split up amongst multiple files.

For a maintenance programmer, they may already understand how everything works. They aren't following a particular code path, necessarily. Maybe they're working on a new feature and they need to re-familiarize themselves with previous chapters. It that case, it's nice to jump to a file that concerns itself with things grouped together.

I could see this working with vim folding. That's an interesting approach. I never really used folding in IDEs.

> I find single file dense leetcode style code easier to understand and follow the flow. Algorithmic code I can reason around. A large mature codebase is far harder to get to know.

I genuinely can't tell if you're being serious or not. If you are, do you also like to read books written as one giant chapter? Or entire chapters as one giant paragraph?

Yeah, but without the objects.

I find SQL harder to work with because I'm used to reading and writing functions - functions that have explicit parameters with (hopefully) explicit types, and explicit return types.

So I was hoping PRQL might have some sugar like that.

It'd be nicer for my brain if I could treat any select like a function that transforms a set. Instead, even with PRQL, I'm stuck examining source tables and fully understanding them before being able to understand the query.