foo101

The trailer link on this page is very impressive. Here is the direct link to the trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReDDgFfWlS4

Thanks for the reply.I have a follow up question about the "operator pending mode". I understand you didn't know it was a thing. But say, you press 'd' in normal mode because you want to delete a line and then you change your mind, what do you do it cancel the pressed 'd'?

I know I just rephrased the "operator pending mode" in a more elaborate manner but I am curious how you handle this case? Do you press Esc? Or do you go ahead with the delete anyway and then press 'u' to undo the delete? Or do you have some other technique to cancel the delete operator pending?

Do you realize that this is open source and being offered to you as a gift? The license allows you to compile this tool with whatever compiler and flags you want. Please do that if you care about the optimizations. But please do not post dismissive comments when someone is putting themselves in a vulnerable position willingly by sharing their hard work for free with the community. If you have feedback to offer, do it constructively with kindness and acceptance, not with reproach and snide.

Stop! Just stop this! This is a "Show HN" post. Someone out there is trying to develop something useful and share it with the community. By doing so, the author is willingly putting themselves in a vulnerable position where the author's work could be examined critically. The project is also open source. Don't forget that it means that it is being given to you as a gift!

If you think this needs more testing, do it yourself. The author of this project does not owe you any testing. If the Makefile works for author, that's good enough for the author. If it isn't good enough for you, fix it. The license allows you to do that. Then consider being nice and giving that fix back to the community with a pull request.

Don't come here on your high horse and post vile comments on something that is being shared with you as a gift! If you come here with your pull requests, code, or even better--your own projects, you would be welcome!

I do this. But then I find that whenever I have to help someone out at work in their Macbook, I have to go through the hassle of first mapping Caps Lock to Escape on their Mac, do the work, then remember to unmap it again after the helping session is over. Is there any good way to automate this workflow for helping other people on others' Mac?

> inoremap jj <Esc>

That takes care of returning from insert mode to normal mode. What do you do for returning from other modes (operator pending mode, visual mode, etc.) to normal mode? I don't think it is possible to reliably reproduce all of the <Escape> in all the modes with remaps.

Is it? djk in normal mode would delete the current line and move the cursor one line up!

d<Escape> on the other hand would cancel the operator-pending mode for delete and do nothing.

There is no guarantee offered by the standard that you must be able to read and write to memory allocated by malloc(). What if the memory was allocated and just a split second later, the physical RAM burnt out due to overheating? How is the standard supposed to guarantee reading and writing to it then?

Both the hardware burning after memory allocation and lack of availability of physical memory after memory allocation are outside the scope of the standard. The standard says nothing about them. A C program can fail in these scenarios without violating the standard.

I tried the idea of using `jk` in the past and found that it surely cannot be a perfect replacement of Escape.

Say I perform these mappings:

  :noremap jk <Esc>
  :inoremap jk <Esc>

Now granted, pressing `jk` in insert mode escapes me to normal mode. But many use cases that work with the Escape key do not work with `jk` anymore.

For example, try:

  :ab hn Hacker News

Now type `hn` in insert mode and press Escape, it would expand to `Hacker News` like it should. But then type `hn` in insert mode and press `jk`, it does not expand to `Hacker News`.

Your original critique from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19161365 said this:

> Yes, C doesn't force you to use braces here, but this is really overdoing it.

It said nothing about nesting level depth. The question of nesting level appeared later in a child comment of yours which I believe is moving the goalposts. Sorry, I didn't make this clear in my previous comment.

Having said that, I do agree with you that braces are helpful. But then, we should all decide the pants policy in our own homes: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/nodejs/MWaivVTirPY/0pnRjKsgg...

The second example does lack braces in two nested 'if' statements. Did you ignore that? Granted it is not three levels deep and granted there is a brace in the 'else' part but that's no reason to ignore the fact that K&R does in fact omit the braces for nested 'if-else' statements.

Demanding now that the nesting has to be less than three levels deep to omit braces is just moving the goalposts.

How were the illustrations in this post created?

How can we show that real numbers form a vector space over rational numbers? I mean a real number like 2 is just a real number. How is it also possibly a vector? Where is the origin and where does this vector point to?

Why would you make such an unfounded assumption and ask a loaded question?

What is "Google+ for consumers"? Is it different from the Google+ a regular user like me?

> The investigation also found that He’s experiment ran counter to national regulations forbidding people with HIV from using assisted reproduction — an allegation reported for the first time in the Xinhua article.

What is the rationale behind this regulation? Is it that the baby is likely to be infected with HIV or is there some other reason?

> Algorithmic ability has no correlation to the ability to write maintainable code, though.

This is not true in my experience. I usually see a strong correlation between algorithmic ability and writing maintainable code. At various organizations I have worked for, I have seen that the ones with strong algorithm skills also happen to be critical thinkers who put a lot of emphasis on simple, elegant, and robust design and code.

So I am very surprised to know that this correlation I observe may not be true in general. How did you come to this conclusion?

> If one has great work ethics, the connection to the teacher doesn't really matter because one would learn regardless

If one has great work ethics, there is a possibility that the student with connect better with the teacher. Do you have concrete references that prove that under the condition that the teacher has great work ethics, the effectiveness of learning is independent of connection to the teacher. Equivalently, do you have references that show that the effectiveness of learning is more or less the same in both of these cases: (1) Teacher has great work ethics and students have better connection to the teacher (2) Teacher has great work ethics and the students have poorer connection to the teacher.

> fear can have a really positive effect when it comes to learning something

You seem to be presenting a personal anecdote that opposes a peer-reviewed study of Patricia K. Kuhl from University of Washington but you do not present any evidence to corroborate your claim. It's great that fear worked out well for your class but without supporting evidence for it, I doubt if this would work for the majority. I would be wary of using fear as a tool while teaching.

Is this sentence incomplete or am I missing the context of the word "compelling" here?

> be able to write up a compelling

Can someone clarify what this means?

Same question as cjohnson318's.

What are some low hanging fruits in mathematics? I have been looking for them for a few years now and have found none.

Please don't do this here. Comments like this degrade the reading experience on HN. This is why you are getting downvoted. The HN crowd generally prefers more substantive comments and discourages low effort humor.

> It's impossible for a site developer to know how much space to allocate to their page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design

This concept is popular for more than 10 years now. Many websites do it with something as simple as

  article { max-width: 60em }

> It's completely unsurprising to me that I can resize the window into a state where the website becomes silly. I just don't do that.

Take Twitter for web. Reduce the browser to something like 60% or 70% of the screen width. The <div><p>...</p></div> elements containing the tweets are chopped off on the right side. It disrupts my reading experience due to minor resizing. This is most of the web today.

> Resizing a window is trivial, it's not that you can't, it's that you won't.

That's true. I don't want to be resizing my browser up and down for every good and bad website.

I have taken it a step further.

I started with Blogger (blogspot), then Medium, then Jekyll, then Hugo. Even with self hosted Jekyll/Hugo, I never felt comfortable about the tooling dictating how my directory structure should be.

Now I have my own static site generator written in Python. It is based on https://github.com/sunainapai/makesite that was posted to HN sometime back.

What I like about generating my blog with pure Python is that I can control every aspect of my blog just the way I want it.

I have found Reddit to be a very hostile place to post content. You post your blog post. Regardless of how much hard work you put into your content, the first few comments on Reddit are going to be a snarky one that attacks some trivial point and adds nothing to the discussion. I don't know why people do that.

HN, on the other hand, feels like a more matured community. Any other such matured communities where one can feel comfortable about posting their blog posts?

I know people keep saying this, but resizing the browser is not really a viable solution with today's messed up web. Sure, I can resize the browser for this blog using full width lines but then I have to resize my browser again for another website because the other website chooses to waste half of the horizontal real estate with meaningless stuff. As a user, I can't keep resizing the browser for every site I visit.

Most of the popular online services have screwed up their interface.

I think it started with Digg. It was once a loved website. The screwed up the interface and everyone ran to Reddit.

Now Reddit has screwed up their interface too.

We all used to love Google for its simple and elegant web interfaces. Look at what a mess GMail is now.

If there is anything that more than 10 years of Web 2.0 teaches us, it is that once we host our content on another company's service, we are at the mercy of that company. They can take our content and serve it over absolute crap interface providing an absolute crap experience to our readers whenever they want to. They are never going to care about the presentation of the content the way the original author might. So I think it is time to take back control and host your own blogs. I know not everyone wants to buy a domain name, buy a VPS, set things up, and keep a blog running. And no, GitHub Pages, is not a solution. GitHub Pages is great today but if there is anything that more than 10 years of Web 2.0 teaches us, it is ... Do you see my point?

So as technologists, we need to think how we can make it easier so that anyone (from young kids to the suits type) can setup their blogs and publish content with ease. Any interesting solutions? Any takers?

Network with people directly via physical world and web meetings. It requires some time and monetary investment (building relationships and traveling to conferences), but once you have build a network of even 4 or 5 people who value your skills out of which at least one is offering you a gig, you are all set. You can now use this network to vouch for your skills, ethics, and expertise to get more gigs.

Sure, Upwork is much easier than this but with this ease comes this huge risk of your livelihood disappearing into thin air at the whims and fancies of Upwork.

Why are people still using Upwork? How many of these horror stories do we need to come across before people learn to ditch Upwork for good? Here was another horror story that I read sometime back: https://hackernoon.com/why-you-should-never-use-upwork-ever-... It has been two years since then!

Heck, everyone ditched Digg in a matter of weeks due to a UI redesign. How on the same earth are people still using Upwork despite issues that are for more serious where people's livelihoods are affected?

Proprietary software can and, in many cases, do have their source code accessible, so yes, Common Clause is as good as proprietary software, no more and no less.

> We already know that self proclaimed aficionados can’t tell the difference between cheap and expensive wine.

We can? That is very interesting. Is there some article or reference material about this where I can read more about it?