incog-neato

I agree that's the most cumbersome phrase. But I think the difficulty people are perceiving here is more in the grammar being difficult to parse rather than in the vocabulary being florid.

Some oil places just straight up tell you a lower number even when the owner's manual of the car says a higher one. I just go with what the manual says, rather than some random Jiffy Lube employee.

"At my highest peak" is meaningless to apply to a running total. It must be some period of time. A year would be implied, given the context of the conversation.

This is what I was looking for: https://github.com/aeickhoff/compact

Cool containers.

Can you explain something about "Special recursively-compact containers"? I couldn't find any search hits for the phrase.

Is there any real momentum for any kind of change at the US Federal level? Do politicians talk to you? What's the buzz?

"Left" and "Right" are nearly meaningless when people can have stances on an issue-by-issue basis. As someone who has important disagreements with both big US parties, some would call me a moderate, and I feel disenfranchised by the current system, which doesn't let me pick the person whom I agree with most.

I think this would have a much more dramatic benefit toward US politics than the elimination of the electoral college, adding new US states, or fighting gerrymandering would.

Please tone down the language here. I'm not for hostility against people with disabilities.

However, keep in mind this is a small fraction of people and does not justify single-use plastics. There's more discussion of alternative materials in other branches of this post.

When it's not possible to sit down and enjoy your meal outside of the car, which I understand happens, then bamboo cutlery may be offered.

At some point the problem will become large enough that the UN will have to step up and start imposing sanctions on polluters. But we can hardly take a stand against others without fixing our own problems.

Why not:

Fast food: metal cutlery at the restaurant that gets washed and reused.

Take away: your own cutlery at home.

The point of the borrow checker is that it's run at compile time rather than runtime. Putting something similar into the architecture necessarily implies a runtime check, which is similar to the idea of a smart pointer, which exists in Rust as well as other languages.

Do you blog much? I've been lurking here a lot and have seen your posts. Would be interested in long-form essays or the like on what you would like to see.

There are 2 things I dispute here:

1. I didn't say this affects branch diffing, but rather trawling through history on a single branch.

2. "self-appointed super-users [...] [who break everything]" is a strawman and borderline ad-hominem. If you follow the guidelines I put forth, there won't be any issues collaborating with others.

Also, as a general note, it's actually very difficult to completely destroy information that's been committed at some point. If you're really running into issues with this, don't let fear direct you away from enjoying the greatest features of git. Experiment! Keep trying. Read a good git book (https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2). And learn to use the reflog. Everything you've committed is backed up for a long time even if you've removed all named references to those commits.

This is overly broad dissuasion. `rebase` should not be used if the branch is already shared and built upon by others, but is completely harmless to use on a feature branch.

In fact, it produces cleaner feature branches for review. Tracking the trunk branch with merges into your feature branch makes for a lot of noisy commits and difficult history to read through when the time comes to diagnose a bug. Rebasing, on the other hand, allows you to neatly put all the changes from your branch (and only those changes) into one or a few neatly-packaged commits.