342 karma · joined November 9, 2010
That's fine and all, but I want to work with craftsmen. People who give a shit about their trade, love their tools and relish in the oportunity to learn something that will help them do their job better. I wouldn't hire you.
Having a single atomic commit to "add feature x" is a lots cleaner when you're git blame'ing then git show'ing the commit, as you get to see the whole picture, instead of a log message like "fixing typo" and a 1 character diff.
That said, this should definitely be done off on a branch, and there's no reason not to have multiple useful commits on a branch merged in as such, but trashy typo/forgot to add X style commits are completely worthless to someone looking back at history
I forced my self to sit through 6 hours of the wire before I declared it mind numbingly dull and realized I wasn't going to get what others were getting out of it, but I've loved pretty much all of breaking bad.
It's ok to accept that it's not for you, even if a lot of people claim its the best show ever
>Python is much more mainstream than vimscript, yes, but there are still people who don't know python and don't want to learn it. Learning python for them isn't very different from learning vimscript.
You've quite obviously never tried to code anything in vimscript, have an axe to grind with Python, or are Tim Pope. Vimscript is a horrible abomination that's painful to do just about anything in. Python is far, far superior.
(Vim lover and Ruby guy here, but I'd pick just about any language over vimscript)
Say some mythical unbreakable hash algorithm comes along that's O(1) and you decide you want to move to it, you're forever going to have to drag along these terabytes of junk hashes as you're entire userbase wont log in (giving you the opertunity to change how their password is stored) and since you can't tell the noise from the signal you'll forever have that enormous table of hashes from that time you tried to be extra clever.
I'll leave crypto to the experts :)
Also, your "more technical" definition is off by a long shot; people have been using 100-125 DPI screens for years, that's 100+ and it's not what would pass for a retina display unless it was 40" across and you sat at TV viewing distances away. Retina is being used in the generic sense to say "2X the DPI you're used too", or 250+ DPI for the current examples available. But even that DPI measurement is flexible because it's related to viewing distance.
So rather than stretching for generic terms that dont actually make it any clearer what you're describing, lets just stick with "retina" until we really have a better term :)