Dan42

6 ms·

1.
by Dan42 18d ago
It's an interesting tale of software spelunking and edge cases, but I was wondering about this: > Things like the uncompressed size and CRC-32 can be disregarded. If you compute a running crc32 then you could check for that value in
2.
by Dan42 1mo ago
I'm upvoting this just for the blast-from-the-past anachronistic hype intro. > With their capacity of 640 MiB (three times the storage of PC HDD at the time), CDs allowed enthusiasts to step into a world of multimedia, made of high-
3.
by Dan42 7mo ago
That article was clearly written by AI, based on data from 20 years ago.
4.
by Dan42 9mo ago
Yeah, it doesn't work with keyword arguments. In the playground I tried a simple keyword with default value, and it converted to the wrong thing, as if "someone" was a valid type. def greet(name: "someone"): S
5.
by Dan42 11mo ago
This is really cute and heartwarming. Back in the day, a lot of people including me reported feeling more comfortable in Ruby after one week than all their other languages with years of experience, as if Ruby just fits your mind like a glov
6.
by Dan42 11mo ago
Wow. You are me.
7.
by Dan42 1y ago
I see posts like this one pop up from time to time. I love it. Based on my 30y of exp that's also the workflow I converged on. It seems to me like every experienced and skilled developer is converging on this. jujutsu is entirely built
8.
by Dan42 1y ago
Actually you're right, it is an implementation detail. The original isn’t mistaken, it’s just showing the lo-to-hi partitioning pass rather than the from-both-ends version I had in mind when I implemented quicksort before. shame, sha
9.
by Dan42 1y ago
I'm pretty sure the swapping is a fundamental part of the quicksort algorithm, not a mere implementation detail. That's the reason quicksort is an in-place algorithm.
10.
by Dan42 1y ago
This is cool, but missing a LOT of details between steps 4 and 5, which is the meat of the quicksort. Actually, the first and last elements of step 4 would be swapped, which means the order depicted in step 5 is incorrect.
11.
by Dan42 1y ago
This article really resonated with me. I've been trying to teach this way of thinking to juniors, but with mixed results. They tend to just whack at their code until it stops crashing, while I can often spot logic errors in a minute of
12.
by Dan42 1y ago
Reading this, I couldn't help but think these guys really know where their towel is. The opposite of enshittification?
13.
by Dan42 1y ago
Beautiful. I had that exact computer model 30 years ago.
14.
by Dan42 1y ago
> Don't we have decades of research about the improvements in productivity and correctness brought by static type checking? Yes, we have decades of such research, and the aggregate result of all those studies is that no productivity
15.
by Dan42 2y ago
> This is incorrect, according to this comment from the Firefox implementer who delayed the feature. He intended the roll back to be temporary. [0] I see no such thing in the link you have there. #ref-6 starts with: > [6] On 01/1
16.
by Dan42 2y ago
No, please, just no. The idea of using PUT, DELETE, or PATCH here is entirely misguided. Maybe it was a good idea, but history has gone in a different direction so now it's irrelevant. About 20 years ago, Firefox attempted to add PUT a
17.
by Dan42 2y ago
grep has a --line-buffered option that does the job fine in most cases. Just set in your aliases grep='grep --line-buffered', that way you get the correct behavior when you tail logs piped to a sequence of greps, and you avoid the
18.
by Dan42 2y ago
I'm 47 and I also have never heard this in my life. So I don't think it's just a matter of younger generations.
19.
by Dan42 2y ago
An order of magnitude is a bit much. I'd say quick and dirty gets you 3 shots, while slow and beautiful gets you 1. And if you succeed, it means the result is dirty/ugly code that must be maintained forever.
20.
by Dan42 3y ago
It's the first time I hear "Mikado" but it's pretty much the commit policy I established for work, and we call it micro-commits. http://lucasr.org/2011/01/29/micro-commits/ https:&#x
21.
by Dan42 3y ago
I can't believe such satirical gold is getting downvoted.
22.
by Dan42 3y ago
Yep, this is pretty much what I've settled on myself. GET for read, POST for write. And a url made of a slash-terminated "resource" followed by an "action" verb. user 123 + edit = "/user/123/edit
23.
by Dan42 3y ago
Thank you for saying that, it save me the trouble of writing it. This apples-to-oranges comparison (strawman? motivated reasoning?) unfortunately makes me mistrust this entire article.
24.
by Dan42 3y ago
Fully agree. When the user selects a file via the file selection dialog, that automatically implies s/he has given permission to read that file. So the Flatpak libportal approach has really good UX. Having a second popup to grant acces
25.
by Dan42 3y ago
I wonder what would be the performance characteristics of using the top 2 bits to mark 63-bit integers. So 00xxx are positive integers and 11xxx are negative integers. That way all integer operations stay simple and you just need to check t
26.
by Dan42 3y ago
Oh, that's very close. And a Steve Yegge blog post fits the era I'm thinking about. I think what I read was less rambling, with a narrower topic, but it was very very close to this conservative/liberal duality.
27.
by Dan42 3y ago
That's interesting. A bit all over the place, but that's expected of C2 :-)
28.
by Dan42 3y ago
No. Web 1.0 was one-to-many publishing, the direct translation to the web of existing pre-web business models. Thus "1.0", the first iteration based on known/previous models. Web 2.0 was many-to-many publishing, user-generate
29.
by Dan42 3y ago
It's an interesting hypothesis. Unfortunately I see a bunch of people kneejerk to say "adblocking is good" or "ads are bad" when that's not really relevant to the question. But I don't think it's adbl
30.
Ask HN: “Enabling” vs. “Restricting” in Programming
6 points by Dan42 3y ago|5 comments

More ›