billmcneale

5 ms·

1.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> if (customer?.Profile is not null) >{ > // Null-coalescing (??) > customer.Profile.Avatar = request.Avatar ?? "./default-avatar.jpg"; >} Isn't this over engineered? Why not allow the ass
2.
by billmcneale 1y ago
Why is Zig so inconsistent in its syntax? We see: pub fn implBy Camel case (impl_obj: anytype) Snake case v_setLevel Mix of camel case and snake case anyopaque whatever that is
3.
by billmcneale 1y ago
Yeah, hard to see how better this is than Gradle. If anything, it's worse by the mere fact this is Scala, but it's really so incredibly verbose to accomplish basic tasks such as upload to Sonatype.
4.
by billmcneale 1y ago
I am convinced! Which god should I believe in, though? There are so many. And what if I pick the wrong god?
5.
by billmcneale 1y ago
Not everyone has your luxury of being able to choose their tools.
6.
by billmcneale 1y ago
But the whole promise of monads is precisely that they are a type that can compose. It basically allows you to pipe successive function calls returning different types by lifting these types into a monad. Don't get me wrong, that promi
7.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> That's why the pattern is so useful in the first place How useful, really? Monads don't even universally compose, which is what most people sell the concept for.
8.
by billmcneale 1y ago
COM is exactly what OP was talking about. Apps can expose endpoints that can be listed, and external processes can call these endpoints.
9.
by billmcneale 1y ago
Microsoft introduced this in Windows in 1993, it's called COM and is still in (heavy) use today. It basically powers all inter communication in Windows.
10.
by billmcneale 1y ago
The question is not whether it can be done (of course it can) but rather, what is the more elegant approach. There is plenty of evidence that OOP provides some flexible, extensible, and intuitive ways to design GUI libraries. I have persona
11.
by billmcneale 1y ago
A lot of that verbiage is absurd exaggerations and most of these things never became true. > Being in denial about this isn't an excuse for these problems. I'm not in denial, I know exactly what Denuvo entails. Whenever I buy a
12.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> I don't believe that "whenever [I'm] playing and enjoying a game" it was "most likely" created thanks to Denuvo I never made that claim, please reread what I wrote, but here is my point again. When you pl
13.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> Are you going to be OK with that just because it's some corpo doing it and not the government? If I willingly let them in my home and I knew they were going to do that? I don't really have the option to complain, do I? Your
14.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> by its mere definition it's always aimed against the user, therefore it's always an anti-feature. Describing it as "anti user" is theoretically correct but practically incorrect. It's true that it might preven
15.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> it's an anti-user feature by definition. That's an extremely naive take that shows some stark ignorance of the tech and market forces at work. From a tech standpoint, Denuvo negatively impacting performance has been debunked
16.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> Worth noting that denuvo causes a lot of hitching, massive load time increases and overall performance problems. There is pretty much zero evidence that this is true and some credible evidence that it is untrue. For example, plenty of
17.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> If a function fails, then you need to handle its failure And this is exactly where Go fails, because it allows you to completely ignore the error, which will lead to a crash. I'm a bit baffled that you correctly identified that
18.
by billmcneale 1y ago
These are some pretty arbitrary rules without much justification, quite reminiscent of the Clean Code fad.
19.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> dynamic language like Kotlin and Clojure, Kotlin is not a dynamic language, it's statically typed, just like Java.
20.
by billmcneale 1y ago
> Our mission is to take this code and make it readable: Anyone else finding some irony in the fact that the provided code is unreadable not because of its structure but because of the highlight colors?
21.
by billmcneale 1y ago
How is this different from creating a folder of links on my Bookmarks bar and selecting "Open all"?
22.
by billmcneale 1y ago
That's not assembly language, that's a less powerful version of C. If you're going this route, you might as well learn LLVM.
23.
by billmcneale 2y ago
> they have proven already that other's interests do not matter for them I disagree. Their interests matter greatly to them, they are just totally unequipped to understand who, and what, they are voting for.
24.
by billmcneale 2y ago
Yes, you gain testability. If your global state contains something that runs in prod but should not run in a testing environment (e.g. a database connection), your global variable based code is now untestable. Dependency Injection is popula
25.
by billmcneale 2y ago
In 2025, sure. Back when that calculator came out, this kind of saving was probably worth it.
26.
by billmcneale 2y ago
Yes, exactly. If you have 1 + (2 * 3 + (4 / 5)) The smallest key count with RPN is to start entering the deepest expression first: 4 ^ 5 / 2 ^ 3 * + 1 + You can type it left to right but it takes more keys and is probably on par w
27.
by billmcneale 2y ago
The keyboard on this calculator has the number of keys reduced to the minimum by the use of only three function keys, including a combined "x÷" key. Here, pressing "x÷" gives the multiplication function if "+="
28.
by billmcneale 2y ago
I used to be in love with RPN and owned multiple HP calculators (HP-41, HP-15) but RPN is cheating by offloading effort on the user. When you see a complicated, parenthesized expression, it's up to you to figure out the deepest express
29.
by billmcneale 2y ago
> Although ML people are just going to keep on misusing the word "tensor" to refer to a mere multidimensional array. Could you elaborate on the difference? I was under the impression that beyond the fact that arrays are a comp
30.
by billmcneale 2y ago
tl;dr: OP was using a Lisp and they were looking for a different Lisp. Probably the only reason why anyone would ever pick Common Lisp for a new project in 2025.

More ›