deredede

5 ms·

1.
by deredede 3mo ago
I don't have that reading at all. The phrasing even seems (carefully?) chosen to avoid this interpretation: it's "Examples are many of the administrators [...]", not "Examples are the administrators [...]".
2.
by deredede 6mo ago
GitHub (still) allows you to edit files directly in the browser without using AI.
3.
by deredede 7mo ago
I know how to review code without looking at the corresponding assembly and have high confidence in the behavior of the final binary. I can't quite say the same for a prompt without looking at the generated code, even with temperature
4.
by deredede 7mo ago
I also do this. Random flags added to core tools are done with aliases, which do not affect the launched processes, not by shadowing them in ~/bin. Shadowing in ~/bin are for cases where a newer (compared to the system-wide versio
5.
by deredede 9mo ago
I like it. IIFEs always make me nervous because they look like they beg to be removed if you don't know why they are used. Using an explicit function such as `run` looks much more intentional, and provide a single intuitive place (the
6.
by deredede 9mo ago
You can send arbitrary commands, but they will be rejected unless you provide valid credentials first.
7.
by deredede 10mo ago
Not GP but I read "I'm fine with allocation failures" as "I'm OK with my program terminating if it can't allocate (but not for other errors)".
8.
by deredede 10mo ago
Not GP but bump allocation (OCaml's GC uses a bump allocator into the young heap) mitigates this somewhat, list nodes tend to be allocated near each other. It is worse than the guaranteed contiguous access patterns of a vector, but it&
9.
by deredede 1y ago
You can give honest, unbiased feedback without insulting either people or their work. Software engineering is a collaborative process, not an adversarial one.
10.
by deredede 1y ago
You should have a drop-down for selecting a tool profile next to the drop-down for model selection. Select "Minimal" for no tools. "New text thread" should also have no tools I believe. https://zed.dev/do
11.
by deredede 1y ago
I can think of plenty situations where you really want to use the dependency's types though. For instance the dependency provides some sort of data structure and you have one library that produces said data structure and a separate lib
12.
by deredede 1y ago
Alternative answer: both versions will be picked up. It's not always the correct solution, but sometimes it is. If I have a dependency that uses libUtil 2.0 and another that uses libUtil 3.0 but neither exposes types from libUtil exter
13.
by deredede 1y ago
It's not "all the transitive dependencies". It's only the transitive dependencies you need to explicitly specify a version for because the one that was specified by your direct dependency is not appropriate for X reason.
14.
by deredede 1y ago
Sure, I'm happy with locking the parts I need to lock. Why would I lock the parts I don't need to lock?
15.
by deredede 1y ago
What if libinsecure 0.2.1 is the version that introduces the vulnerability, do you still want your application to pick up the update? I think the better model is that your package manager let you do exactly what you want -- override libusef
16.
by deredede 1y ago
The article starts with this description of 2FA: > an electronic authentication method in which a user is granted access to a website or application only after successfully presenting two or more distinct types of evidence (or factors) t
17.
by deredede 1y ago
If people need "`expect` scripting and a few open source packages [to] automate it to be 1 factor", it is effectively 2 factor for 99.9% of the population. Also, if someone uses a password manager to store both the password and th
18.
by deredede 1y ago
Some people can't install arbitrary software on their employer's hardware.
19.
by deredede 1y ago
> It's not actually how code reviews are done by the people who wrote it. What do you mean by that? Even if you do review by emailing patchsets those are still managed locally using branches, to my knowledge.
20.
by deredede 1y ago
> This is excruciating in git if you ever need to make a fix to an earlier PR because you have to manually rebase every subsequent change. Spreading the word about `git rebase --update-refs` that will automatically update any branches th
21.
by deredede 1y ago
"Parse, don't validate" is a catchy way of saying "Instead of mixing data validation and data processing, ensure clean separation by first parsing 'input data' into 'valid data', and then only process
22.
by deredede 1y ago
> You need an email_or_error and a name_or_error, etc. You don't need that. A practical solution is a generic `error` type that you return (with a special value for "no error") and `name ` or `email ` output arguments that
23.
by deredede 1y ago
> E.g., requiring that a file have the correct MIME type, not be too large, and contain no EXIF metadata. "Parse, don't validate" doesn't mean that you must encode everything in the type system -- in fact I'd arg
24.
by deredede 1y ago
> The problem with convention is that no ten people do it the same way "Stuff that starts with one underscore is an internal implementation detail, use at your own risk" in Python is as close to a universal convention as you ca
25.
by deredede 1y ago
Maybe the project is a commentary on a post-truth world masquerading as a button.
26.
by deredede 1y ago
> At least TypeOK can be much more expressive than any type system. Can you clarify what you mean by that? Dependent types or more practically refinement types (à la F*) can embed arbitrary predicates.
27.
by deredede 1y ago
"Moving preconditions up" means moving the code that checks the precondition up. The precondition still needs to be documented (in the type system is ideal, with an assertion otherwise, in a comment if necessary) close to where
28.
by deredede 1y ago
> that is not used anywhere in daily life Does it matter? MM-DD-YYYY is used in America and makes DD-MM-YYYY ambiguous, but as far as I know nobody uses YYYY-DD-MM, so ISO8601 should be perfectly fine, especially if users are trained. Be
29.
by deredede 1y ago
> Modular implicits have been shelved indefinitely from what I understand, if that's what you're referring to. They have not — people are still working on it. There's been a paper at the OCaml Workshop at ICFP this year, a
30.
by deredede 1y ago
It was, but then they changed their mind apparently https://discuss.ocaml.org/t/owl-project-restructured/14226 Too early to tell what it will lead to. > Is Raven the successor to Owl? That's what I am wond

More ›