spoiler

13 ms·

31.
by spoiler 6mo ago
Most of the transfors you describe are still unfortunately destructive (ie the only way to go back is to undo). I'm not an expert on this, but I think the only way this could be key framed would be to take snapshots of the pixels and i
32.
by spoiler 6mo ago
No horse in this race, but your phrasing seems a bit weird, honestly... If reduced, your comments read as: "You don't know about X? Well, at least I know about X and Y..." Doesn't seemed like a good faith comment to me e
33.
by spoiler 6mo ago
I don't know why you have to qualify your sentence with "think carefully before you respond" it makes it seem like you're setting up some rhetoric trap... But I'll assume it's in good faith? Anyway... I don&#x2
34.
by spoiler 6mo ago
If AI writes a for loop the same way you would... Does it automatically mean the code is bad because you—or someone you approve of—didn't write it? What is the actual argument being made here? All code has trade offs, does AI make a ba
35.
by spoiler 6mo ago
The PR touched a lot of internals, including module code and mirrors the fs APIs. So, yes it was big, but the commit history was largely clean and followed a development story, and it was tested. The code quality was decent too. I didn&#x27
36.
by spoiler 6mo ago
But it's a reimplementation... So it's new code, their code. Can't they license it? Only the project name and the API surface remained similar
37.
by spoiler 7mo ago
Oh right, I know what you mean now. I was thinking more along the lines of the QueyBuilder API (and you can write extensions traits to make things more ergonomic). But yeah, some of their APIs work only/best with static strings. There
38.
by spoiler 7mo ago
They have been maintaining the project for years. It's not like some Joe Random with ChatGPT randomly entered the scene
39.
by spoiler 7mo ago
Let us also remember that certain architectural changes need to happen over a period of planned refractors. Nobody wants to read a 5000 line shotgun-blast looking diff
40.
by spoiler 7mo ago
Ok since this is not really answered... Hypothetically, If I'm a maintainer of this project. I decided I hate the implementation, it's naive, horrible performance, weird edge cases. I'm wiser today than 3 years ago. I rewrite
41.
by spoiler 7mo ago
Which is what happened here? The maintainers did a rewrite, apparently, but it's not enough!
42.
by spoiler 7mo ago
I think it's just the GPL family of licenses that tend tend to cause most problems. I appreciate their intent, but the outcome often leaves a lot to be desired.
43.
by spoiler 7mo ago
So effective, LGPL means you freely give all copyright for your work to the license holder? Even if the license holder has moved on from the project? What if I decide to make a JS or Rust implementation of this project and use it as inspira
44.
by spoiler 7mo ago
That whole clean room argument makes no sense. Project changed governance and was significantly refactored or reimplemented... I think the maintainers deserve to call it their own. Original-pre MIT release can stay LGPL. I don't think
45.
by spoiler 7mo ago
They didn't make them hard by design, I think, it's just the limitations of the current API and prioritisation. Dynamic queries are possible, just not trivial
46.
by spoiler 7mo ago
There's lots of things you could do. Imagine you're making a group chat bot (way more difficult than a 1-1 chat) where people can play social games by giving the LLM game rules. You can have an agent that only manages game state u
47.
by spoiler 8mo ago
While (I think) I agree with you on the facts here, I don't think this type of dismissive comments are that useful either. Can you give the replyee some pointers, for example? Link to articles or studies that show a different view?
48.
by spoiler 8mo ago
I mean stuff like adding `display: block` on the parent and `flex: 1` on a child element. Clearly a copy-pasting leftover because someone or whatnot, but then you're debugging a layout issue and you're wondering "but why is t
49.
by spoiler 8mo ago
> and nobody knows what is going on there. For what its worth, I had the same experience with Tailwind. I regularly see classes that don't have an meaningful outcome. I don't think the problem is Tailwind or CSS (well, I guess
50.
by spoiler 8mo ago
I don't mind the dialogue, but if we're taking about the same author, some of the content gets diminished by the meandering waffling. I realise it's a stylistic choice but there's been a few posts where I felt tired af
51.
by spoiler 8mo ago
I think one of those pedagogical half-truths useful for onboarding people onto an idea across different languages or getting parts of a point across, and they cover some similar use-cases. It's a bit like saying JavaScript's pro
52.
by spoiler 9mo ago
I think the barrier to entry with Rust is lower than C++. Like was way lower... And I've been writing C++ for way long than Rust, so I'm probably a bit biased
53.
by spoiler 9mo ago
I found their comment hilarious... I can't tell if it's satire or not. There's just too much going on at the same time for this not to be trolling lol
54.
by spoiler 9mo ago
Var wasn't "a mistake", and there's still (albeit niche) use cases where var makes sense. But for most cases, you do want to write a let/const declaration, even though they're not "free" technically.
55.
by spoiler 9mo ago
You're saying "force into this and that" like there's some evil omnipotent entity compelling people to write Rust against their own free will lol. What do you mean by forced? People enjoy writing Rust, so hence it's
56.
by spoiler 9mo ago
At the end of the day, we're all useful idiots at some point in our lives. I'm someone who leans more on the freedom/libertarian side and dislike what's happening in the EU. But on the other hand, I do think someone type
57.
by spoiler 9mo ago
I think they have some good points (having a deep understanding of tools you use), but I think the path they take achieve those results is misguided. A stupid example off the top of my head: I use VSCode and often I'll use the integr
58.
by spoiler 9mo ago
I'm a bit on the fence about this. If someone buys a TV (y'know, a device that's supposed to reproduce sound and moving pictures), it should at least be decent at both. But if people want a high-end 5.1/7.1/whatever
59.
by spoiler 9mo ago
The problem is multi-faceted. There was a YouTube video from a few years ago that explains this[1]. But, I kind of empathise with you; I and some friends also have this issue sometimes when watching things. [1]: https://www.youtu
60.
by spoiler 9mo ago
Not the author, but it seems to be only stylistic

More ›