usrbinbash

13 ms·

391.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Implementation details are language features, because implementation details are the standard. Python programs that rely on the GIL are not "wrong". The problem here is: Implementation details are not guaranteed to be stable
392.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Maybe, but "de-facto" and "actual" are still not the same, and if I write code that relies on them being the same, then I have only myself to blame when my code breaks. e.g.; there are C-compilers that usually zero most
393.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
No it isn't. It's an implementation detail, and relying on those for functionality is a great way of getting ones code to break.
394.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> You're again comparing the best of then to the worst of now though. No, I am comparing what was common then to what's common now. Granted, the menu structure of apps back then was in large part common, because there was o
395.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Avoid technical jargon and use language familiar to your users instead. The problem with that: Such messages are rarely helpful in diagnosing and actually fixing the problem, which is the point of error messages in the first place. T
396.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> For errors, it's easy enough to show a friendly error message at the top with more technical details underneath if it could be useful. What exactly is the point of an error message being "friendly"? Does a sad cartoon fa
397.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> really think people take for granted how much better UIs do this stuff now because best practices have improved. We had these things figured out in the late 90s already. - Menus were single click, and hierarchially organised
398.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbon_(computing)#/media/File... Okay, please show me the categories in this picture, and the logic of their relation to one another. For example, the ribbon in the picture is u
399.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> but I personally think people really take for granted that the baseline of usability for many areas has hugely increased over the last 20 years. I disagree. What has happened, is that products that could get away with it, have hidden m
400.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Fifteen years later and I still can't fucking find anything Of course people can't. That ribbon was a shite idea 15 years ago, and still is. A textual menu is, by sheer necessity, hierarchical. Hierarchy imposes order. Text m
401.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Instead you ask what is needed and provide a restricted REST API. Happy to. Problem is, that API has to be built, and tested, and vetted, and maintained, and who's going to do all that work? Because I know a lot of software devs,
402.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> The real answer is "ok, that is a bad idea for XYZ reasons, what problem are you trying to solve? That's the answer that I give immediately after the "No." Look, I get what you are saying. I am not trying to keep pe
403.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Do you have a customer focus? Indeed I have a customer focus. My customers are the people and businesses who rely on the fact that the production servers run smoothly. And I serve their legitimate business needs, among other things, by
404.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> they are giving a service for the rest of the company That is very true. And part of that service is to ensure that things run smoothly, securely and according to industry standards. How well would an IT guy provide that service if he
405.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> the dysfunctional bureaucracy of IT I am not here to talk about management-bureaucracy, of which IT depts; same as all other branches one can find in established corporate culture, have more than enough. I am talking about the perceive
406.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> that the user should understand what's going on Sure he should. But design maxime of a lot of contemporary software does exactly the opposite: Hiding as much of the "icky techy stuff" from the user as possible. > One
407.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I'd be happy to put up a repo for them, if they ask . Problem is, they often don't. And not to make too big a deal out of it, but using github, gitlab or anything along these lines, is mostly free, not exactly rocket science, and
408.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I can find bad examples of how things work in basically every department I chose if I look long enough. Are there IT-Managed things that border on insanity? Oh yes. Are these a good excuse to build a shadow IT? No, they are not. Don't
409.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Unix Epoch with the string "Stardate: " prepended does the trick :D
410.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
People without a technical background could accept a browser that doesn't display an URL at all. Just put a nice big Button with the Google-Logo somewhere, which for many people is "The internet" and they are happy. And anyon
411.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> In fact, UTC will change its leap second logic much sooner than Unix time logic, so UTC logic will be more like Unix time. This. If anyone is interested in a source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-l
412.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
It applies to everything, everywhere. Overly complicated, architecture-astronaut code, that leans on frameworks for no good reason, is bad, no matter what part of the stack. And yes, this is true for the backend as well. There are people wh
413.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> First of all it’s not just an issue of maintaining the language itself, but all of the associated tooling as well. Which is part of the language core, and distributed alongside it. > Google could choose to prioritize their own needs
414.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> “Locality of behaviour” is such a poorly defined rule. And "separation of concerns" isn't? What should be separated? Along what lines? How do we determine these lines? When does it make sense to pull some concerns out in
415.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I wasn't aware of that, thanks :-)
416.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
I am very happily listening to UX thoughts from people who specialize in UX. What I am decidedly NOT happy with, is the frontend using as much, or even more, internal logic, magic, and build steps as the actual business logic. To put this a
417.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
The only thing a build step changes about CSS/JS resources of this kind, is a minimization of the libs...which is entirely achievable without building, by simply including the already-minimized version. I think what the article is abou
418.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> Exactly! So raise an EngineFailure exception and let the driver decide how to proceed. In the analogy, the car is the program. The ENTIRE program. It is the limit of the analogy. The car driving is the program running. The car no longe
419.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
Yes, I do expect that, and I will continue to do so, unless someone can show me a breakthrough in language modeling, that isn't just a big-data derived stochastic parrot. Being able to write code because I have seen lots of it, and kno
420.
by usrbinbash 3y ago
> They're just two different names for the same thing No, they are not. One is a function, the other is an operator. An operator has implicit meaning. I know with absolute certainty, that `+` is supposed to mean that 2 things are ad

More ›