It runs in browsers. It… isn’t poop? I don’t know. I’m all out of ideas.
It runs in browsers. It… isn’t poop? I don’t know. I’m all out of ideas.
This happens to me more than I care to admit. I told a coworker about a Gitlab CI issue that I’d seen a few years back and hadn’t had any action. I looked up the link to share it. Me; I opened it. Brain failing me, I had forgotten it was my issue.
I guess I’m just lucky, but I’ve gotten nothing but thoughtful support on Arch forums and Stackoverflow. If you read the article How do I ask a good question?, it works very well. It seems harsh but coming with poorly thought out questions without debugging details makes it impossible to help.
PascalCase
I don’t disagree. I’m just saying the distribution of workload has an impact on what looks a good idea or too hard.
Because it changes the risk benefit profile of the choice. Imagine that your backend is 70k hours of work and your interface is 1k hours. Managing two interfaces isn’t going to seem like nearly as big an ask so other variables may get a higher weight. Of course those numbers are contrived for the sake of explanation, but if you still don’t think there are any circumstances in which others may value the benefits of native applications over cross platform applications, that’s fine. My point is simply that it may not seem like the trouble of managing two frontends is as insurmountable as you may think.
But I have a hard time believing you don’t think it is possible that there are any situations where one might reasonably believe it worth it.
Sure. Bitwarden provides its own backend. So that backend represents some portion of their code base. In the case of Voyager, Lemmy provides the backend. So that backend isn’t a portion of your code. So Voyager is 100% frontend. Bitwarden is < 100% frontend.
Recognizing you as a PWA developer; and a damn fine one, I get your take. But surely you are aware there are limitations to using PWA’s or other cross platform libraries. Sometimes maintaining multiple UI’s is the right choice. Especially if very little of your code is actually the front end. For you, Voyager is pretty much 100% front end, so that’s 100% of your code. But for Bitwarden, the interface is a much smaller proportion.
While the subjective assessment that quote handling in yaml is worse than bash is understandable, it is really just two of many many cases where quotes complicate things. And for a pretty good reason. They are used to isolate strings in many languages, even prose. They, therefore, always get special handling in lexical analysis. Understanding which languages use single quotes, double quotes, backticks, heredocs, etc and when to use them is really just part of the game or the struggle I guess.
Damn right. And once it compiles… it works.
That sounds like a skill issue. Something isn’t bad because you don’t understand it. Suggesting quoting is an issue for yaml is beyond the pale; it happens to be an issue everywhere.
I’m sure if this weren’t black and white it’d be some green on black z/OS goodness.
You shouldn’t waste time being scared. Look for a new job now.
Well… it’s a correct phone number. So that kind of undercuts your message.
edit: I’m actually a bit baffled by people downvoting this. That is the correct number given by both of those organizations. It isn’t some LLM hallucination.
Used vim since the mid 90’s, but switched to emacs at some point. It was wonderful for many years, but neovim has come so far that I switched back a few years ago. Could not be happier. The tools available for programmers these days are superb and neovim chief among them.
Markdown in the repository is a pretty good way to keep documentation in sync with the source.
The overlap between people that write C and people that write JavaScript is negligible.
It is supported through the entire Apple product line in recent versions.
Like with everything, context matters. Sometimes it can indicate poorly structured control flow, other times inefficient loop nesting. But many times it is just somebody’s preference for guard clauses. As long as the intent is clear, there are no efficiency problems, and it is possible to reach the fewest branches necessary, I see no issues.