lysdexic
@lysdexic@programming.dev
- Comment on Shape optimized spoolholder 7 months ago:
This shape certainly beats a triangle (…)
Nature loves triangles.
- Submitted 9 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 0 comments
- Comment on [deleted] 9 months ago:
Was this thing generated by a poorly trained LLM?
- Comment on [deleted] 9 months ago:
C syntax is simple, yes, but C semantics are not; there have been numerous attempts to quantify what percentage of C and C++ software bugs and/or security vulnerabilities are due to the lack of memory safety in these languages, and (…)
…and the bulk of these attempts don’t even consider onboarding basic static analysis tools to projects.
I think this comparison is disingenuous. Rust has static code analysis checks built into the compiler, while C compilers don’t. Yet, you can still add static code analysis checks to projects, and from my experience they do a pretty good job flagging everything ranging from Critical double-frees to newlines showing up where they shouldn’t. How come these tools are kept out of the equation?
- Comment on [deleted] 9 months ago:
C has always been (…)
I think you tried too hard to see patterns where there are none.
It’s way simpler than what you tried to make it out to be: C was one of the very first programming languages put together. It’s authors rushed to get a working compiler while using it to develop an operating system. In the 70s you did not had the benefit of leveraging half a century of UX, DX, or any X at all. The only X that was a part of the equation was the developers’ own personal experience.
Once C was made a reality, it stuck. Due to the importance of preserving backward compatibility, it stays mostly the same.
Rust was different. Rust was created after the world piled up science, technology, experience, and craftsmanship for half a century. Their authors had the benefit of a clean slate approach and insight onto what worked and didn’t worked before. They had the advantage of having a wealth of knowledge and insight being formed already before they started.
That’s it.
- Comment on Introducing OpenD 9 months ago:
It was supposed to be a better C without the bloat and madness of C++, right?
D was sold as a better C++, way back then when C++ was stuck with C++98. To be more clear, D promised to be C++ under active development. That was it’s selling point.
In the meantime C++ received 2 or 3 major updates, and thus D lost any claim to relevance.
- Comment on List of IP protocol numbers - Wikipedia 10 months ago:
I found that it was worth sharing this list of IP protocols because more often than not developers are only faced with two of them, TCP and UDP, but there are over a hundred of IP protocols, most of which are never discussed or see the light of day. One I find particularly interesting is UDP-lite.
- Submitted 10 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 2 comments
- Submitted 10 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 0 comments
- Comment on Why You Shouldn’t Use OFFSET and LIMIT For Your Pagination 11 months ago:
Having said this, I’d say that OFFSET+LIMIT should never be used, not because of performance concerns, but because it is fundamentally broken.
If you have rows being posted continuously into a table and you try to go through them with OFFSET+LIMIT pagination, the output from a pagination will not correspond to the table’s contents. Fo each row that is appended to the table, your next pagination will include a repeated element from the tail of the previous pagination request.
Things get even messier once you try to page back your history, as now both the tip and the tail of each page will be messed up.
Cursor+based navigation ensures these conflicts do not happen, and also have the nice trait of being easily cacheable.
- Comment on Why You Shouldn’t Use OFFSET and LIMIT For Your Pagination 11 months ago:
For the article-impaired,
Using OFFSET+LIMIT for pagination forces a full table scan, which in large databases is expensive.
The alternative proposed is a cursor+based navigation, which is ID+LIMIT and requires ID to be an orderable type with monotonically increasing value.
- Submitted 11 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 1 comment
- Comment on Kids — You Don’t Need Anyone’s Permission To Learn To Program 11 months ago:
You don’t need any of it, relevant experience is worth in the region of 5x-10x for every hiring manager I’ve known, and for myself.
The only time I had to brush up on data structures and algorithms is when I apply to job ads, and recruiters put up bullshit ladder-pulling trivia questions to pass to the next stage of a recruiting process. It’s astonishing how the usefulness of a whole body of knowledge is to feed gatekeepers with trivia questions.
- Comment on GitHub - couchbase/fleece: A super-fast, compact, JSON-equivalent binary data format 11 months ago:
"Appendable” seems like a positive spin on the (…)
I don’t think your take makes sense. It’s a write-only data structure which supports incremental changes. By design it tracks state and versioning. You can squash it if you’d like but others might see value in it.
- Comment on GitHub - couchbase/fleece: A super-fast, compact, JSON-equivalent binary data format 11 months ago:
I’d love to see benchmarks testing the two, and out of curiosity also including compressed JSON docs to take into account the impact of payload volume.
Nevertheless, I think there are two major features that differentiate protobuff and fleece, which are:
- fleece is implemented as an appendable data structure, which might open the door to some usages,
- protobuf supports more data types than the ones supported by JSON, which may be a good or bad thing depending on the perspective.
In the end, if the world survived with XML for so long, I’d guess we can live with minor gains just as easily.
- Submitted 11 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 17 comments
- Submitted 11 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 0 comments
- Introducing Wikifunctions: first Wikimedia project to launch in a decade creates new forms of knowledge – Wikimedia Foundationwikimediafoundation.org ↗Submitted 11 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 10 comments
- Comment on How do I convince my company to add tests for FE? 11 months ago:
We have a client which is MAD cause the project is riddled with bugs, but the solution somehow is paying more attention. Except that it clearly isn’t feasible to pay more attention when you have to check, recheck and check again the same thing over and over…
By definition, automated testing means paying more attention, and doing it so well that the process is automated.
They say it’s a waste cause you can’t catch UI (…)
Show them a working test that’s catching UI bugs. It’s hard to argue against facts.
- Comment on Backlash over fake female speakers shuts down developer conference 11 months ago:
I understand. I have to admit I felt a little dirty after pasting that text.
- Comment on Backlash over fake female speakers shuts down developer conference 11 months ago:
(…) it was "because the organizer wants big names and it probably seemed like an easy way to address their diversity concerns.
Wouldn’t it be easier to, say, invite real people to deliver real talks? How exactly is it easier to spend multiple years maintaining sock puppet accounts than simply sporadically extend an invitation to someone?
- Comment on My charger wouldn't fit D-batteries, so I made an adapter. Printables link, with F3D file, inside 11 months ago:
why not
just buy a proper chargerwaste $50 ? - Comment on My charger wouldn't fit D-batteries, so I made an adapter. Printables link, with F3D file, inside 11 months ago:
I love the idea of being able to fit 4 big D’s
I’m more interested in knowing whether the charger actually supports that type of usage.
- Comment on Backlash over fake female speakers shuts down developer conference 11 months ago:
Eduards Sizovs, the DevTernity organizer accused of making up fake female speakers, felt it was the right PR move to post this message on Twitter:
twitter.com/eduardsi/status/1728447955122921745
So I’ve been called out (and canceled?) by listing a person on my conference’s website (who never actually made it to the final program). JUST A RANDOM PERSON ON THE CONFERENCE WEBSITE canceled all the good work I’ve been doing for 15+ years. All focus on that.
I said it was a mistake, a bug that turned out to be a feature. I even fixed that on my website! We’re cool? Nooooo, we want blood! Let’s cancel this SINNER!
The amount of hate and lynching I keep receiving is as if I would have scammed or killed someone. But I won’t defend myself because I don’t feel guilty. I did nothing terrible that I need to apologize for. The conference has always delivered on its promise. It’s an awesome, inclusive, event. And yes, I like Uncle Bob’s talks. They’re damn good.
When the mob comes for you, you’re alone. So, let it be. I’ll keep doing a great conference. With all speakers, half the speakers, or I’ll be speaking alone on all tracks and lose my voice. But the event will be a blast. Like always. I’ll die while doing great work. But the mob won’t kill me.
I don’t think that tone-deaf is the right word for this.
- Comment on Backlash over fake female speakers shuts down developer conference 11 months ago:
From the article:
“To spell it out why this conference generated fake women speakers,” Orosz alleges, it was “because the organizer wants big names and it probably seemed like an easy way to address their diversity concerns. Incredibly lazy.”
How hard is it for these organizers to actually reach out to women developers and extend an invite to talk about any topic they are interested in? In the very least, there are tons of high-profile bloggers who are vocal about things and stuff. Even though women are severely outnumbered, you almost need to go way out of your way to avoid actually extending an invite to a woman in the field.
- Comment on GitHub: Can no longer search code without being logged in 11 months ago:
You used the wrong search bar, you just used the one for the file list.
The fact that one of the excuses for GitHub search results being subpar is that there is a right and a wrong search bar is already telling.
- Comment on GitHub: Can no longer search code without being logged in 11 months ago:
must have been a half ass attempt
How hard do you need to try to use a feature for it to be considered decent? Do you expect something as basic as a search to put up a fight?
- Comment on GitHub: Can no longer search code without being logged in 11 months ago:
The biggest news to me is that GitHub allows users to search code. Every single time I tried to search something in GitHub, search results were next to completely useless, and always a sure-fire waste of time and effort.
There’s hope, I guess.
- Submitted 11 months ago to programming@programming.dev | 2 comments
- Comment on Is there a place where you can request code reviews on opensource software? 11 months ago: