4 ms·
Argue the point, not the person. Look ma, no skimming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37647230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37647230
by mrkeen 1y ago
Argue the point, not the person.
Look ma, no skimming: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37647230 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37647230
- gf000 1y agoThere is not much to argue, when your point is based on a misunderstanding. > You nest transactional statements, not the calls to atomic. The happy-path for an atomic is that it will commit; it should be obvious a priori that something that commits cannot be in the codepath that can be rolled back. This makes absolutely no sense with my above correction.