barumi

14 ms·

91.
by barumi 6y ago
> No, CoCs are meant to clearly state that bigotry is unacceptable. Oh really? This discussion is about someone that was persecuted and punished for violating a CoC. Do you see any bigotry involved in this story?
92.
by barumi 6y ago
It is not a take. It's an objective description of what a CoC is and how it is designed to be used. There is no way around it. At all. I'm surprised you feel the need to turn a blind eye to this fact. Let's put it differently
93.
by barumi 6y ago
> They don't have to be that way. They really have, because that's the sole reason they exist. It's like arguing that a oppressive totalitarian regime doesn't have to oppress their citizens. > (...) they can be too
94.
by barumi 6y ago
> but the piece itself seems pretty balanced and thoughtful The piece is not balanced of thoughtful. The piece is crafted to present the case in a way that's immune or resilient to typical and expectable attacks. It underlined the c
95.
by barumi 6y ago
> Using CoC's to backstab people is not going to end well. But that's their only usecase, isn't it? CoCs are just a convenient document aimed at helping out Cardinal Richelieus finding ways to hang you under the guise of b
96.
by barumi 6y ago
> Especially when the training has nothing to do with military matters (...) This assertion is patently false. The goal of the military is to force your will onto others while stopping others from imposing their own will onto you. You do
97.
by barumi 6y ago
> Linux package managers (that I'm aware of) tend to dislike keeping multiple versions of development headers around, though; They really don't. At most, those doing the packaging lack the insight to allow users to install sepa
98.
by barumi 6y ago
Among the available platforms, Windows is by far the less picky about libraries and project setup. You pretty much only need to dump all interface headers in any part of your file system, dump your libraries somewhere else, and then point y
99.
by barumi 6y ago
> CMake and qmake is not enough. Adding Ninja... Your comment makes no sense at all. Both cmake and qmake are competing build systems, and qmake already lost and was superceded by cmake. Cmake works as a high-level makefile generator, wh
100.
by barumi 6y ago
> Honestly that all seems to mostly derive from C/C++ issues, doesn't it? No, it's not. It's exclusively derived from the fact that there is no package manager. Python has a few package managers. Node.js also has pack
101.
by barumi 6y ago
The value of Docker is not packaging per se. It's like a linux installer: yeah it's great that they come bundled ina neat ISO image that you can burn/copy/run in place, but that's not it's value proposition. It
102.
by barumi 6y ago
> Your system package manager typically also sucks for keeping multiple versions/variants of libraries around They really don't. At most, what really sucks is the way some projects are bundled. Unfortunately the way Qt has been
103.
by barumi 6y ago
> QMake is old but functional, CMake is more up to date but a total pain if you use it irregularly. In my experience it's the exact opposite. Cmake can be a real treat to use, provided you follow the so-called modern cmake approach,
104.
by barumi 6y ago
> If you rely on your package manager, you are basically stuck with whatever was in the previous LTS of ubuntu when it was shipped. This is not exactly true. You are free to put together your company's PPA, and just package your stu
105.
by barumi 6y ago
> Are you actually a programmer? Why, yes I am. > You sound more like an academic with no real life experience on large software. Well, I do work as a software engineer for a FANG, so that does fit the bill I guess. > You do realiz
106.
by barumi 6y ago
> ... sort of. Last I checked, the Make features required by POSIX were very anemic. You're trying to move the goal post here. The question is not which obscure feature is made available only by a specific implementation of Make. Th
107.
by barumi 6y ago
> But linux filename basically allows any byte sequence except EOF and / (...) Could/should/would... Even though UNIX doesn't impose many restrictions on file names that doesn't mean it's in your best intere
108.
by barumi 6y ago
> Show me how you’d implement a basic MS Paint clone and we can talk! A MS Paint clone is one of those apps that fits rather nicely on a Clean Architecture. You have the domain model (raster image), you have the application layer (image
109.
by barumi 6y ago
"A non-peer-reviewed study" is quite telling from the start. The bar for peer reviewed studies is quite low, but for some reason the study's authors weren't too keen on having their work reviewed by insightful and knowle
110.
by barumi 6y ago
To be fair, gyp is quite awful. I mean, a low-level language to generate project files for a few IDEs from a definition file where IDE-specific settings had to be added anyway? While the source of truth is left out of the equation, renderin
111.
by barumi 6y ago
> There may be some warts right now but the community is attempting to address these warts. Some of Bazel's design problems do feel like the outcome of a poorly executed requirements gathering process. Last time I checked, it assume
112.
by barumi 6y ago
> Paths containing ':' are also fun. To be fair, anyone who uses reserved/special characters in file names is asking for trouble in pretty much any usage.
113.
by barumi 6y ago
In your personal opinion why do you believe that installed software is not available? Because make is indeed installed on all UNIX, otherwise they are not UNIX.
114.
by barumi 6y ago
> You are not wrong, but if the world where not full with even worse build systems it'd be a bit saying I prefer to drink from puddles because I find them wherever I go. That assertion is quite wrong. If you really want to go with t
115.
by barumi 6y ago
> If only more of the world used rc instead of bash, Make does not use bash. Make uses whatever shell is pointed to by the SHELL env variable. If you don't pass any, it defaults to sh. Meanwhile, you can use Python in a Makefile for
116.
by barumi 6y ago
> There's an even higher probability of Perl being installed You're showing your ignorance there, champ. Make is one of the utilities that's required by the UNIX specification,which means that each and every single UNIX or
117.
by barumi 6y ago
Does anyone feel that this is too little too late?
118.
by barumi 6y ago
> Examples: > https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uk-man-jailed-over-facebook-sta ... So a guy posted "grossly offensive" or "of an indecent, obscene or menacing character", and infuriated everyone ar
119.
by barumi 6y ago
> No, because the premise is open source projects which developers, skilled professionals, work on. You do understand that designers do have free will and a developer can't simply order one to work for free on someone else's ho
120.
by barumi 6y ago
> Simple answers might be open source contributors don’t respect the work designers do as much as other environments (...) Wouldn't a simpler explanation be that skilled professionals don't work on someone else's hobbies f

More ›