bipvanwinkle

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 3y ago

   Looks awesome, one of my frustrations with jq has always been that I can't see what data I'm going to be retrieving until I run it.
2. 2.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 5y ago

   Agreed. I don’t if it’s for everyone, but i love it. No commute, healthier food, access to a bed for a quick nap, and a nice office. 10/10 would do again.
3. 3.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 5y ago

   I’d love to know more about this too.
4. 4.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 5y ago

   I just convinced the company that i work for to do exactly this. We’re small so there isn’t a lot of extra cash lying around, but we just started with a low number and we’ll increase it as we go along.
5. 5.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 8y ago

   I'm likely guilty of being a naive technologist. I appreciate this different perspective.
6. 6.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 8y ago

   Ah, cool. Thanks for the explanation.
7. 7.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 8y ago

   What is k-anonymity?
8. 8.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 10y ago

   Although this is mostly true, it's not entirely true (at least in the house).
9. 9.▲
   by bipvanwinkle 10y ago

   I'll need to check out lenses. I've run in to a few annoying this working with records so far so I was hoping some progress was in the works.
10. 10.▲
    by bipvanwinkle 10y ago

    Out of curiosity what progress has been made in regards to improving the ergonomics of records in Haskell? Stephen references that an answer is in the works, but it looks like it has stalled out.
11. 11.▲
    by bipvanwinkle 10y ago

    I think it's worth pointing out though that idiomatic C is probably going to be more consistently performant. It seems common to run in to situations in Haskell where one change can cause 10X speedup, but I don't see that nearly a