cerved

18 ms·

241.
by cerved 4y ago
the post is not mobile friendly :(
242.
by cerved 4y ago
Yes. He's switched from LKML to TikTok
243.
by cerved 4y ago
I didn't do the math so can't comment on that. Just noting the claims of the apparent source, without any sort of agreement or disagreement.
244.
by cerved 4y ago
Well, I do, more or less. Whether it's a waste of time or not is dependent on how efficient you can do it, in my workflow it's efficient, and to which degree you can avoid waste as a consequence of a "messier" approach.
245.
by cerved 4y ago
The apparent source, AIER a think tank, claims it's a difference between a $5 and $13 big mac. If true, that would be noticed
246.
by cerved 4y ago
You can use cut, tr and sed https://stackoverflow.com/a/70614580/1507124 it's not full pretty, rather just newline delimits arrays. Incidentally, it's much faster than jq. Probably wouldn't use it f
247.
by cerved 4y ago
When I said destructive, I meant in the literal sense, in that it rewrites history. Don't get me wrong, I _often_ rebase, about a dozen times a day and it's been a core part of my workflow for 2 years. In that time I have learnt a
248.
by cerved 4y ago
I'd be happy to, this is (roughly) my git config. https://github.com/CervEdin/gut/blob/config/.gitconfig NB, that some are personal custom scripts, like git-branch-status, which I also publish in th
249.
by cerved 4y ago
as always, different circumstances can generate different results. In a merge, you solve conflicts once. Whereas in a rebase, those conflicts will turn into incremental conflicts. If the branch history is "tidy", with discrete, pu
250.
by cerved 4y ago
you can do this git rebase -r target source && git checkout target && git merge --no-ff target since what your asking for is not a merge, you'd have glue it together by yourself. Perhaps, add it as a script
251.
by cerved 4y ago
True, but at least you don't have to download on every checkout
252.
by cerved 4y ago
it's actually way easier to accidentally mess up a rebase, especially if rearranging commits. I can recommend git diff @{1} post rebase I alias it to d-
253.
by cerved 4y ago
All hail centralized version control, make life slow again!
254.
by cerved 4y ago
in my experience, rebase works great if the commits are structured and much more painful with lots of overlapping changes, say by continiusly doing _wip_ commits every hour
255.
by cerved 4y ago
rebase only require force push if you're rebasing something already pushed
256.
by cerved 4y ago
merge is the only way to reliable determine if a branch is merged ¯ \ _ ( ツ ) _ / ¯
257.
by cerved 4y ago
git rebase && git merge --no--ff
258.
by cerved 4y ago
you get the same, and often more, conflicts using rebase
259.
by cerved 4y ago
Rebasing / rerolling is completely fine if done right, no need to be overly zealous. But merges are often more elegant
260.
by cerved 4y ago
> it requires many force push in the branch Can't say I recommend this approach.
261.
by cerved 4y ago
merge, then resolve conflicts with rerere, undo the merge and rebase
262.
by cerved 4y ago
way easier to mess up a rebase
263.
by cerved 4y ago
the irony is the firings pulling eyeballs and interactions to Twitter, which increases load, which nobody works to handle anymore
264.
by cerved 4y ago
To be fair, he owns most of the place
265.
by cerved 4y ago
it's because of the algorithm, good UX and few, skippable ads
266.
by cerved 4y ago
True. You could implement that using an array of structs where each struct contains indexes of the array to link other structures. instead of memory pointers, since they are 8 bytes in 64-bit applications. This way you get the nice properti
267.
by cerved 4y ago
it's easier for me to fake then you to check
268.
by cerved 4y ago
That doesn't seem to make much sense to me. LL are useful in cases where you deal with changing lists, where you'd be forced to allocate and deallocate memory often. If you know before hand the exact or approximate size of the lis
269.
by cerved 4y ago
> This is obviously highly valuable for marketing Yes, all that from data from tens of people is going to rake in the big $$
270.
by cerved 4y ago
this one does http://ceres-solver.org/features.html but maybe that's not what you were referring to?

More ›