dhruvrajvanshi

6 ms·

1.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
That hasn't been my experience at all outside the opinion section, which is precisely what you described. The main section feels pretty anti Trump, actually. Not by choice but reality has an anti Trump bias ;) They are also quite good
2.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
With all due respect, have you read it regularly? In my experience, WSJ just reports what happened and who said what in a very dry way. My impression is that their news section provides a very anti Republican party view. Note that this is m
3.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I would love this in modern languages. For dev builds, I see JIT compilation as a better deal than debug builds because it's capable of eventually reaching peak performance. For performance sensitive stuff like games, it really matters
4.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I think WSJ is a good complement to the Economist. They have good, unsensationalized coverage of the facts. I ignore their opinion columns as they don't seem very serious.
5.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I also read the Economist. Other than that, Wall Street Journal is quite good at purely factual, unopinionated coverage. Note that their Opinion section is heavily biased towards the American right, but I mostly ignore it. It's clearly
6.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> I also make unit test runner play sound for success and failures. This is brilliant! Such simple change but a massive qol improvement. > Test runner Node has one built-in these days. Haven't tried it yet but would be nice to ge
7.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> Has emacs reinvented itself to incorporate the best ideas of being very performant, allowing better languages for extensions, replacing health-hazardous default keybinds with something ergonomic, using commonly understood terms for its
8.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
A very simple way to think about is that if an intrinsic is written in C, the JIT can't easily inline it, whereas all ruby code can be inlined. Inlining is the most important optimization that enables other optimizations. It's not
9.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I suppose it's a matter of perspective but I don't see returning a 500 as "Recovering from the error". The user's request has still failed. It just hasn't taken down the server. IMO this is still fine.
10.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> manually pass around JSON objects and continually checking their shape Well Zod is a library that's typically used on the boundary. I don't know why you're assuming stuff about a library that you've never used. No o
11.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> So I try to make the ones that seem the most likely impossible. Yeah this is a very key point to reflect on. Is this stricter type actually catching a bug that's easy to make? Or is it just giving you more satisfaction of more pre
12.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
There is something to be said about pushing such things to runtime checks. I'm not arguing for giving up type systems in general, but I'd rather read something like `class VersionString` that asserts the requirements in the constr
13.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> Im not worried about new code. Im worried about stuff written 15 years ago by a monkey who had no idea how threads work and just read something on stack overflow that said to use threading. This code will likely break when run post-GIL
14.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> Oracle doesn’t make little mistakes that accidentally harm the competition while helping themselves. No, they’ll look you in the eye and explain that they’re mugging you while they take your wallet. It’s kind of refreshingly honest in
15.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> I wonder why people never complained so much about JavaScript not having shared-everything threading. Maybe because JavaScript is so much faster that you don't have to reach for it as much. I wish more effort was put into baseline
16.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I think you're being too negative about why people got excited. It is quite a bit faster than eslint. Not saying it's a good food idea to use it. I think it asks too much out of me to migrate to it. If they had been even somewhat
17.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
> - don't use junk tools like webpack I used to have that opinion, but now, going through a months long project modernizing our codebase's build tooling, I'm not so sure. Vite isn't so amazing either if you stray away
18.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I went through exactly what you went through and by god it was frustrating. Eventually I did get stuff to work, but in the process I became an expert in a bunch of tools that I never wanted to be an expert in. I just wanted to write my busi
19.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
You can use React without jsx too. JSX is just a very thin wrapper over React.createElemental ``` const h = React.createElement h('div', { id: 'foo' }, [ h(MyComponent, props) ]) ``` Of course the props to divs are a b
20.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
Not Python but this is exactly the idea behind zx https://github.com/google/zx
21.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
I think you're being too unfair. People aren't dumb. It's also about how much better. Beyond a decent enough type system, the advantages start to flatten and other factors start to matter more. Can't speak too much for p
22.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
It doesn't have access to the type system, for example. It just sees it's input as what you typed in the code. It wouldn't be able to see through aliases.
23.
by dhruvrajvanshi 1y ago
Well I wouldn't call lalrpop "Pure rust". It's a separate language that gets compiled to rust. It's within the rust ecosystem though. Perhaps cargo could expose a simpler way to use code generators.
24.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
> a single component outweighing an entire app feels fundamentally broken. I think this is an overly dramatic take. Of course react has a fixed overhead. If all you're deploying is the single button, then that overhead is for no ben
25.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
It's generic system for example, is built on top of comptime. A generic struct is just a function that takes a type as an argument and returns a struct. ``` fn Vec(comptime T: anytype) { return struct { // ... }
26.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
Yeah absolutely. Cargo is one of the highlights of Rust. Completely no nonsense.
27.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
I think most server type software can trade off the borrow checker for a GC while still benefiting from other Rust stuff. IMO there's still need for a higher level Rust where you don't need that last 20% of the performance and con
28.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
Yeah this is the stuff I meant when I said high level languages should borrow from Rust. It's also good to remind people that these things were borrowed by Rust from other languages too. Primarily the ML family of languages.
29.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
Thats your opinion and I respect it. Especially the bit about complaining about syntax. There's no ther language directly competing with rust which had less syntax. My opinion is that in Rust you have to make decisions on certain thing
30.
by dhruvrajvanshi 2y ago
> How come it is in demand? Because it's a complicated language for building extremely low level things, when you have no other choice. IMO it's not the right tool for high level stuff (even though it does have some stuff which

More ›