djacobs

12 ms·

31.
by djacobs 13y ago
It's always good to share Vim tips, so thanks for that. Question, though -- why not use the native <C-i> and <C-o> to navigate between jump points? It will get you to the previous and next buffers but has just enough granula
32.
Facebook leans in(vanityfair.com)
4 points by djacobs 14y ago|0 comments
33.
Clojure: All grown up(wit.io)
240 points by djacobs 14y ago|185 comments
34.
by djacobs 14y ago
It's true that in general, people need to understand what is dangerous in each language they use. However, as far as I can tell, the problem here has nothing to do with homoiconicity. The "get string" vulnerability, as you call it, comes ou
35.
by djacobs 14y ago
I'm not an expert on this, but I have a different take. I think that "is" happens when there is an implicit gerund before the plural noun. - [Working] five days in the office is too much (I do think that the title should be "too much", not
36.
by djacobs 14y ago
Nanoparticles would be the solute in this case. (If a foreign substance, and not water, were the solvent, you'd have problems regardless of how tiny the solent's particles were.)
37.
by djacobs 14y ago
I disagree -- frameworks enforce structure (especially of callbacks), not code style. Unity of code style is something you can solve with standards, style guides, pairing with new developers, and following conventions from surrounding code.
38.
by djacobs 14y ago
I don't agree that in pair programming you should succumb to your pair or take a least-common denominator philosophy. When I pair, I always use a (customized) Vi, swapping between two editors if my pair's is different. I'm intimately famili
39.
by djacobs 14y ago
Hinton was one of the people who invented backpropagation, which has let neural nets be as powerful as they are today. Somehow, despite his brilliance and intimate familiarity with backpropagation, his explanation of it is stunningly clear
40.
by djacobs 14y ago
While I enjoyed most of Brian's talk, I wasn't particularly convinced by his dislike of refinements. Essentially, it boiled down to "this feature is hard to implement, it hides complexity, and it isn't well specified". The first and third a
41.
by djacobs 14y ago
I've tried using Sublime with Vintage mode, and about 30% of the time I'm editing, I try a Vim combo and nothing happens. This isn't just for advanced Vim features -- it's for basic things like g_.
42.
by djacobs 14y ago
The worst part is that they're not admitting it's even an issue: http://twitter.com/therumble2012 Update : Looks like they finally fessed up.
43.
by djacobs 14y ago
Just changed it. I was hoping people wouldn't mix and match, but I don't mind using `o` instead: https://github.com/davejacobs/letters/issues/6
44.
by djacobs 14y ago
Letters is an abstraction layer over the ways many people detect problems with code in the real world. (I see these patterns re-emerge every day.) A debugger is part of the solution. Easy profiling and object diffing are another. Detecting
45.
by djacobs 14y ago
This is great feedback, thanks. I updated the docs.
46.
by djacobs 14y ago
That's the base case. It takes arguments, too, and if you give it a block, it prints out the result of the block called in the receiver's scope.
47.
Letters: A tiny debugging library for Ruby(lettersrb.com)
105 points by djacobs 14y ago|22 comments
48.
by djacobs 14y ago
That's a totally legitimate point. I'm just pointing out that the quoted bit would lead the reader to believe that a block is defined as a closure. The problem is almost everyone I talk to in the startup scene thinks that an anonymous funct
49.
by djacobs 14y ago
In fact, the computer science concept behind blocks, called “closures” As far as I know, the language-free concept of "block" is orthogonal to the concept of scope. That is, a block is not by necessity a closure.
50.
by djacobs 14y ago
I like that Acme has such a radically different paradigm from vi, but I can't imagine that pixel-dependent mouse interactions could ever beat vi for text manipulation. (It takes me a maximum of about 4 keystrokes to get anywhere I want in a
51.
by djacobs 14y ago
No -- as opposed to pacman -S package (or whatever his former distro used). Having come to Linux from OS X, I agree that OS X installations are pretty inferior to Linux's.
52.
by djacobs 14y ago
I'm not sure the responses are expressing negativity as much as they are expressing confusion. This was a learning project, sure, but it was also posted to Hacker News (and without that caveat).
53.
by djacobs 14y ago
It is hilarious that someone would have the knowledge to build this but not know that it was already implemented as part of the language. Is this a parody?
54.
by djacobs 14y ago
I agree. I spent a lot of time simplifying my OpenId setup so that all I had to do was type in my first name on a website and would be authenticated. I think online identity is still ripe for disruption and improvement.
55.
by djacobs 14y ago
I liked this app until I found out there were no privacy settings. I don't need or want to have a social network around the most mundane parts of my life.
56.
by djacobs 14y ago
#each and #map are not meant to be the same thing. #each in any language is meant only for side-effects. If you only care about the return value, #map is a much better choice. (Similarly, if you only care about the return value but want man
57.
by djacobs 14y ago
The Ruby community does not say "you should not learn iteration using for loops." It says "if you're (still) using for loops for anything but performance reasons, you probably don't understand enough about Ruby to consider yourself an exper
58.
by djacobs 14y ago
I understand the thought, but a Facebook "like" is no less mathy than a "+1". That much is clear from the way Facebook has turned "like" into a quantifiable thing. (Sure, "like" is a verb, but when you see "20 likes" under that status you j
59.
by djacobs 14y ago
It should be, but I can assure you that it's not. Also, I think this has much less to do with OO than with conditionals at large.
60.
by djacobs 14y ago
For me, this technique is bigger than objects or encapsulation. It's about reusing existing "branch points" that a language gives you (whether it is polymorphism, method dispatch, namespacing) instead of explicit conditionals at a level hig

More ›