maratc

5 ms·

31.
by maratc 2mo ago
If Chrome can write into TPM/Secure Enclave it's like the best fingerprinting ever?
32.
by maratc 2mo ago
Gruber himself has written a number of posts critical of Apple, some of them scathingly so.
33.
by maratc 2mo ago
This whole affair seriously undermines Terry's credibility, however it needs to be said that his take on how RSS readers should work is genuinely new and -- to some audiences -- interesting. It's as if real people are not all good
34.
by maratc 2mo ago
Now let's count their mortgage debt.
35.
by maratc 2mo ago
I've tried that and I've got only 2900 errors -- which weren't errors at all just yesterday .
36.
by maratc 2mo ago
You can set your clock with an iPhone app or a computer with a pair of speakers. https://timestation.pages.dev
37.
by maratc 2mo ago
I find it kinda amusing that we seem to have an endless and useless discussion on "what version of ruff to use" now when you kinda implied that you have some sort of a solution to these endless, useless discussions -- in a form of
38.
by maratc 2mo ago
I find it hard to look at ruff as at "other dependencies." First, my other dependencies usually deliver something of value to the customer (and so I deliver my other dependencies to the end-user installation.) Second, when I need
39.
by maratc 2mo ago
> many people have a single quotes obsession Not my problem. My problem is that I want to use them both , as I've been able to for many years. I'll always use double to surround "can't" and single to surround &#
40.
by maratc 2mo ago
So to the practical question: what we're gonna do today in CICD and/or precommit? "Default configuration is always the way" but which one: `ruff<0.16.0` or `ruff=0.16.0`?
41.
by maratc 2mo ago
Please don't turn this site into Reddit.
42.
by maratc 2mo ago
The options you suggest seem to be either (a) feed the bot now (halt development and reformat all code) or (b) under-pin/suppress and feed the bot later, probably dealing with people adding more non-conformant code to already-reformatt
43.
by maratc 2mo ago
You neither usually write in that style, nor go full shrink mode on people you talk to, so your original comment here is quite unusual in both the contents and the style. Peace, man.
44.
by maratc 2mo ago
The linked article says that ruff now has 413 default rules -- instead of 59 previously. Do I understand it right that all the projects that were using ruff were 100% conformant to 59 rules yesterday but likely not conformant to 413 rul
45.
by maratc 2mo ago
Yeah, I'm in the "not interested" and "don't care" camp, with the addition of "please don't come at me with your bots who would tell me what to believe and what not to believe". If someone wants
46.
by maratc 2mo ago
The beauty of it is that all artists can be different. It's the cog wheels that need to be identical.
47.
by maratc 2mo ago
But the formatting is not all that "delivery" stands for. I've worked on great codebases that would produce thousands of linter errors (lowball estimation), and on shitty codebases that were 100% compliant.
48.
by maratc 2mo ago
I do not have any opinion on formatting. My argument is that nobody should.
49.
by maratc 2mo ago
My issue with your comment is not that it seems to offer unsolicited psychological advice completely out of the blue; it's that it leaves me with an uncanny feeling that it was written by an LLM. In a thread where I complain about the
50.
by maratc 2mo ago
I’ve written it up-thread: you want me (and possibly, everybody) to be a cog wheel. But I want to be an artist.
51.
by maratc 2mo ago
Thank you, but I'm afraid I disagree. Single line dict definitions are fine when that's my intent , multilines are also fine when that is, and I trust myself to know when to use one or the other. My problem is with arbitrary ru
52.
by maratc 2mo ago
> These tools don’t add extra commits. When you replace tool x with tool y, you need to fix your code, because these tools do not agree on what your code should look like, and what was acceptable for tool x simply isn't for tool y.
53.
by maratc 2mo ago
You want to be a cog wheel, in a company of cog wheels. There's nothing wrong with that. But I want to be an artist, and preferably in a company of artists, having been in a company of cog wheels too many times. Not only it's more
54.
by maratc 2mo ago
And here's where this abstraction breaks: when a programmer leaves, their code is not going anywhere. The bigger problem is this: you want me to be a cog wheel, but I want to be an artist.
55.
by maratc 2mo ago
> \bfoo\b will produce noisy results. Add a look-behind for '[' and a look-ahead for ']' and you'll be fine.
56.
by maratc 2mo ago
I think you miss the point, but using your foodie reference: would you rather go to a couple of Michelin restaurants -- where each piece brings a reflection of the chef, the geographic area, and what quality ingredients were available on th
57.
by maratc 2mo ago
My argument is that searching for \bfoo\b will produce all the results you want. Python was designed from the start so that 'foo' and "foo" are equal. It also worked like that for 30 years or so. This has not been an iss
58.
by maratc 2mo ago
You can build yourself any strawman you want :) In my first ten years of writing Python, I never argued about code style with anyone. It's only after they brought the bots in that I learned that my style is somehow "bad."
59.
by maratc 2mo ago
See if you know where this leads before clicking on it: https://xkcd.com/208/
60.
by maratc 2mo ago
My argument is more to the tune of "everybody’s code looking slightly different is not a problem in practice as long as I can read and understand it." However since you've asked so nicely here you go: everybody’s code loo

More ›