sb8244

9 ms·

61.
by sb8244 3y ago
This is from 2021. I'd be curious if Elixir is still in use, or has expanded at all. Side note: Pablo's blog posts are always quite good.
62.
by sb8244 3y ago
I agree big time with this. Organizing by clean commits is definitely important.
63.
by sb8244 3y ago
It's not necessarily about the units of code, it's about the bigger picture. Let's give a hypothetical situation where you split up a PR by the backend and frontend components, but you have some extra fields and endpoints tha
64.
by sb8244 3y ago
It's artificial to break up a PR to satisfy the rule of small PRs. Often you need the full context when evaluating a new feature end to end. Or you spend 2 days splitting up a PR into smaller PRs so that a person can review it in 30 mi
65.
by sb8244 3y ago
I believe that there's certain things (particularly ambitious net new feature development) that isn't served well by artificially minimizing PR size. You should absolutely strive to keep smaller PRs, but I've frequently seen
66.
by sb8244 3y ago
That's my big question here. If I don't claim an r&d tax credit, does the salary still get treated as r&d?
67.
by sb8244 3y ago
True, I used a vanilla wysiwyg editor integrated via hooks. To be clear, I heartily endorse LiveView. Not using it now due to pretty heavy chrome extension needs, but it was solid. It's just rough in the "just works JS integration
68.
by sb8244 3y ago
Mongo appears to have a decent driver for it. I'd lean to that if i were looking for an alternative to SQL. You shouldn't have any issues integrating it into Absinthe, because it doesn't have any ecto bindings out of the box.
69.
by sb8244 3y ago
What about wysiwyg editors? Something equivalent to react-grid-layout? Date pickers? I want to build a startup, not rebuild complex components for the sake of purity. Simple components are taken care of, but I think that's not where th
70.
by sb8244 3y ago
I did heavy LiveView development for a while. The library problem definitely exists. It's very rare to find what you want already implemented, so you have to rebuild it yourself. It takes a lot of time. What I ended up doing was loadin
71.
by sb8244 3y ago
Yup! I lean towards a tenant ID approach. I ALWAYS use a library that enforces these tenant checks on queries. Ruby ( https://github.com/citusdata/activerecord-multi-tenant ) and Elixir (I wrote https://github
72.
by sb8244 3y ago
I'd say it's probably not the typical implementation. Mainly because it's a pain to implement and manage. I guess that's why this was created though. It's definitely an intriguing tool. I did shift in past from sing
73.
by sb8244 3y ago
I think it's clear they forgot the 0, given that 5*250=1250
74.
by sb8244 3y ago
Thanks for your work here!
75.
by sb8244 3y ago
Maybe going outside of engineering? I use both loom and cmd opt 5, but my CS and sales team would not be able to effectively use cmd5 (editing, hosting, comments, etc.) The moat for us is that it just works and is cheap enough that moving o
76.
by sb8244 3y ago
C'mon Atlassian, have the decency to throw another 25M their way...
77.
by sb8244 3y ago
Do you dislike the tools or dislike the process that gets created around the tools?
78.
by sb8244 3y ago
I do all of these things with loom today and love it.
79.
by sb8244 3y ago
I don't think that would've been a good idea. I guess it's possible, but I'd rather trade known obstacles versus unknown obstacles (that will definitely exist). I said "torn down and built back up" in an endear
80.
by sb8244 3y ago
I was generic in how I described it because I didn't want to talk about the system (it doesn't matter). The system was for a very specific use case and the set of rules were all specific to that domain. The domain was not related
81.
by sb8244 3y ago
I wrote a system that used the database as essentially a rules engine for "what work to execute next?" There were constraints about max throughput per key, waiting periods, etc. That system broke me down and built me back up over
82.
by sb8244 3y ago
You...understand how you can't have one without the other, right?
83.
by sb8244 3y ago
I strongly agree with you. I'm fairly involved in Elixir, so I run a risk of catching some frustration for agreeing with you here. I get why they are going the direction they are, but I think it comes at increased complexity for beginn
84.
by sb8244 3y ago
Bad take when the ToS can change on a dime and companies don't give a hoot about retroactive respect.
85.
by sb8244 3y ago
Another thing with numeric maps is how insert would work. Swapping elements is trivial, but inserting a new one would require rewriting every subsequent entry.
86.
by sb8244 3y ago
The only time I've hit this is when implementing algorithms that assume constant time access and modification (a lot of algorithms assume this, and can't be swapped for index based maps easily) This occurred somewhat recently when
87.
by sb8244 3y ago
I'd say most errors I handle are user facing in some way. The specific error (going to say in response to API given the article) you gave would likely be returned through the system as API response error tuple. The parts of call stack
88.
by sb8244 3y ago
Return the error to my user so they can at least see what went wrong with their request (assuming the errors are built to be user facing). The idea of hiding information from the user, just for me to get it from bug tracking and support tic
89.
by sb8244 3y ago
People often take this paradigm too literally, especially if they have not programmed much in Elixir. It is most common to bubble up errors using error tuples, and exceptions are available. Fred Hebert's blog post called "it'
90.
by sb8244 3y ago
I feel this same way now. Although it's been a few years growing on me

More ›