skydhash

18 ms·

361.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Drawing/Painting and Cad modeling is very much like games. One hand on the keyboard and the other on the mouse. This mixture can be also done well in other programs. I only bother learning shortcuts for daily tools, not something I use
362.
by skydhash 3mo ago
The Emacs API is kinda huge, with things like very raw network API, a very good approximation of fork/exec process management, buffers as the base communication mechanism with a lot of capabilities, various utility function with regard
363.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Yep, you have to use C# and Java because they are safe. If you want anything extra, you need to use $library, because only $library's maintainer is trusted with the dark corners of the language. Look how powerful we are, millions of li
364.
by skydhash 3mo ago
The reason people don't bother with specs is that they're extraordinarily verbose, ambiguous, and simplistic at the same time. Which is why we have invented formal notations, because they're short, have one definition, and en
365.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> The whole point here is that you don't change the code, you change the specs, > but doesn't encapsulate anything about the spirit or purpose of why the design in a certain way. Good specs do. Specs are meta solutions. They
366.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Always have been. When something is your primary tool, you develop strong opinion about it. Code is notation, helping to describe solutions. Not everyone thinks and solve the same way, so strong preferences is not unusual.
367.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Not really, I don't think I've ever care about the how. I want to mostly know the trigger of a change (a bug, possible feature, or just tidying) and what are the impacts if that changes is included in the codebase. That is often j
368.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> ps. How do you easily get to the first commit in a repo on GitHub? Browsing commit history feels rather tedious I usually check the history of a file not easily changed like .gitignore. The first commit seems to be this one https:&#x2
369.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Nowadays, I’m mostly interacting with open source components, so I read source code when the docs are lacking. I rarely have questions in the form of “How do I do…”. They are mostly “How does this thing work?”
370.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Not really, as you always need to check back on your assertions, especially at the boundary points where information about types and ownership are more axiomatic than the result of logical inference.
371.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> I think it will be second nature to ask "how did you arrive at the code". What about “Do you understand the code well enough to argue about it, its past, and possible evolution paths”?
372.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> But as code becomes increasingly abundant through agents, the context behind "why" the code was written is becoming vital: That’s the commit message. If something is not immediately clear from the title and the diff, you writ
373.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Angular has C# and Java vibes, especially with frameworks like Spring. React is on the other side of that spectrum.
374.
by skydhash 3mo ago
The “clankers” won’t take over, but have you also noticed that most people are talking about their workflows/process instead of their results/outcomes? It’s all about “Is the train still running?” than “Are we getting close to the
375.
by skydhash 3mo ago
C/C++ does not care and they’re currently the language for foundational work (OS, platforms, and libraries). Python and Java does not care, they will just throw runtime exceptions and crash. Rust care, but they don’t play well with the
376.
by skydhash 3mo ago
I’ve not seen any languages that does not require meticulous care to avoid runtime bugs. Type checking and lifetime ownership eliminate some, but not all of them.
377.
by skydhash 3mo ago
There’s a config[0] mechanism, both static and runtime that tells what gets enabled. In static mode, it tells what’s get compiled in the kernel, while you can disable any drivers (and save your config as a modified kernel) in a compiled one
378.
by skydhash 3mo ago
I’ve been involved in B2B (so no payment flow). But it’s basically the same with an handful of integration tests for common workflows. They run fast and mostly serve a canary to ensure that we are not crippling some use cases. When a bug hi
379.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> I totally get that a lot of people won't want to adapt though. Or people don't want to be reverse centaur keeping the clankers happily running. Instead of helping to solve users/consumers problem.
380.
by skydhash 3mo ago
I don't even care about tests being correct as you can still verify them even when tedious. What I care is that, more often than not, the shape of the solution is not fixed. Having unit tests for those can be extremely costly as when t
381.
by skydhash 3mo ago
The Bluetooth spec is horrendous, and from what I read, the hardware is equally horrifying. Bluettoth is a wireless bus, not one class a device and an implementation would need to provide hooks to the other subsystems like wscons (keyboard
382.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Most data in the kernel are rather long lived or traversing too many layers. There are too many entry points (system calls, interrupts) into the kernel for guarantees to hold. And OpenBSD development is rather slow. The tech mailing list av
383.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Validation asserts what’s in the data type, while parsing just creates it. Especially in the context of C structures where you can just create it from a blob of bytes.
384.
by skydhash 3mo ago
I’m not an OS programmer and have been dabbling with OpenBSD’s code for fun. But the fact is that Rust kinda lacks flexibility. Most of the OS is dedicated to building a beautiful lie for programs to run happily, and that’s where C shine.
385.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Was just about to say this. And the application can also try to rename the terminal window title with the OSC 2 escape sequence. Don't think you need more than that. The bell was the general "Something needs your attention" s
386.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> I can have several ideas in mind, and have a concrete implementation made for each, making it easier to compare alternatives. I would ask what exactly are you comparing. I don't think I've ever wrote 2 versions of code to com
387.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> LLMs are an abstraction just like machine code -> assembly -> C/JVM -> some lang -> LLMs The what is the semantic mapping between <some lang> and LLMs? I know the semantic mapping between maching code and assembl
388.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Creating a program is more like the interior designer choosing paints or the engineer designing a bridge in some CAD software. The actual painting/building has been automated for ages and they are the compiler/computer combo. Peop
389.
by skydhash 3mo ago
Are they? Most B2C tooling are free or nearly free or serve a very small market. The heavyweights are all B2B and I don’t believe they can tolerate the inefficiency for long.
390.
by skydhash 3mo ago
> I would now place "learning to code" in the same category as "making a living as a poet." As in, it's truly enjoyable art and some people appreciate it, but you'd better plan for a day job. Learning to cod

More ›