wtetzner

19 ms·

331.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I think it means the approach is quite neat, not the fact that it requires reinventing the wheel.
332.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I think the Vision Pro needs to be as comfortable and convenient to use as a TV, or it needs to be cheaper. And/or it needs a new killer app. It's sitting in a weird place right now where it's too expensive for what you get,
333.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "uses", but it does store the map as voxels, even if it renders via a polygon mesh.
334.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> I'm not sure how you would go about building the compile-time table of log locations and format strings, sounds like the hardest part. Sounds like a job for a macro.
335.
by wtetzner 2y ago
The Game Boy Advance is a fun console to program for. Though you'd need to get a flash cart to easily run your code on it, which isn't especially cheap. https://www.coranac.com/tonc/text/ http:/&#x
336.
by wtetzner 2y ago
The only way this could be an issue is if it's entirely relying on security through obscurity.
337.
by wtetzner 2y ago
You need to be able to send a form to people with required fields.
338.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> Often people strongly type because they're making assumptions (or direct knowledge) about some other component. I'm not really sure why strong typing would have that effect. It seems like an orthogonal concern to me. In fact,
339.
by wtetzner 2y ago
How are these 2 things related? Why do devs need to work on a game full time for it to be successful?
340.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> Actually, you often can't :) Ask Microsoft how easy it is for them to change some code once it's been shipped. My understanding is that the OP was talking about prototyping. Once code is in a public interface in the wild, it&
341.
by wtetzner 2y ago
And if this was an untyped blob of JSON it would somehow be better? I'd argue that dynamic typing makes it easier to paint yourself into a corner.
342.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I think the brackets were simply suggesting that flow charts are analogous to code and tables are analogous to data structures in that quote. Not that your tables and data structures in a concrete system will be the same.
343.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> Strict types are a great way to paint yourself into a corner. I've never really understood this stance. It's all code. It's not like you can't change it later. > So the faster (in the long run), "better&quot
344.
by wtetzner 2y ago
That makes sense, but then why not just work on trunk and don't worry about branching?
345.
by wtetzner 2y ago
Honestly (for online multiplayer games) I'd be OK with companies simply documenting the server API and allowing you to point the client to a different server.
346.
by wtetzner 2y ago
That's a rental, not a purchase. If nothing else, companies should be forced to use correct terminology.
347.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> it is idiomatic to avoid macros as much as possible. Of course, don't use a macro if you don't need one. But when you do hit a case where you need one, it's better than using/writing external tooling to solve the pr
348.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> How are you going to "vet" the language server when it pops up? You may not vet the source of the language server, but you might want to determine which ones you are willing to trust/take the risk, and which ones you are
349.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> … everyone has a line somewhere on the trust-but-verify spectrum Sure, and by making the automatic downloads optional, users are given the choice of where they want to draw that line.
350.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I guess because if you haven't done it, how would you know if it's fulfilling?
351.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I don't think they've thought it through that far.
352.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I interpreted it to mean that lying to someone isn't actually being kind, even if that was the intention.
353.
by wtetzner 2y ago
And gravity.
354.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I think they want one login, but don't want it all controlled by one company. I think they either like or just don't notice that everything they do is controlled by one company at first, until they see something shiny and cool tha
355.
by wtetzner 2y ago
"Easy to extend" for me means keeping things decoupled (as opposed to adding extension mechanisms etc.). Of course there's a tradeoff (there always is), I think my point was just that this option doesn't really seem like
356.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I seem to have replied to the wrong comment. I meant to reply to the one about Intel threatening Microsoft about emulating x86 on ARM.
357.
by wtetzner 2y ago
I wonder why this hasn't been an issue for Apple (or maybe it has?).
358.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> There are two poles I'm not sure I agree. I think you can write a simple-but-not-hacky implementation that does only what is necessary, and is also easy to maintain and extend later. Of course, you never really achieve that ideal,
359.
by wtetzner 2y ago
It doesn't seem like an especially important distinction. I've never understood why people always make such a big deal about it.
360.
by wtetzner 2y ago
> primarily because the XML data model is so mismatched with the object structures you find in programming languages I dunno, it matches up reasonably well with languages that have nestable custom types. XML labels nodes, and JSON labels

More ›