wubrr

12 ms·

121.
by wubrr 2y ago
Deno does not support jsx and typescript 'without a build step'. It just runs a build/transform step for you under the hood - using the same tsc compiler, config, etc. https://docs.deno.com/runtime/refere
122.
by wubrr 2y ago
The code is not runnable on the frontend. It needs to be transformed/built before that can happen. Saying this doesn't have a build step is like saying a python script that compiles and runs a C program from source has no build st
123.
by wubrr 2y ago
That's not going to prevent the next DeepSeek from emerging.
124.
by wubrr 2y ago
If the subordinates have to lie about taking time off, and intentionally accept lower pay for the benefit of their superiors - then no, it's definitely not reciprocated. I'd argue the subordinates are straight up being abused in t
125.
by wubrr 2y ago
I don't think I quite follow your point? Connecting LLMs/AI to physical tools that can 'write/modify' the world is happening, and it's happening at an accelerating pace. It's not hard to imagine how, given
126.
by wubrr 2y ago
It can't do those things because it doesn't have the physical/write capability to do so. But it's still very interesting that it ~tries them, and seems like a good thing to know/test before giving it more physical&#
127.
by wubrr 2y ago
> Doesn’t this make the case specifically for better government and regulations rather than more “competition”? Yes, we need 'better government and regulations', not just 'more regulations'. It's literally the cu
128.
by wubrr 2y ago
> And for anyone who wants to looks at the fundamentals, all large telecom companies (Bell, Telus, Rogers) in Canada have lost >20% of their valuation over the last 2 years. Pretty sure that if they "owned" the government th
129.
by wubrr 2y ago
Corporations already control all aspects of our economy. Whether they are foreign or 'benevolent domestic corporations' - as you seem to think they are, doesn't really matter. The insane flood of immigration and TFWs, which d
130.
by wubrr 2y ago
I think if you were confident and believed in what you're saying, you wouldn't have a pre-written complaint about people questioning what you say every other sentence of your comment. > What the point is, change does happen, an
131.
by wubrr 2y ago
Interesting how you interpreted 'current government' even though I specifically said 'decades' and 'all parties'.
132.
by wubrr 2y ago
Yeah, they can identify one, then gift it taxpayer money and adopt a bunch of laws to prevent competition.
133.
by wubrr 2y ago
It's not exactly a monopoly, but telco, banking, grocery, etc. are very obvious oligopolies in Canada. Oligopolies that have been growing ever more dominant, and supported/protected every step of the way by the government. Claimin
134.
by wubrr 2y ago
This lack of competition isn't an accident - the (very very corrupt) government has essentially been supporting and enforcing monopolistic practices and collusion for decades (all parties).
135.
by wubrr 2y ago
That's almost a non-answer in the context of an interview for a technical role.
136.
by wubrr 2y ago
The longer I've been in tech and the more I learn, the less strong opinions I have. There are things you learn that should be done a certain way, but if the rationale behind that is strong/ubiquitous enough, it's not really a
137.
by wubrr 2y ago
I guess it would depend on how big the ridge you add would have to be. I'm not at all an expert on this, but my thinking is that a ridge of size 2X would have an exponential effect on the travel of the suspension and resulting IRI valu
138.
by wubrr 2y ago
The metric might already account for the scenario you bring up, since a road with potholes will be more 'rough' than a smoothly varying one based on my understanding of this metric.
139.
by wubrr 2y ago
> You seem to be focusing on the most obtuse possible way of structuring descriptive test names for rhetorical purposes. No, I'm focusing on the most realistic and common ways this kind of pattern actually exists (based on my experi
140.
by wubrr 2y ago
You're right, thanks.
141.
by wubrr 2y ago
It's ok if you misunderstood my comment and the context of this comment chain. No need to get snarky about it and project your own feelings onto others though.
142.
by wubrr 2y ago
Good faith debating is when you actually try to honestly consider and understand the other side's point. Not when you make dismissive blanket (and factually incorrect) statements while refusing to rationally engage with the counter-arg
143.
by wubrr 2y ago
Saying 'stuffing a test description into the function name improves test quality because it improves test quality' is a cyclical, useless statement. > The article is discussing the quality of the tests, not quality in general a
144.
by wubrr 2y ago
> I think what you're focusing on is just syntax sugar. Those examples with the 'describe'/'it' pattern are just another way to provide names to test cases, and their goal is exactly the same. The goal may b
145.
by wubrr 2y ago
Names, descriptions for tests are useful for many purposes, I'll leave it at that. The point I'm making (and I think you are agreeing with me) is that trying to stuff a test description into a test function name is cumbersome and
146.
by wubrr 2y ago
Pretty much every major language/framework now supports free-form test names/descriptions, including JUnit, which is referenced in the article ^ (again, highlighting the author's ignorance). Just because something doesn'
147.
by wubrr 2y ago
Shallow/meh, article. Demonstrates complete lack of familiarity with many popular testing frameworks/approaches, and proposes a subpar solutions for problems that have already been solved in superior ways. Your test description&#x
148.
by wubrr 2y ago
Yeah, it doesn't solve the problem of low quality code/laziness, but it's a better tool/approach for documenting your tests than encoding the description/documentation into it's name. Encoding such information
149.
by wubrr 2y ago
Yup, I've not actually seen any tool that enforces these kinds of test names. But yeah, trying to encode test description/documentation into it's name is like one of the worst common ways of documenting your tests.
150.
by wubrr 2y ago
> The quality of the tests. Very insightful, thanks.

More ›