TehPers

Types aren’t unit tests. Unit tests only test a discrete set of inputs and outputs for correctness, and can miss cases that aren’t tested for.

In sound type systems, they are closer to formal verification. The compiler guarantees the properties you expect of the type hold.

As for the rest of the article, do what works best for you in your projects, but if I need to work with you, I’m going to ask for types. I need to know what types the interface expects to receive. Names are not enough. Document them, use type hints, whatever, just put them somewhere because I’m not psychic and I don’t know what you thought about when writing the function.

There’s a lot of bold claims being made. No segfaults, no memory leaks, etc. I’m curious to see how that’s implemented.

Also:

it’s safer than Rust because it lacks an “unsafe” keyword

lol

So, in other words, it’s so users excuse it when it produces dog shit. Got it.

I’m more worried about fraud at the elector level, not at the voter level. If the survey covered that, I’d say that there will absolutely be (another) attempt this year.

That makes more sense. Thanks for sharing.

Of course, in context it’s a lot different. Conceptually, it’s interesting, but only taken without the context that the goal is clearly to subvert the balance of powers between the different branches of government and turn it into an authoritarian government.

If anyone reasonable were to suggest it, it wouldn’t be so terrible though. It’s just that we know how Trump would abuse that office to push his own agenda.

An office to consult with could have helped pushed some of Biden’s things, especially regarding student loan forgiveness. It’s not always clear what is and isn’t legal, and ideally a president would try to push the boundaries as much as they can to accomplish what they believe is best for the country.

Trump is just a uniquely bad dude. Give him a hammer and he’ll turn it into a weapon before he builds anything productive with it.

Yeah, the timing of the article makes it clear what the motive is. It’s to distract discussion away from the article about Stallman.

Taken wholly out of context, a legal office to work with the president to ensure their orders are legally sound and hard to challenge sounds like a good thing. Does that not already exist?

The rest of this nonsense can cease along with his whole campaign, and the world would be better because of it.

Up to you. Two people can make mistakes at the same time. Whether there is truth to the claims, I’m not sure, but if there is truth then there are some unpleasant details in it.

Is this supposed to be a leading question? I’m not making the decisions, but there’s no reason to be happy about losing contributors in any case.

It’s supposed to put the LF in line with sanctions rather than at risk. They have no control over the invasion (aside from pushing a malicious patch that shuts down all Linux systems or something)

My understanding is that users can edit the chat themselves.

I don’t use c.ai myself, but my wife was able to get a chat log with the bot telling her to end herself pretty easily. The follow-up to the conversation was the bot trying to salvage itself after the sabotage by calling the message a joke.

Good point. Committing genocide is completely justifiable as long as you’re not the only one doing it.

To add to this, funerals for veterans/active duty can be a bit more involved. I’ll admit I don’t know who pays for the military ceremony, but someone does.

The whole situation around Israel has bipartisan support. Even if it’s political, it’s hard to say they’re picking a side there.

If you’re hoping for the standard lib to have things built on evolving standards and ecosystems like HTTP clients, then I doubt that will ever happen. There are plenty of examples of why that would be a terrible idea (urllib, std::regex, etc).

Sometimes when I don’t leave comments like that, I get review comments asking what the line does. Code like ThisMethodInitsTheService() with comments like “what does this do?” in the review.

So now I comment a lot. Apparently reading code is hard for some people, even code that tells you exactly what it does in very simple terms.

TL;DR:

From today the license applied to the project will be the Apache 2.0 license with an extra line forbidding usage of the codebase as an integration or app to Atlassian’s Confluence or Jira products.

While it’s disappointing to see the additional restriction, it’s better to have a project the devs find sustainable than to have nothing at all. It seems like the goal of this change is to protect their main source of funding.

Worst case, people can fork the code before the change.

I’ll give it about two weeks before some random court in Texas tries to block it.