HN user

factotvm

143 karma
Posts2
Comments77
View on HN

In order to fix this, we might start sending out satellites in every direction

Minor correction: Satellites don't go in every direction; they orbit. Probes or spaceships are more appropriate terms.

Not to mention, the best commit messages are about the code that isn’t there.

As you say, we know what’s there. I need the author to tell me why it’s there, and perhaps what other alternatives were abandoned because they didn’t work.

You know, so I don’t waste a day finding out for myself why you didn’t just do ${obvious}.

2. Margin of commit messages is often too small for documenting the rationale - this job is better left for tickets.

The commit message lives with the code. The number of times in my career that a company has migrated, changed, consolidated, or otherwise made all those links in commit messages obsolete, well I don't quite yet need two hands. But I see a lot of dead ends to context in code bases.

I read Head First Design Patterns years and years ago. I'm a fan of the series. It's less for dummies and more using ideas from psychology to help you learn the material. I'll forever recall the power and conciseness of the Decorator pattern for computing the price of coffee drinks when there are as many variations as there are people. Starbuzz...

From my memory banks after close to 20 years:

    SoyDecorator: CoffeeDecorator {
        price: Cents { price + 90¢ } // Soy adds 90 cents to the price
    }
Edit: My regret is lending it to someone and never getting it back. I believe I might get this bundle.

You can disambiguate two types with the same name from different libraries, e.g. `Factotvm.URL` and `Foundation.URL`. Do you mean something more full-featured? You are not prefixing types with three letters, if that's what you think has to be done.

I don't know if it's still the case, but there was an annoyance where you couldn't have a type with the same name as the package. But that is hardly a lack of namespaces.

I'd like to see the difference in bug detection between "pull requests" vs. "over-the-shoulder code reviews".

Edit: or, rather, in my experience the author of the code often finds the bugs when explaining it to the person standing next to them. This goes away in the GitHub-style pull request.

It’s been great in many ways, but the user interface is horrible. Why they show the scores on the thumbnail for replays is beyond me. Time shifting is all about not knowing the outcome beforehand. It’s as if this was created by people who don’t understand sport ball at all. But I don’t know what excuse they can use for burying the replays in the first place such that I found others on the web thinking the same as me—that only recaps are available for past matches.

I'm here for this, but not to declare empathically my position. Rather, I'd like to ask a question: Say I'm learning a new language that is opinionated about casing. Suppose it was easier to read one style, but the language in question adopted another style. Would you buck the trend of that ecosystem and adopt it, or follow convention?

For me, it’s because I’m on my work machine. I don’t move my personal credentials to my work machine. (In fact, I moved over to my phone to write this comment.)

We could discuss that aspect—sharing accounts on computers that don’t belong to me—but that’s why I’m often thwarted from reading content. I have the account, just not on me.

You have chosen poorly.

If we lose that essence of humanity where we feel wonder and awe looking up into the night sky, then we lose one of the prime movers of discovery and science. Or do you think cat videos can do the same?

But one is about the past and one is about the future.

And those items in the past have been heavily investigated, brought to the courts, and due to no evidence, summarily rebuked.

Apples and oranges.

Don’t get me wrong, the world ending in 12 years is a silly thing to say.

According to the downvotes, my statement must be false and predictions are the same as lies.

If it’s been proven false, don’t say it. If it can’t be proven false, carry on, as that’s not against the terms and conditions.

Or, a false equivalency between saying the election was stolen, and saying the world will end in 12 years if we don’t do something.