gumoro

I recommend the 6th paragraph (4 sentences) in this article: https://newsroom.ucla.edu/dept/faculty/peter-goadsby-migrain...

Do you have a reference for that? Struggling to find one, and very interested.

Looks like so, with a clever rotation, clipping, and drawing twice (had a cursory look at 'lenses.js', look for 'draw_blade')

I think the question is how is this drawn on a canvas. It's not trivial, if I draw 6 shapes successively, one will be on top and another at the bottom, you would not see the tip of one at the top and the other part of the same blade at the bottom. Nicely spotted, interesting question!

Yes, that's why I thought OP's idea of explicitly separating the derived "better" questions interesting, instead of allowing anyone to edit the original question and steer the discussion in a different direction. This is an interesting format that leaves room for multiple directions to explore… which SO does not want to do as they insist so much on focus.

Sometimes the asker is missing a concept, and it's not always impossible to comment about it and rephrase the question to make it answerable & more useful to keep for posterity. It's far from the majority of questions, but not awfully rare either. Some of those are worth salvaging.

I upvoted because I find the idea of an explicit third stage interesting. But SO does offer the ability for experts to edit questions already, in order to keep the simple Q&A format with two stages, so it's "by design". I'm not arguing which design is better... I'd actually like to see your idea implemented :)

First one was aptly closed IMHO, much too vague. SO is not the right tool for absolute beginners to seek guidance when they have no idea what they're doing: the format asks for a reasonably specific answerable question. Would be nice if upon closing the asker was given pointers to beginner-friendly resources, though.

The other two are better, and (aptly) not closed. Of course you'll get inappropriate votes to close, but I hope they are correctly offset by other votes the (hopefully vast) majority of the time.

Now about this:

how is closing the question helpful in any way?

I suppose it's to stay focused. When googling I quite often get useful SO results (& upvote those), and I'm happy not having to sift through tons of useless questions.

Yes! Unit test code!

I avoid humor in main code, but in unit test code when you have to come up with dummy bits of test data or variable names, I love getting funky there :)

which is close enough to "login", which is widely understood (I do have the same issue with "sign in" VS "sign up", I know the difference, but as a non-native speaker it also takes me a second, or sometimes one is more prominent than the other and I mistakenly click on it, etc).

But whatever, ("Sign in" or "Log in") alongside "Register" is clear enough. "Sign in" alongside "Sign up" is confusing. Thanks Al-Khwarizmi for bringing that up... or is it bring in ? ;)

Bug report: time series analysis chart fails to display properly on Firefox, all points stay on x=0, I see "Unexpected value NaN parsing cx attribute" x250 in the console. Works fine on Chrome.

Reminds me of "Don't kick a man when he's clown"; Google finds 2 PDFs with this, due to bad OCR:

https://www.google.com/search?q="Don't+kick+a+man+when+he's+...

Credit: https://twitter.com/ObeyComputer/status/1050131788830560258

It's not just about code. In any non-trivial system you have a bunch of components, and any minor occurrence of "bad design" that affects boundaries, protocols, configuration, deployment, persistence schema, upgrade procedures, etc, can lead to huge complications down the road if there's no one to catch this early. Mediocre engineers will only make it worse and worse, and you'll get something super complex that costs big bucks to maintain. If you have someone capable of detecting & fixing such bad patterns early enough, in extreme cases that person can be considered a 1000x engineer.

Wow look at those plan names: "go unlimited", "beyond unlimited", "above unlimited"...

WTF does that mean?

I was wondering the same, but I thought the number of illustrations would be 7!/2 = 2520, that is, the number of permutations for 7 different elements, divided by 2 because symmetrical sequences generate the same drawing.

Is it incorrect? How do you get "6!" ?

720 custom doodles seems doable, 2520 seems a bit much, so I suspect my reasoning for 7!/2 is wrong :)

Edit : oh, I see how for all closed paths all 7 permutations are the same so we can divide by 7 for closed paths, but there are still the open paths... hmmm (still pondering)

Edit 2 : aaaah, got it, I did not notice he was always closing the path himself... tss that's cheating :)

Sometimes you want to access the application from outside, available via some corporate proxy, and all do not support WebSockets, and even those that do on paper are so complicated to set up that some admins abandon the idea (looking at you MS Forefront TMG). So it's good to know that you'll get the baseline functions working without WS.

Not just an American thing... At home I got a bare bones one with 2 mechanical knobs (even the "ready" sound is produced mechanically I think). But right now I'm standing in front of a sophisticated one in a Taiwanese home, it has 18 buttons marked with Chinese characters and various numbers or ranges of numbers that make no sense without a reference manual. No symbol, no knob, no useful color coding. I'm unable to operate it without help... Makes you feel like a child needing help from an adult :)

Ah, yes, right, sorry. I understand now what you were after. Agree there would have been (is?) an interesting potential there too.

If I understand correctly, they offer this now, your private instance for your own product(s) & team(s):

https://www.stackoverflowbusiness.com/enterprise

Edit: while interesting, this (private internal instance for your team) is not what johansch is after (separate public instance dedicated to your product, for your users)

So, one bit ;)

In seismic acquisition (when you acquire "pictures" of the subsurface, much before the drilling part) you need accurate positioning of your sources & sensors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_seismology

Correlation, causation... Tomahto, tomayto...

Yes I think that's exactly what Stratoscope meant, and it was funny because that expression is a classic language peeve, as it is an illogical deformation (of the phrase "I couldn't care less") that is becoming the norm... but in that situation it made perfect sense. So I was showing appreciation for that nice touch.

I realized I could care less.

I see what you did there. Well done.

Some people can't judge the merits of game programming, that doesn't make them small minded.

Right, but the problem is those that do judge it in a systematically negative way.

Not implemented. "Under consideration".

https://webkit.org/status/#specification-service-workers

Higher cohesion and modularity.

I'm glad to see this in an article for JavaScript projects. Here are a few articles for Java projects, that go in more details (I think the concepts still mostly apply to JavaScript projects):

http://www.javapractices.com/topic/TopicAction.do?Id=205

http://www.codingthearchitecture.com/2015/03/08/package_by_c...

Go to http://feedback.feedback/ and write a sternly-worded review, that'll teach'em.

Good point. While I still don't think this general idea can be applied universally, lately I've come to realize it can help a lot. But I feel I only have a blurry/incomplete understanding of what exactly "it" is or entails to, and would love to hear other ideas or insights.

For now I have:

- write down everything: tasks, discussions & conclusions, etc (you said "keep a backlog of tasks")

- when interrupted while coding, insert a //TODO with a few words that will help rebuild context on resuming, maybe with a statement that does not compile to quickly get back there (if the interruption leads you to navigate away from that file/editor)

- if a few seconds are not enough, explain "I need a few minutes to write down stuff and I'll get back to you". This is always accepted without issue. Although it's difficult when the person politely waits behind you :)

- if you figure you really cannot be interrupted on the spot, make great effort to explain this as gently as possible, and offer to get back to them later: again, always accepted by peers (in my experience). If the interaction stays below a few seconds, AND I stayed agreeable & polite, I have little problem getting back in the flow. When I reply too curtly or let the slightest trace of anger show, then I fail to get back in, because my thoughts are polluted with remorse & guilt.

- over time, learn to identify in advance when you are about to enter a "really-really-no-interrupt zone", and then wear audio gear or something to signal this. And don't do it too often.

- I also noticed "recursive tasks" are a challenge. You suggest to avoid them when they are just ideas that help the previous task, but what if they are impediments that MUST be fixed? (Google "malcolm hal fixing light bulb" for hilarious illustration). For this I only have "write down everything", but it gets frustrating with the feeling I'm getting slow due to constant swapping, and could be faster if I could count on short term memory alone (and no interruptions...).

Anwyay... would love to read more about "embrace interruptions" & "optimize for re-starting".

I work on such a system, to organize data processing (HPC) projects in the oil & gas industry, and I try to follow this space. I remember I got excited when I heard of Airflow for the first time, but quickly got frustrated with its "static flow" nature: many "flow" systems are like this, you first design the flow, then "deploy" it and let it run (usually many times).

What our tool does is allow users to organize the flow of their processing jobs on an infinite 2D layout, have some jobs run at the beginning of the flow while they organize another part to run later.

Unfortunately it's a big pile of messy code that depends too much on other "internal" systems so we can't open source it... I'd like to add "yet" because I try to gradually clean it up, simplify and make it more generic, but I'm not sure I'll see that day myself.

In the meantime... maybe Node-RED ? https://nodered.org/