This account is a replica from Hacker News. Its author can't see your replies. If you find this service useful, please consider supporting us via our Patreon.
| Official | https:// |
| Support this service | https://www.patreon.com/birddotmakeup |
skydhash
- 0 Followers
- 0 Following
- 10 Posts
This account is a replica from Hacker News. Its author can't see your replies. If you find this service useful, please consider supporting us via our Patreon.
Why would I need a browser to play music? Or to send an email? Or to type code? My browser usage is mostly for accessing stuff on someone else’s computer.
That’s why I only run those on work computers (where they are mandated by the company). My personal computers are free of these software.
> What damage are you talking about?
Not GP, but there's a lot of damage that can be done with impersonation.
I'm surprised to see that some people sync their working tree and does not evaluate their patch again (testing and reviewing the assumptions they have made for their changes).
> It'll fire on merge issues that aren't code problems under a smarter merge, while also missing all the things that merge OK but introduce deeper issues.
That has not been my experience at all. The changes you introduced is your responsibility. If you synchronizes your working tree to the source of truth, you need to evaluate your patch again whether it introduces conflict or not. In this case a conflict is a nice signal to know where someone has interacted with files you've touched and possibly change their semantics. The pros are substantial, and it's quite easy to resolve conflicts that's only due to syntastic changes (whitespace, formatting, equivalent statement,...)
I think you need to enable 3 way merge by default in git's configuration, and both smerge (minor mode for solving conflicts) and ediff (major mode that encompass diff and patch) will pick it up. In the case of the latter you will have 4 panes, one for version A, another for version B, a third for the result C, and the last is the common ancestor of A and B.
Addendum:
I've since long disabled it. A and B changes are enough for me, especially as I rebase instead of merging.
Fantastic write up!
And we're seeing rust happily going down the same path, especially with the micro packages.
To out it more clearly. You take a domain (like OS security, perfomance, and administration) and you’ll find those kinds of problems that people feel important to share solutions with each other. Solutions that are not trivially found. Findings you can be proud your name is attached with.
And then you have something like the LLM craze where while it’s new, it’s not improving any part of the problem it’s supposed to solve, but instead is creating new ones. People are creating imperfect solutions to those new problems, forgetting the main problem in the process. It’s all vapourware. Even something like a new linter for C is more of a solution to programmer’s productivity than these “skills”
For a very tiny slice of these deep problems and how they were addressed, you can review the usenix conferences and the published papers there.