TheV2 @ TheV2 @programming.dev

Posts

8

Comments

209

Joined

2 yr. ago

Why should they? Less users are programming anything, but more people have become users of computers in the first place. And we have more users of computers, precisely because the levels of abstraction do not require the ordinary user to program anything. Today's ordinary user is more "ordinary" than fifty years ago. This development of making a tool or subject more accessible to the layman, by hiding the complexities with abstractions and yet allowing more skilled users to gain advantages by peeling away the abstractions, is present in many different fields throughout the history of mankind.

If you look closely, it is not really surprising. Not even a problem at all. In fact, if you have the simple understanding that maybe somebody doesn't want to program, not because they are a stupid idiot or a lazy normie consumer, but because they simply don't give a shit about it, follow other interests and can contribute to the world with other skills, then the observation that most users are not programming anything, is insanely unproblematic.

I'd immediately substitute it for an alternative left nipple that is definitely left (for the next five years at least).

I consumed fast food regularly when it was cheap. Maybe today someone consumes fast food regularly, because it can still be cheap, but only if you collect points, coupons and such.

On top of that, they're always around you and you know what they offer, if you get used to it. Sometimes I want a satisfying safe bet instead of an unknown experiment.

If I understand this correctly, the polite request is meant to be passive aggressive flattery and the outright demand is the honest tone that gets to the point. I think in written form I prefer the polite request to avoid panicking immediately. In person, I'd panic anyway. So I prefer the outright demand, because I can't handle passive aggressive attacks at all. Usually I'll reflect their politeness before I understand the matter and then when they assume that I'm not taking it seriously, they get more intense which scares me long-term.

EDIT: No, actually, forget it. I'd prefer the outright demand even in written form. I get chills when I think about encounters with passive aggressive demands...

The USA is neither the best country nor the worst country. It's just one of the countries.

The reasoning behind a lot of "only humans do that" is that it's unexplored.

I thought I was INFJ. I'm glad to learn that in reality I'm undefinedNFP.

In Omori ::: spoiler Title Mari's death and how it happened - I still feel pressure on my chest whenever I think about it. Since a missclick lead me accidentally to the alternative ending at first, it was even worse... :::

Me, too, and it works for other Linux distros, but in this case it's a Windows Sandbox. Unless it's copy and paste, for this case it wouldn't be worth it and I assume there can be similar situations in the future for other reasons.

I once started to work on auto-setup scripts for Windows, but the unpredictable nature of it made me give up on that :D

Since fish abbreviations get replaced by the actual abstracted content before the execution, I'm more concise about the tools. And thus I'd remember the ways without my setup better. Then again, it only works for small stuff.

This is cool! It doesn't fit my current situation. The temporary system I'm dealing with now is a Windows Sandbox for a school project. While it could take a few minutes to install winget and the necessary tools, I'd rather not risk the potential of troubleshooting time, because of the limited amount of time I work on it physically (and because I'm cursed with troubleshooting nightmares on Windows).

But I'll have a look on xxh. It could definitely improve my comfort with servers that do not maintain nushell packages.

I assume that every decision I make I'll regret for what could have been and embrace for what has become. And that's only the small part of the future I get to decide.

Contagion and Children of Men - while they didn't look far into the future and dealt with existing problems, it's still horrifyingly accurate.

That's an interesting question. I'll try to get to the bottom of this.

I'll dodge.

Thank you! That's exactly what I need, but I probably have a unique case where I as the developer am the cause for the feature creep myself. For work, luckily our product is an ERP software, so in most cases I'm naturally uninterested for more features :D

But I do choose this approach for these problems to not have reusable code on purpose xD I'm not try-harding to rewrite everything for every feature separately, so most of it would be separated and modular, as long as it's required by the initial purpose of the software. However I avoid writing generic and reusable code that only gets rewarded with functional scalability in mind.

And unit testing is honestly not on my list for these kinds of projects. At best I'd write integration tests to challenge the route handlers. But simply using the software is sufficient to cover the predictably unpredictable usage in these cases.

Thanks for the recommendations. A missing understanding of what needs to be reusable could be a problem. E.g. in my example when I add a DAO-like interface just to implement it for the two entities I have, I invite my future self to add unnecessary features to make more use of that interface and other generic components.

This is the kind of extreme solution I want to discover with a fitting search term. But personally, I still want to be able to fix bugs and update dependencies. I don't want to lock down the project, but only the features.

Yup, but I struggle to find results about intentional usage of anti-patterns. I mean, it's actually a good thing, but... :/