If you have a common folder that you clone projects to (like OP’s ~/coding), then that checkbox lets you trust that whole folder easily when this pop up comes up.
I have a coding folder “repos”. It’s on a remote machine though and I get this every time I connect to my code folder using a new remote host. So annoying!
I read in a different post that the code was misinterpreted to be a 5 second sleep before showing the video, but instead was waiting 5 seconds to execute some anti-ad-block script. Still pretty sleazy either way.
There’s a video going around of a guy using a useragent spoofer to prove that it only does this on non-Chromium browsers. So I don’t think it’s necessarily anti-adblock, but it could be interpreted that way when you consider Google’s plans to implement DRM in Chromium.
When I went rooting around to find it. I figured it was some QA process that starts 5 seconds after the video loads (the timer seems to be async and the code sends a promise off while it waits). Of course, it’s all minified JS so it’s a huge pain to read.
If somebody actually did that it would be grounds for removing their privileges to merge into master. THIS, THIS is why the JavaScript ecosystem has gotten so bad, people with mentalities similar to his.
In this case, it’s a function that takes an Integer and three values of a generic type a and then returns a list of tuples of those same as.
So, those as are just any types representing the towers. Could be strings, integers, custom data types, whatever. The returned tuples represent movements between towers.
Following that are actually two definitions of the function.
…is the recursion base case. Function definitions are applied, whenever they match, being evaluated top-to-bottom.
This line specifies that it only matches, if that first Integer is 0. It does not care what the remaining parameters are, so matches them with a wildcard _.
Well, and to the right side of the equals sign, you’ve got the return value for the base case, an empty list.
Then comes the more interesting line, the recursion step:
<span style="color:#323232;">hanoi n a b c </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">=</span><span style="color:#323232;"> hanoi (n</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">-</span><span style="color:#0086b3;">1</span><span style="color:#323232;">) a c b </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">++</span><span style="color:#323232;"> [(a, b)] </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">++</span><span style="color:#323232;"> hanoi (n</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">-</span><span style="color:#0086b3;">1</span><span style="color:#323232;">) c b a
</span>
This line matches for any remaining case. Those small letter names are again wildcards, but the matched value is placed into a variable with the provided name.
And then, well, it recursively calls itself, and those ++ are list concations. This line’s only real complexity is the usual Tower Of Hanoi algorithm.
It’s still going to be better than screen on budget laptops. I am convinced my laptop’s screen is 30Hz and it surely wasn’t manufactured to produce colors.
My issue with typescript… and, correct me if I’m wrong… is it doesn’t exist without Javascript. Typescript needs to be compiled down into Javascript to be run. It has no stand alone interpreter (that I’m aware of) and definitely not one baked into web browsers or NodeJS (or adjacent) tools. In essence, Typescript is jank sitting on top of and trying to fix Javascript’s uber jank, simultaneously fracturing the webdev space while not offering itself as a true competitive and independent language for said space.
I really don’t get how people can feel more productive in JavaScript. With typescript the code practically writes itself. Sometimes when refactoring I’ll change a functions input and output signature and just fix compiler errors until it stops complaining, and the code just works without me having to really even think about what the code is doing.
Any time I’m forced to go back to js I feel like I’m going crazy trying to keep track of what’s in all the variables. With typescript I can use more powerful object structures without having to constantly double check where they came from.
I’ve never worked with it and don’t know in detail, but it lets you compile several languages into web based client/server code (basically, converting other languages into website code). Works with C, C++, C#, Go, Rust, Swift, etc)
I don’t think it really fractures anything considering you can call a ts package from js without knowing. The other way also works with third party typings in DefinitelyTyped.
It really just adds a bit of extra type info into js, looks like js, and transpiles into js that looks almost exactly like the input, including comments and spacing and such if you like, so there isn’t any lockin.
There isn’t any competition, it’s just an extra optional tool for the js ecosystem in my eyes.
The transpilation that typescript does doesn’t really have anything to do with typescript, it’s just there because typescript wants to support the latest ecmascript features, so transpilation is necessary for that, but technically you could simply strip out the type info and have another transpiler like babel handle the backwards compatibility. I think there are a few minor exceptions to that, like enums. There was even a proposal to add some typescript types to native JavaScript that would be ignored by the interpreter and just act as comments.
I mean, tsc without any of the backporting functionality is still a transpiler since it goes from a high level language(ts) to another high level language(js). Transpilation as a concept doesn’t imply that it is for backporting language features or that the source and destination languages are the same, just that it is a transformation from source code to a similar or higher abstraction level language source code
Yes, it’s still a transpiler, I’m not saying it isn’t, but what I mean is that it doesn’t add any functionally specific to the typescript language. There’s a transpiler for TS that doesn’t even do any type checking at all and just does the type stripping and back porting. But of course, that’s not why people use typescript. All the features that are actually important to typescript could be done through a linter instead. If type annotations were added to JavaScript you could get most of typescript’s features with linting rules and just handle back porting in a more standard way.
V8 also doesn’t run js, it does some byte code compilation stuff amongst other things, then interprets that. But that’s all a bit pedantic too, V8 runs js, deno runs ts.
fwiw deno.com even has as one of their first bullet points that they have “native support for TypeScript and JSX”
As a professional with 25 years of experience I agree with you. The entire modern architecture was created by people who don’t like simple things that work. I’m pretty sure there are a couple of high ranking master developers sitting at the head of W3C competing to create the most convoluted system possible.
I’m a hobbyist. I don’t work on really large or complex projects. I just want to get the most productivity for my spare-time-dabbling and having tried a few times to get into typescript it seemed to create more “extra steps” for me than it saved.
I’ve used JavaScript since its creation. I would describe typescript as JavaScript as it should have been. I’ve always actually liked JavaScript’s simplicity, but I’ve never liked its lack of type safety. At its core, JavaScript has a tiny conceptual footprint, and that’s actually pretty refreshing compared to other very complicated languages. But it was plagued with terrible implementations and the inherent messiness of dynamic typing. I’ve watched it evolve over the years and it’s improved beyond my greatest hopes. Between the advent of transpilation, tooling, and typescript, I’m very proud of where the language has gotten to. Having made websites in the 90s and 00s, I feel like people don’t realize how much work has gone into getting the ecosystem in a much better place.
Typescript doesn’t have strong typing but static typing still gets you really really far. It means you need to be more careful with your io and avoid dangerous type assertions, but I don’t think that’s a bad thing. Having used typescript an absolute ton, the only real jank I’ve encountered is from bad library typings that either use it lazily or incorrectly, but for code bases that use it through and through it has been smooth sailing, and having professionally used both traditional static typed languages and dynamically typed languages, I really enjoy typescript’s type inference and structural typing. I think you should give it an honest try before judging it. But that’s just my 2 cents as an industry professional who has used many languages and have been programming for decades for what it’s worth.
Still won’t help me when I type ifconfig or dig, though.
Also I’ve noticed there is also a curl in Windows CLI that I believe is based on libcurl, but when called from powershell is an alias for (iirc) Invoke-WebRequest.
I came across this one just yesterday and while it was convenient at first, I immediately got frustrated when I went to add some parameters and discovered it wasn’t actually curl
Classic PoweShell experience. Try rm -rf - I wonder why they added the aliases in the first place. Only frustrating to type different arguments which are also more verbose. Tastes like the good ol’ embrace-extend-extinguish.
Yet depressingly common in MMORPG circles. People tend to vastly underestimate the amount of work needed to get an remotely playable MMO off the ground.
I’ve entertained the idea, and the first to requirements that come to mind are advertising money and server upkeep money - then one could start worrying about actually making it
Hear me out: a fully fledged desktop environment, like KDE Plasma or Gnome, but it’s a 3D world - “windows” are just walls, the file explorer is just a bunch of procedurally generated condos, and you get a Gmod physics gun to move stuff around.
Ruby syntax is nice although I prefer python way of enforcing indentation instead of adding "end"s. Personally I just want a statically typed language with enforced indent as syntax.
Funny, the forced indentation is what I hate about Python. If you think a missing semicolon can be hard to catch, don’t ever think about a missing whitespace :p
The end keyword really isn’t a big deal for me. I find it to be a good way to easily spot the end of a method. But if you wouldn’t like it I’d still find it a good compromise to avoid syntax issues due to whitespace.
Same and agreed, especially if you keep your functions small and focused as you should. 3-5 indents is nbd to keep track of, and if you need more than that… No you don’t, refactor.
I’ve had way more hangups with brackets then indentation, personally, not that either is a super frequent issue, but I’m indenting anyway, so brackets are redundant and just another thing I have to keep track of
That’s just Algol instead of B. Most languages use the one or the other, then there’s sexpr-based languages (lisp, scheme), lua (technically Algol but not needing semicolons while also not needing newlines so it’s definitely special), and layout syntax (Haskell, or, if you want a bad implementation, python).
Basically, when you leave out the ‘{’ then Haskell uses your intendation to insert ‘;}’ on later lines between the leading whitespace and the first token.
There some really old Haskell code out there that lines up the ‘{;}’ characters on the left under block-introduction keywords.
It’s not just old Haskell code that’s how you write Haskell if you want explicit braces. Well, mostly generate, but it’s still the idiomatic formatting (and when you generate you always generate braces because it’s easy to get layout subtly wrong when generating).
programmer_humor
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.