BatmanAoD

joined 2 years ago
[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

The post doesn't say "imperative", it just differentiates between defining pipeline steps and defining the logic within a step.

...also, TCL? I haven't used it for ops, but my memory of tcl/tk is extremely negative.

...also also: a core part of a build, CI, or, CD pipeline is almost always invoking binaries to run a command. That's why shell scripts are so ubiquitous in pipeline-logic: invoking binaries is what they're for. And it's very difficult to do that a declarative way: Make comes close, but it's difficult to track any side-effects that aren't "update these files", and a huge amount of CI/CD is no longer just "update a file".

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 15 points 5 months ago (2 children)

https://askubuntu.com/q/641049

TL;DR: it's supposed to send email to an administrator, but by default on some distros (including Ubuntu), it isn't actually sent anywhere.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 11 points 6 months ago (4 children)

This misunderstands the announcement completely.

What the announcement is saying is: previously, if you wanted Gemini to have access to text and chat apps, you also needed to enable Gemini Apps Activity, i.e. the feature that saves all Gemini interactions to the cloud. Now, the settings to enable or disable app access from history tracking are fully separate, so you can have app access enabled (if you want) even if the Apps Activity feature is disabled.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Do you mean Dan Luu, or one of the studies reviewed in the post?

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah, I understand that Option and Maybe aren't new, but they've only recently become popular. IIRC several of the studies use Java, which is certainly safer than C++ and is technically statically typed, but in my opinion doesn't do much to help ensure correctness compared to Rust, Swift, Kotlin, etc.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 4 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I don't know; I haven't caught up on the research over the past decade. But it's worth noting that this body of evidence is from before the surge in popularity of strongly typed languages such as Swift, Rust, and TypeScript. In particular, mainstream "statically typed" languages still had null values rather than Option or Maybe.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 6 points 6 months ago (7 children)

Note that this post is from 2014.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 10 points 6 months ago

Partly because it's from 2014, so the modern static typing renaissance was barely starting (TypeScript was only two years old; Rust hadn't hit 1.0; Swift was mere months old). And partly because true evidence-based software research is very difficult (how can you possibly measure the impact of a programming language on a large-scale project without having different teams write the same project in different languages?) and it's rarely even attempted.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Notably, this article is from 2014.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

It's valid usage if you go waaay back, i.e. centuries. You also see it in some late 19th/early 20th century newsprint and ads.

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

No, because the thing they are naming is "The Github Dictionary"; they're not applying scare-quotes to the word "dictionary" implying that what they've written is not really a "dictionary".

[–] BatmanAoD@programming.dev 5 points 6 months ago

"Scare quotes" definitely precede Austin Powers, though that may have spurred a rise in popularity of the usage. (Also, "trashy people never saw Austin Powers" is honestly a pretty weird statement, IMO.)

That said, in this case, arguably the quotes are appropriate, because "the github dictionary" isn't something that happened (i.e. a headline), but a thing they've made up.

view more: ‹ prev next ›