skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
With GCC itself being written in C++, what is better about GCC's own bootstrap story except that it's been part of operating system distributions for longer? I am not aware of anyone using clang or MSVC to bootstrap GCC on Linux distributions for example, they use GCC's own lineage traceable back to C. It has the same bootstrap problem, and it isn't a problem in practice because vendors distribute binary toolchains. Even BSD and Gentoo start out with an initial set of binaries before rebuilding the world.

The architecture support angle is a better one for why a GCC backend is helpful, but that will also be addressed by rustc_codegen_gcc so it isn't a relevant argument here. And by the looks of it, that will be a usable solution much sooner than gccrs, and it will remain usable with a much lower long-term resource commitment. This is an argument more in favor of rustc_codegen_gcc than gccrs.

The strongest argument I can see about bootstrapping issues here is that Rust moves much faster and Rust's own compiler code requires a relatively recent Rust version, so in the extremely specific circumstance where binaries are not available and cross compilation is also not possible, bootstrapping will take more steps than it would for a gccrs frontend limited by C++'s slower rate of evolution. I don't see this being anywhere near as much of a problem as gccrs trying to catch up to & keep pace with Rust's frontend evolution. The former we can solve with the same build farms and cross compiles we need anyway, the latter requires continuous ongoing human effort with all of the disadvantages of C++.
after reading the title I thought the manufacturer coated the adapter in chilly, so cats won't chew on it and thought - "That's a brilliant idea".
It wouldn't be too dim, your eyes have remarkable dynamic range. Brightness is experienced more like sound, with sensory capacity of many orders of magnitude, than a physical scalar sense like weight or distance.

Wikipedia says [1] the solar radiation on Uranus is 3.4-4 W/m^2. Imagine lighting up a square meter of wall with a 3W pocket inspection light, or a mood-lit room with just a few 8W bulbs. Reading might be a little bit of a strain after a while, but I think your eyes would quickly adjust.

When New Horizons was going past Pluto, Nasa put out the #PlutoTime website [2]. Pluto is about 30 AU from Earth, Uranus is about 20 AU out, so at a particular moment around twilight - when it's bright enough to walk around without artificial lighting and to take a photo - it will be as bright as it is on Uranus. The widget is dead, but it's still accessible through archive.org. Unfortunately, it's no longer accurate, it seems to be linked to the time and date when the site was archived. I'm neither a web dev nor an astronomer, but I exported the JS and it seems to provide reasonable results:

https://jsfiddle.net/9btumsj6/

Anyone have an idea of what solar_angle should be to simulate Uranus or Neptune? Apparently, when the sun is -1.5 degrees below the horizon here, that's about right for Pluto illumination. Just reducing the angle by three from -1.5 to -0.5 changes the time by about 6 minutes of twilight...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunlight#Intensity_in_the_Sola...

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20150827083531/http://solarsyste...
Thanks for providing images of the suit, quite strange the article never shows a single image of the iconic suit he created.
I wish that Arena included a few more "interesting" models like the new Phi-2 model and the current tinyllama model, which are trying to push the limits on small models. Solar-10.7B is another interesting model that seems to be missing, but I just learned about it yesterday, and it seems to have come out a week ago, so maybe it's too new. Solar supposedly outperforms Mixtral-8x7B with a fraction of the total parameters, although Solar seems optimized for single-turn conversation, so maybe it falls apart over multiple messages (I'm not sure).
What does "abusive media tactics" mean?
That seems disingenuous. No doubt there are some car owners who do care about these things, but the vast majority of drivers would likely be hard-pressed to know what type of engine their car has, or what the differences between rear and front drive are. Most people select cars based on some mix of cost, perceived safety, utility, and by what other people they know are getting.

(edit) Went to add sourcing and was surprised to find that while most of the things I listed were accurate, fuel efficiency turns out to be one I significantly underestimated:
https://www.statista.com/chart/13075/most-important-factors-...
Sure sure. Nobody is going to make mission decisions based on my artistic interpretation of the results.

Aside: I think the most useful instrument for NASA's mission at the moment is a boolean "Life/no-life" indicator on each planet, moon, asteroid, etc. Not very pretty.
I bumped into so many corner case and dumb bugs on a recent python project that I'm even more of a unit testing enthusiast than before. Past a certain level of complexity they are definitely a net benefit.
> In the standard socket, you can have 10 amp, 15 amp or 20 amp, and they all have different sized pins.

Yeah, Brazilian NBR 14136 does that too. It has 10A and 20A variants, and the only difference is that 20A has slightly larger pins, so it won't fit into a 10A socket. (And the international standard it was based on, IEC 60906-1, has only a 16A variant with an intermediate pin size, so the 10A plug would fit into its socket and its plug would fit into the 20A socket.) Annoyingly, that's the only difference, making it quite hard to tell just by looking whether it's a 10A or 20A plug/socket; you have to try and see if it fits.
Google podcasts is shutting down
Yeah it doesn't seem like police academy fly overs and the like are the best usage of taxpayer dollars. I was thinking about tacking that onto my comment but it felt out of place to the question I was asking originally.
You should not be downvoted as heavily as you are now.

I feel like we did testing a disservice by specifying the unit to be too granular. So in most systems you end up with hundreds of useless tests testing very specific parts of code in complete isolation.

In my opinion a unit should be a "full unit of functionality as observed by the user of the system". What most people call integration tests. Instead of testing N similar scenarios for M separate units of code, giving you NxM tests, write N integrations tests that will test those for all of your units of code, and will find bugs where those units, well, integrate.
The correct behavior is the behavior it has, of course! It is all the other programs that can't integrate with it that are wrong. /s

Unit tests or not, so much code I interact with is like this. This is part of why I love integration tests. It's usually at the point of integrating one thing with another that things go bad, where bugs occur, and where the intention of APIs are misunderstood.

I like unit tests for the way that they encourage composition and dependency injection, but if you're already doing that, then (unit tests or not) I prefer integration tests. They might not be as neat and tidy as a unit test OR as a e2e test, and they might miss important implementation edge cases, but well made integration tests can find all sorts of race conditions, configurations that we should help users avoid, and much much more precisely because they are looking for problems with the side effects that no amount of pure-function unit-tested edge-cased code will make obvious or mitigate.

Integration tests are like the "explain why" comments that everyone clamors for, but in reproducible demo form. "Show me" vs "tell me"
I thought he was going to say there was current in the water.

I remember showering in Costa Rica at a “hotel” and the shower head was one of those that heats the water (with an electric heater) and it was shocking me the whole time I used it. Probably shouldn’t have used it

Apparently those are common in central and South America.
When your accusations of hypocrisy are just picking two random writers who have no connection, attributing them tk two different broad diverse groups that each containing many and different viewpoints and are largely unconnected, and then arguing as if these two broad diverse groups are like a single hive mind that should have one consistent viewpoint... maybe instead of doing a hypocrisy based ad hominem against an entity you’ve invented for the purpose you should just either discuss the actual issue?
Junior dev left to his own devices will start reimplementing Linux kernel.
You could have watch the program and observed the failure, why need to write a test to be “surprised” it failed
Helicopter rental prices vary tremendously based on the aircraft type, optional equipment, and whether pilots are included. A fully loaded cost of $3K per hour for a police helicopter can be reasonable accounting for depreciation, maintenance, fuel, crew wages, training, licensing, and airport fees. Modern police helicopters tend to be on the expensive with twin turbine engines, large spotlights, stabilized cameras, and high-end digital avionics.
Nobody knows what's happening online anymore
In the post-mainframe era, tech centric companies have learned to age discriminate by shifting the platform out from underneath their workforces causing older workers to stumble, typically laying off those older workers and/or turning around and hiring younger workers who are pre-trained (or willing to and cheap enough to be trained) in the new platforms. Sometimes the platform vendors themselves help their customers execute on such schemes, even targeting specific workers who might have authority to block such platform shifts. Even in small startups where the hiring entrepreneur may have been working in a different field with plenty of high-skill mature workers or living at (a parent’s) home playing video games pounding caffeine drinks just a few months earlier, there still seems to be an instinctive bias to hire young (and cheap) tech people and embrace whatever tech du jour that they prefer to maximize their chance of success. Even Y Combinator reportedly got its start poaching college age kids with $6K all-in packages and “incubating” them. (Get away from me with that thing!) It’s not The Way, of course, but with most mature workers permanently taken out of the industry during the dot-com crash and that flood of technicians filling critical roles for a while, it’s also not going to change until the new generation (currently their most senior workers are at about 17 years experience by my clock) takeover the game like “The Ancients” before them (that they never knew).

Source: my six year education and 41 year pro career that began under people who had once fought in WWII and I’m still way (WAY!) younger than the youngest founder of Apple (#8)
If we cut off at 8 byte blocks every number would be < 256^8. Encountering x > 256^8 would simplify be invalid.
I don't think people and how they work are much different now than in 1975. I have no data, though. That would be an interesting study. Do you have data?
I have a Hyundai Santa Fe. It pairs my Android Phone as soon as the car starts and the Google Maps pops on the screen. Zero fumbling. Except when a member of the family Iphone is nearby. Then the Iphone bullies my Android and pairs first.
Xfinity had a data breach [pdf]
> What Information Was Involved? On December 6, 2023, we concluded that the information included
usernames and hashed passwords. For some customers, other information was also included, such as
names, contact information, last four digits of social security numbers, dates of birth and/or secret
questions and answers. However, our data analysis is continuing, and we will provide additional notices
as appropriate.
conceptually, not hard. the issue is scale and transport.
Road Sign Instruction Intemator
The primary objective of the Road sign instruction intemator is to provide early traffic conditions on roadways to detect congestion,

and Provide information to drivers to take alternative routes to avoid congested areas or incidents,

The system utilizes a combination of NodeMCU and LCD display to notify drivers or users to change routes to manage their time
Quickly transmitte and respond to traffic incidents, accidents, or breakdowns to minimize their impact on traffic flow and improve emergency response

Display real-time information and instructions on variable message signs along roadways to communicate messages to drivers

By incorporating a NodeMCU and LCD, the system offers a comprehensive solution for accurate and timely information to emergency vehicles to avoid congested area
Bought my cat a nice and large bed which is more akin to a throne but anyway. He now happily sleeps directly next to it.
The large moons have zero inclination with respect to Uranus’ equator but the smaller irregular moons are all over the place. Wikipedia has this nice graphic showing orbital distance (x), eccentricity (x error bar) orbit inclination (y), and moon size:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/TheIrreg...

The only thing missing from the graphic is each moons axial tilt with respect to either its orbit or the rest of the solar system.
Check out VSCode's "Ruby in Visual Studio Code" page [1].

Ruby LSP already does quite a bit and started gaining go-to method abilities last month [2], though it isn't complete quite yet [3]. It's build on Prism, so promises to be more robust than past attempts. Shopify has been moving fast on improving things here.

The Rdbg integration works great too [4]. Just add a `launch.json` and VSCode can hook into the very nice capabilities Koichi Sasada has been adding to the official `debug` gem.

[1]: https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/languages/ruby

[2]: https://github.com/Shopify/ruby-lsp/releases/tag/v0.12.4

[3]: https://github.com/Shopify/ruby-lsp/issues/899

[4]: https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=KoichiSa...
Release Radar · End of 2023 Edition
What are you talking about?

OP said "asking quick questions and getting an instant answer. vs chat where I may not get an answer for hours"

It's ALL they have said.

They did NOT said they will "touch your shoulder", they did NOT said they will "interrupt you when you clearly don't want to be interrupted", they did NOT said they will "interrupt you after you made clear you don't like working like that", they did NOT said they will "ask incessant questions that are easily found in the doc", they did NOT said they will "ask you to answer day in day out", they did NOT said they will "guilt trip you to do something obviously unreasonable", ...

And, YOU, YOU called them "toddler". YOU DID THAT. If now you are changing the goal post to "people who guilt trip other people are not nice", yeah, everyone agrees with that, but WHY DID YOU CALL OP TODDLER?

WHY

DID

YOU

CALL

OP

TODDLER?

What is the thing that OP have said (really said, not something in your mind) that according to you is not compatible with a respectful and sane work relationship?

> who doesn't like being said "NO" to and who throws a fit ever time when somebody expresses a boundary?

Yep.

Me: your colleague needs to work, if they are blocked by something that can be easily solved with a simple quick question and that they are being reasonable with their requests, they should be authorized to just ask you. They should not have to walk on egg shells to cater for ath3nd social inabilities, it's not their work, it's not their mental charge on their shoulders, there are boundaries.

You: NO, they should just submit to MY way of being asked a question.

The situation is EXTREMELY SIMPLE: just don't be a prick. You and everyone else.

Don't ask incessant questions.

But also, don't ask people to care for your fragile person who is not able to get one or two questions a day that will help everyone progress.

Not liking question is fine. Just act like an adult about it: discuss and tell them. Don't jump on the first person who passes and says "I find quick question convenient" and yield "well then you are a toddler" without even knowing if this person is a prick or not.

ALL your explanations, ALL OF THEM, they are ALL about YOU, YOU, YOU. You only present situation when you are reasonable and when the interlocutor is a prick. Yes, we know, incessant questions are disruptive (daaaah, it's obvious). But there is more than one way to be a prick. One other way is to be a self-centered idiot who is incapable to help the team because they view everything into distorting glasses (like when you call OP "toddler" for behavior they never had) or because they view their work relationship in a competitive way instead of collaborative (like when you say that the person who ask the question "owns" something to the person who has the knowledge)
> every single function and method

Very much no, that's the bad kind of unit test that locks your code into a specific structure and makes it a pain to update because you also have to change all the related tests even if the actual interface used by the rest of the codebase didn't change. I would call this the rookie mistake of someone new to unit tests.

You want to encapsulate your code with some sort of interface that matches the problem space, then test to that interface. How its internals are broken down don't matter: it could be one big function, it could be a dozen functions, it could be a class, it as long as the inputs and outputs match what the test is looking for you can refactor and add/remove features without having to spend extra time changing the tests. Makes it much less of a pain to work with in general.

One way of looking at it I've used before with coworkers: For this new feature you're writing, imagine a library for it already exists. What is the simplest and most straightforward way to use that library? That's your interface, the thing you expose to the world and what you run your tests against.

This is what unit testing originally meant: semantic units, not code units.

It's like app Hungarian notation vs system Hungarian notation, the original idea got overtaken by people who didn't understand the idea and only mimicked the surface level appearance.
As low-DDK player, what has helped me most is

1) Playing lots of games (https://online-go.com and https://gokgs.com are good for this). I usually have a few correspondence games going and then try to play a normal speed game daily. Don't worry about winning and losing, just play. Begin to internalize how standard tactics reappear regularly on the board.

2) Do tsumego (life and death) a lot. But don't just try things and see what happens. Try to read out the entire sequence before looking at the answer. (SmartGo One is a good app). Cho Chikun's beginner ones are good [1]. Try to work on a subset of problems (<100) until you can just look at the formation for a few seconds and see the answer. Play out all sequences to really understand why they don't work. Getting the answer isn't really the point, it's that you internalize the tactics involved in all tsumego.

3) As someone who spent WAY too much time reading books about Go strategy and tactics before I could barely play the game: don't do that. Books become much more useful once you are a SDK (single digit kyu) player. Until then, just play and study life and death. Reading books isn't bad, it just isn't that helpful when you can get beat in a game because you don't have the basic tactics down.

[1] https://tsumego.tasuki.org/
I asked myself that question at the start of the year and the answer was: I have none! I realised that I was rapidly approaching retirement age and I had nothing to do when I stop software stuff!

So I've changed all that and tried a few things. I've settled on golf (used to play as a child - I'm 49 now) and playing piano (played that as a child too).

Anyway... I'm happy af now (only way to put it).

Not to sidetrack this but I reckon unfinished stuff is a definite cause of mid-life crisis: I realised that I start many things but don't finish them and often use the excuse, "meh, it wasn't for me!" to justify it and funnily enough, from the middle of last year to this year I was decidedly unhappy but couldn't put my finger on it. Since I picked up the piano and golf again (both things I quit at before), I've never been happier.

Anyway, golf and piano :-D
Hmm, not sure what you mean about language extensions. Most language extensions just remove unnecessary restrictions in the language. What are you thinking of?
(Author here) Construct is completely independent of GameMaker. Key differences are it's fully browser based and built entirely on web technology, has more focus on the block-based alternative to coding, but also support for industry-standard JavaScript and TypeScript rather than a custom language (GML).
amazon bought book depository, which used to be the only alternative that shipped books to my country at reasonable prices. No more.

There's another value that's lost, more human, of just browsing a charming book store.
Kent Beck also said [0] "I get paid for code that works, not for tests, so my philosophy is to test as little as possible to reach a given level of confidence"

[0] https://stackoverflow.com/a/153565
A bug in test code is not a real bug. It’s just a test that’s not giving you useful information. Lots of tests don’t give you useful information. Some that fail and some that pass.

It’s easy to write a test that doesn’t provide useful information across time. Harder to write a test that does.
Thanks for taking care to explain.
But aren't all embedded vectors representing something organized?
I recently replaced my 120V receptacles with USB ones. Super convenient and it's allowed me to get rid of the dozens of various transformer plugs around the home.

https://store.leviton.com/collections/usb-outlets
Creators, porn stars turn to AI doppelgangers to keep fans entertained
I've seen the same thing with comments. My boss required us to add comments to our code, to make it easier to read. That was all he asked, please add comments. My co-worker added comments like "Increase variable i by 1", while completely ignoring the 8 lines of spaghetti business logic above.

Similarly I've seen people add tests that will ensure that code coverage doesn't go down, but it doesn't actually do anything to help anyone. I'd argue that the issue is that have random coverage goals is a problem on its own, but it's the only way to force some people to write even to most basic of tests.
God. That website literally has one ads for every few paragraphs.
i think, you can almost get there already with hdmi support, which was done (iirc) couple of weeks ago.
Unit tests are not even well defined. What is a unit?
The really crazy part is that one of the factors that make emergency helicopter fleets more expensive than regular commercial chopper fleets is keeping the fleet at a state of readiness. Using them for ferrying officials around cancels those benefits out while driving the costs even higher.
If you have worked in places where safety is critical, you wouldn’t say something so shallow. In those places they place human verification above all else. They have a thick book where you do a full run and is double checked, they don’t f around with unit tests and say this is good to go
3d printing stuff and making devices with Arduinos
Good Oak (1949) [pdf]
Sounds like they're asking questions and you're making assumptions.
I've found this article before and have to say, it put me off going any further when I got to...

> # tl;dr
>
> Here’s how getting code reviewed and submitted with Gerrit is different from doing the same with GitHub:
>
> - You need to add a commit-msg hook script when you clone a repo for the first time using a snippet you can find e.g. here (link)

Well, that was enough to make me think twice.
As a former programmer and now EM, I agree with this. Open offices definitely felt a lot more productive since everyone was always frantically working and communicating. I think people actually have gotten more done since WFH started, though.