I use OMZ because it lets me rely on popular defaults instead of bike shedding and rolling my own. Its main advantage is convention over configuration. For instance, I just have to learn the git plugin aliases once, and then I can use them anywhere with OMZ + git plugin. Is there any lighter alternative that is compatible with OMZ plugins?
The problem I have with coding on Termux is that it's not a full Linux environment, and a lot of tools will fail to compile because there's some dependency that doesn't exist. That includes, for instance, database adaptors for nodejs, which compromises web app development.
Do you use any workaround for that huge limitation? Or just SSH into a proper Linux box?
This could be debatable if browsers had any UI at all to display XML. It's incomprehensible that if you open the open web solution for subscribing to web content (RSS) you're greeted with a wall of unformatted text. Right now, XSLT is the poor fix to that browser's basic inability.
+ Doesn't have the same compatibility issues Termux has, so I can install things like bun.js and npm packages with native bindings (e.g. database connectors)
- Can't edit text selection, which makes it difficult to copy text
- Can't paste text
- Frequently restarts and loses all progress while switching apps
I can't say much about the battery because I just haven't used it enough to tell the difference. Honestly, with all these major flaws, I usually end up just using Termux.
I hope they fix these glaring flaws soon, IMO they're a lot more urgent to get devs to actually use this than GUI support.
Nitpick: also, a more distinctive name would be nice. Right now, it's basically impossible to search for solutions to Android Terminal issues
Do you believe the amount of time developers have spent building hello worlds is a waste because those are useless applications?
Should go without saying, but the interesting thing about this thread is not that you can now play a flawed text version of an old game. It's that this example toy use case manages to explore the new capabilities and limitations of this new promising tool. This improves our understanding of this technology, and helps us make better use of it in the future, for more productive and innovative applications that we may not be able to predict yet at this point.
Relying on hacks for production code is usually a red flag/code smell that indicates there was probably a better alternative. `string & {}` definitely feels like one of those hacks.
As an alternative, wouldn't it be better to map the list of supported values in a structure like an enum?
Example:
```
enum HelloWorldValue {
Hello: 'hello',
World: 'world'
}
const value = HelloWorldValue.Hello
```
And now you can call that enum when declaring a variable value and get its contents in autocomplete. As a nice bonus, because these are references and not strings, you can ask your IDE for all places instantiating those values, which can be a life saver.
I like to focus on the main business element. If it's a SaaS for sharing videos with comments, for instance, I'd take a longer look at the video and comment models, their relations, and the call chain from API endpoint to model.
Another strategy I like is picking parts of the codebase and trying to refactor them. You don't even need to commit anything if you're not supposed to go around changing things: just by spending some time moving things around, seeing what breaks and so on will give you a better understanding of the code and what it does.
That's not how coinbase operates. You have a "Buy <Coin>" button, and you expect to get that coin without fail, every time. If a new token launches, you should be able to buy it without waiting for users to deposit and sell. Maybe you're confusing with coinbase pro, which uses the more traditional order book model, or with other exchanges?
> I don't want DuckDuckGo to filter/sensor based on "politics of the day". I don't mind them tagging results.
Agreed on both. Maybe it should have been done sooner, to avoid looking reactionary. Though I understand why today that propaganda may be considered worse than in the past.
> Sure, but there is clearly a difference here.
There's a difference, but not significant IMO. Just like misleading results should generally be penalised, to help people get to the information they requested.
I honestly fail to understand how downranking state-run propaganda that promotes a dictatorship's lies is considered to be a bad thing in a service that is all about providing useful information.
This isn't about silencing a political view, cancelling an unpopular opinion, or whatever. It's defending against a deliberate attack from an oppressive regime. Search engines already have to do a lot of tweaking, for instance to defend against SEO spammers. I don't know how can this be controversial.
Anyway, answering your question, I use and like Ecosia. I've heard good things from Brave Search, but haven't tested it yet.
As someone said in another reply, setting these team expectations is important so that the developer won't assume the reviewer will do the heavy testing, and the reviewer assumes the developer must have done it, leading to preventable production outages.
The developer can definitely do work like providing samples of generated SQL, UI screenshots and so on. Again, knowing who will do that deep due diligence is more important than the actual decision.
This should be something agreed within a team, so that review standards are consistent across team members.
In my previous team, the reviewer was the main responsible for the code they were approving. They were expected to test locally and should actively hunt for potential issues, such as checking in the logs that the ORM was building correct SQL.
In my current team, the developer is the main responsible for the code they're pushing, and is expected to do all the tests needed. Reviews are more about ensuring code standards, finding possible oversights, requirements mismatches, and so on.
No one strategy is right or wrong, as long as expectations are set and everyone knows their responsibilities and expectations.
This is it. If you let the machines do their thing unsupervised, you're creating an optimisation game someone is going to win.
I honestly believe the only way for a search engine to be as valuable as Google was years ago is to let human knowledge drive more decisions. Maybe closer in spirit to what a web app store would look like, or closer to the categorisation Yahoo did. Not to browse by category (though even that would be refreshing at this point), but to better select the most relevant search sources.
Its competitors DNAnexus and Seven Bridges seem to be US based, or at least report having offices there. But Lifebit is recruiting internationally, and even has a US office now too, so AFAIK it should also be a valid option for US folks.
My son (now 4yo) was diagnosed with two rare diseases, due to a mutation in a collagen production gene, and at first it wasn't clear if he was ever going to walk at all. His life will always be severely impacted.
I feel your pain about wanting more R&D around treatments and potential cures but finding almost nothing because it wouldn't be commercially viable.
My main strategy was trying to contribute with what I know best: software development. The company I joined (lifebit.ai) is building tooling to reduce medical/pharma R&D costs, in an effort to make it economically viable to research diseases that weren't viable before. This is a mission I can get behind and that feels like the best use of my time.
I hope you get to find the best way to have the biggest impact. Good luck!