aredplug

Even if that were true, is it a bad thing?

+1. The job of reviewer on shared codebases is advisory, not as a gatekeeper.

If people choose to ignore comments, then that's a behavioral issue worth escalating.

I believe a variant of: "It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."

... applies to code reviewers.

I like Google's review standard:

"In general, reviewers should favor approving a [PR] once it is in a state where it definitely improves the overall code health of the system being worked on, even if the [PR] isn’t perfect."

https://google.github.io/eng-practices/review/reviewer/stand...

Azul is popular in low latency financial services. A usecase might be to reduce the variance that JIT compilation introduces to transaction latency, especially at the high percentiles.

Think of this as an extension of the build pipeline, which already involves shipping source and build artifacts between multiple machines.

To counter the stories of "an ergonomic keyboard" fixed my health issue...

I had back pain for a few years. After physio and other improvements I tried an Ergodox and that didn't fix it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29598697 cites evidence that 94% do the right thing.

Perhaps you're overly cynical?

Either way, a good demonstration of the value of empirical evidence.

I'm happy to pay and wait for the Librem 5 because they fund a lot of Phosh development.

Keep up the good work!

Perhaps quotes that make people feel bad are less likely to survive.