elmigranto

My guess it’s a joke.

Especially for things used directly, you need to understand both, own and third party code, roughly to the same level. With own code, you only care for your own use case; with third-party — you have to kind of get everyone else's.

Depending on what you do and the dependency's scope, either way can make sense.

Third party dependencies are very easy: you just have to intimately know how it is implemented in addition to knowing your own code and stack, and then you are golden!

Nothing to learn, just focus on making your app, it’s all taken care of by This One Simple Package ;)

These things are so far from free as our tooling presents with “just nuget it or whatever”.

Or you can have a single checkbox “Problem with the vehicle”.

Purple tick box is how GitHub formats links to merged PRs and closed issues.

Classic case of "focus on building your app, not infrastructure". Here's another multi-million dollar idea: put this cache directly inside your own video processing server and upload there.

Use managed language, it will handle memory stuff for you, you don’t have to care.

But also read these 400 articles to understand our GC. If you are lucky, we will let you change 3 settings.

Right. That’s why all the software from, say, Microsoft works flawlessly and at peak efficiency.

What if your phone’s kernel panics? :)

> This project […] contains only the necessary parts for realistic benchmarking

> The test program is a simple […] return string

I understand how this is required to measure the effects of sandboxing in isolation. And the result is impressive.

In what ways would you expect performance to be affected when workloads are more realistic as well?

I would guess there is more than one computer :)

Pixar's stuff famously takes days per frame.

iOS app to discover dog-friendly places in Amsterdam.

https://www.instagram.com/doggable.app/

We have over a 100 places now, and are getting ready for closed beta in September. You can sign up by emailing [email protected] or DM-ing us on Instagram @doggable.app.

The app is developed live over at Twitch.

https://twitch.tv/elmigranto

So if most of the issues with GraphQL are the same as with the other approach, what is the point of GraphQL that justifies all the complexity?

> if someone manages to inject arbitrary HTML

If they can, why wouldn’t it be inline <script>?

Good point. I think the fact that it’s named “exit status” instead of “error code” is primary confusion factor.

Sounds interesting, but what are good examples of "Visualizer" part? Screenshots section [1] only has 6 (pretty primitive [2]) images out of about a 100 total, but maybe that is outdated?

[1] https://www.dbvis.com/features/software-screenshots/

[2] https://www.dbvis.com/images/features/screens/chart3.png

Given that `int + bigint` throws in JS, this exact thing will never happen imo, otherwise, you can't differentiate between types.

Maybe something like `{"x": 10n}`, but at that point, might as well do reviver, especially if you already agreed on a format and use some to parse out class instances vs plain objects.

I wish we also had regular word-sized ints as well instead of everything being double precision with all kinds of weird edge cases.

No need for custom parser. Right now, you can use custom format with reviver and serializer functions (2nd arg to serialize / parse). Say, have them serialize as string `^bigint[\d]+$` and revive appropriately.

Keyschain Access.app works exactly like that. Not sure if it would be easy to migrate from Lastlass, though. I know you can at least script the process.

Well, that could be a dealbreaker, though given this is a taste thing and great browser performance of iOS, I personally don't see it as a problem.

Google Photos is on the App Store. On Mac, you can rsync your photos library with cron or launchctl (~/Documents/Photos.library) or stick with time machine or dozen others file-level or block-level backup tools.

Have a single "I clicked by mistake" button that resubscribes instead.

> So it is misleading to say it is secure and that security is built in.

Well, it is a PR blogpost with literally that goal of wording most basic and boring things in a way that sounds maximally sensational and groundbreaking without becoming a lie.

Example: see how they comment on performance improvement. Instead of "compared to previous major relase, npm 5" it says "compared to 1 year ago".

Most likely only popular packages, forget about making `npm publish` a free security review (unless it runs custom eslint rules for stuff like Regex backtracking, etc.).

And probably only guarantee it for particular version.

And "guarantee" is probably too strong a word for it, unless there is a contract with some kind of liability attached.

Same for "security", from the wording of it, they promise notifying about vulnerabilities, not performing comprehensive audits.

I think the point was that malicious actor gets early access to "exploits" by becoming paid customer and has a lot of time to pwn general public.

It's fine, I guess, as long as docs are plain HTML/CSS and use 0 JS. And I think we are all safe on that front, since those pages are Perl generated or something, so…

Neat update, old site had its charm, but w/ever.

Love to everyone in PG community (even those responsible for PgAdmin4 :)

Can someone please explain why for…of needed to be specialized for its async form?

I get why async generators & iterators won't work with plain for…of, but don't get why following is invalid:

    for (const i of [1, 2, 3])
      await getThingAtIndex(i);

The very last example in the article uses similar code, but I feel iterating over array of promises misses the point (as opposed to actually receiving async iterator with `async next () {…}` via `Symbol.iterator`).

Or am I missing something here? Thanks.

Author's remarks are somewhat valid in that certain language formulates certain feelings and general emotional state in people (which is a part of how and why fiction works). Having "easy" and "just" shattered when confronted with reality and not its description by the professionals "on the inside", generates strongrer negative response that it would otherwise.

However, article's argumentation and suggestions on improving the situation make me think that author does not fully realize this or fails to state the problem clearly. Issue lies with the words used and not their meaning or omitting explanations for things that are assumed to be understood by target audience.

"Striking a balance" and "not making too many assumptions" requires making assumptions about where is "balance" and what is "too many" — and we are back at assuming exact same things as before.

What the article amounts to is "use language I like better in your documentation". Albeit understandable, that is wierd position to me, though, perhaps there is some science on writing techniques and language use in order to make your material less discouraging and "easier emotionally" for people (similar to the famous example of positive vs. negative feedback in learning).

"Viable alternative" with its "unacceptable latency" amounts to being just a viewer, which are dime a dozen, including most phones doing that out of the box, countless JS libraries and browser extensions, and every storage service like Dropbox having, if not basic editor, then at least very competent viewer.

I guess it's a start…