g4zj

This is really fun! Nice job.

Small issue: I accidentally right-clicked one of the arrow buttons and it stuck in the pressed position, causing the snake to curl into itself and end my game before I could left-click out of the context menu.

There is a level editor with the ability to show the optimal result for a custom level. In theory, one could recreate any official level and reveal the best solution that way. However, I haven't tried this to verify any intentional roadblocks by the developer.

I'm curious what the issue is with using Handbrake? I use it all the time on macOS and it's generally a simple and effective tool for my purposes.

> There is a shattering sound at around 2:50.

Oof. I'm glad I turned down the volume in response to this warning. Why not just remove this awful sound?

I'm down to just one unmatched expression, but it's going to require undoing many others to fix.

With so many wildcards (`.*`) involved, it feels as though making a few assumptions along the way is unavoidable. If I start over and only make moves I can prove are correct, I don't get very far.

I don't know if this is so much a fallacy as it is a questionable assumption which disregards prudential reasoning.

Thank you for that explanation. It was very helpful. :)

Wouldn't NASA then almost certainly be aware of this as well?

Is this functionally different from a typical license key or activation key?

Off-topic, so I hope not to spark too much side discussion here.

While I agree with your correction and this always bugs me, the common usage of the phrase "begs the question" seems to have become synonymous with "raises the question", as opposed to what I understand to be its former — and perhaps original — meaning which was associated with the informal logical fallacy by the same name.

Can someone help direct me toward an understanding of what it means for something to be "run in/by TypeScript types"?

A short explanation or link to a resource would really be helpful. :)

This option in general seems odd to me. Wouldn't all contributors to the project need to coordinate their exclusions manually this way? Am I missing something?

Different logical systems use different methods of handling negation. No single system is suitable for all purposes. I'm no expert, but maybe search for information about intuitionistic and paraconsistent logic and how they handle negation.

No thanks. Receiving an "official-looking" letter would only make me anxious.

A few years ago, I made a silly little platforming game for my wife that was holiday-themed (Thanksgiving). Since then, I've tried to create at least one new sequel each year for a different holiday.

This year, I'm doing one for Halloween. They only take a few hours to make, but are a fun little thing for me to enjoy making and her to enjoy playing.

> Being thruthful [sic] about the non-discovery

> Just make some shit up

Is that how it works in the scientific community? I'm not actively involved, but I feel like publishing my findings, one way or another, would require explaining how I arrived at them in a manner that would be reproducible (and thus, verifiable to an extent) by others. What am I missing?

Not asking rhetorically, by the way. I'm just genuinely curious.

I just work from home and leave my Teams status set to "offline" at all times.

I still receive messages, but only reply when contacting me through Teams is the agreed-upon approach. In other words, I simply don't reply to messages that should really be emails or tickets.

Some of them could potentially be a little confusing as well, such as "delta" in game development, "echo" in some networking contexts, or "uniform" in OpenGL shaders.

I don't tend to use single-letter variable names outside of the standard `for(;;)` syntax, but if I did, I don't think I'd replace them in this way.

Apparently it was "Bart". I had to look it up because I was curious as well.

Myself.

More specifically, my mental health. I'm a bit of a mess, and I'm not sure I'll be able to properly commit to any external endeavors until I'm feeling better inside.

I type rather quickly and feel better having fresh knowledge of the actual commands I use.

I genuinely consider two of my greatest accomplishments to be building a game and composing a song.

Neither are very impressive, but in both cases, I ended up having to simply decide I was done and stop working on them. I could continue making changes indefinitely, adding little improvements and such every day, but they were also complete as they were. Once I learned to be okay with that and move on, I learned what finishing a project really meant (or at least one form of it).

I moved _back_ to Linux system administration after a few years of full-stack web development. I prefer developing software as a hobby instead of professionally, because the latter is just not enjoyable for me — at least not at any of the companies I've worked for.