sumnole

I'm waiting for the touchscreen to catch up to Wacom and include a stylus + high pressure sensitivity.

A bit disappointed it lacks ProMotion adaptive refresh.

For those that don't know: Crystal is like a typed Ruby with the performance and concurrency flow of Go.

Or merely a single portrayal of a puffer subject to the socio-technological forces of this generation.

I don't even read code anymore. I just have my agent deploy directly to production.

Visual Studio has WinForms, which is pretty RAD.

The UIs are text only, so they are textual. Modern TUIs may support mouse events. That this tool can export to several TUI frameworks is evidence that these UIs are indeed TUIs, even if not the most traditional.

Another to add to the list: Allow flexible naming. For example, drilling the two sum problem requires the user name the hashmap prev_map, but I feel memorizing this sort of stuff detracts from the lesson.

And a banner ad may display on a laptop in your home, what's your point? Location or device type matters not. This ad doesn't interrupt the user or demand any attention.

Ads really aren't that bad. Targeted ads may even help you discover products you'll enjoy.

The ad in the article is pretty obviously an ad to anyone that can read the words, "New Series. Start Watching".

Ads like these that randomly display during idle is hardly what I consider invasive.

Hopefully OP's sister gets her mental health under control, but I wouldn't immediately raise pitch forks to ban an entire industry vital to the economy and business-consumer communication.

I wouldn't worry. Updating .NET rarely breaks anything.

Aside from copying text from images, OneNote can also make text in images searchable.

The average user likely just streams from Spotify. The users collecting mp3s are probably more tolerant to the learning curve.

It helps that the four leaf phenotype can be recessively carried and passed on by normal clovers.

Meaningful and specific parts lists shall be included.

Cases shall be easy to open.

Batteries shall be replaceable.

Special tools are allowed only for darn good reasons.

Profiting by selling expensive special tools is wrong, and not making special tools available is even worse.

Torx is OK; tamperproof is rarely OK.

Components, not entirely subassemblies, shall be replaceable.

Consumables, like fuses and filters, shall be easy to access.

Circuit boards shall be commented.

Power from USB is good; power from proprietary power adapters is bad.

Standard connectors shall have pinouts defined.

If it snaps shut, it shall snap open.

Screws better than glues.

Docs and drivers shall have permalinks and shall reside for all perpetuity at archive.org.

Ease of repair shall be a design ideal, not an afterthought.

Metric or standard, not both.

Schematics shall be included.

Pedantics aside, not much reasoning against quality. Perhaps I've lucked out, but I've worked in many sectors and do not at all agree with sentiment here about DOD software quality. There is significant formal investment/research in DOD to improve operations, including taking the best of practices in commercial. In my experience, the worst of software is written by teams with little experience improvising under Agile and taking on tech debt with no time/resources to get things done the right way.

> Well, this is just standard Aerospace grade software

Can't be further from the truth. DOD software is given huge budgets where it's not surprising to see 3 separate teams performing QA for one software milestone. It's one of the few sectors that still plan software upfront waterfall style and implement strict procedures for traceability, change management, etc. Who else is using formal methods or safety critical stacks like ADA/Spark?