• 43 Posts
  • 2.31K Comments
Joined 6 years ago
cake
Cake day: May 31st, 2020

help-circle
  • What I always find frustrating about that, is that even a colleague with much more Bash experience than me, will ask me what those options are, if I slap a set -euo pipefail or similar into there.

    I guess, I could prepare a snippet like in the article with proper comments instead:

    set -e # exit on error
    set -u # exit on unset variable
    set -o pipefail # exit on errors in pipes
    

    Maybe with the whole trapping thing, too.

    But yeah, will have to remember to use that. Most Bash scripts start out as just quickly trying something out, so it’s easy to forget setting the proper options…


  • I don’t have the Bash experience to argue against that, but from a general programming experience, I want things to crash as loudly as possible when anything unexpected happens. Otherwise, you might never spot it failing.

    Well, and nevermind that it could genuinely break things, if an intermediate step fails, but it continues running.



  • Huh, so if you don’t opt for these more specific number types, then your program will explode sooner or later, depending on the architecture it’s being run on…?

    I guess, times were different back when C got created, with register size still much more in flux. But yeah, from today’s perspective, that seems terrifying. 😅



  • What really frustrates me about that, is that someone put in a lot of effort to be able to write these things out using proper words, but it still isn’t really more readable.

    Like, sure, unsigned is very obvious. But short, int, long and long long don’t really tell you anything except “this can fit more or less data”. That same concept can be expressed with a growing number, i.e. i16, i32 and i64.

    And when someone actually needs to know how much data fits into each type, well, then the latter approach is just better, because it tells you right on the tin.





  • I think, the problem is that management wants the expert humans to use the non-expert tools, because they’re non-experts and don’t recognize that it’s slower for experts. There’s also the idea that experts can be more efficient with these tools, because they can correct dumb shit the non-expert tool does.

    But yeah, it just feels ridiculous. I need to think about the problem to apply my expertise. The thinking happens as I’m coding. If I’m supposed to not code and rather just have the coding be done by someone/-thing else, then the thinking does not occur and my expertise cannot guarantee for anything.
    No, I cannot just do the thinking as I’m doing the review. That’s significantly more time-consuming than coding it myself.






  • Yeah, and you don’t have to know which fork to choose. Only the compatible fork will show up in the search.

    (I was going to recommend that, but had something in the back of head, that you needed a manual step to enable the configuration. But I just saw that this is described in the Plasma 5 version, not the Plasma 6 fork, so I guess, it’s not necessary anymore…)



  • Ephera@lemmy.mltoLinux@lemmy.mlCan KDE Tile Windows Like PopOS?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    I believe, that’s something which became impossible with Wayland?

    But it wasn’t very good under X11 either. Even back then, it was much less clunky to use the various KWin scripts, which offer tiling. Well, and by now Plasma has built-in semi-automatic tiling, which those scripts basically just configure, so they do now feel quite smooth.