I also enjoy reading SciPy as "skippy".

If you have a stack of items, you can pick up half of them by right-clicking on it, which is very convenient when you're dividing out a stack on the crafting grid to make many copies of a recipe that needs that item in 2 or 4 slots; but for some recipes, you need to put the same item in 3 or 6 slots, and there's no built-in way to divide a stack into thirds.

So I made an AHK script that, when I held down a key, would

- pick up half of the items in the stack I'm pointing at (right-click) - move the mouse one inventory space to the right - put them down (left-click) - pick up half of them again - move back one inventory space left - put them down, adding them back to the original stack - and repeat

and it would only stop after one of the "pick up" steps; so, after a few iterations, you'd be left with the stack divided into equal thirds, two in your inventory & one on the mouse.

Eg, starting with a stack of 60, it goes 30/30, 45/15, 22/38, 41/19, 20/40, 40/20, 20/40, 40/20... then release the key, and you've got three stacks of 20.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ParentNode/...

AIUI, the only "container" functionality built-in to the browser is... infrastructure, I guess you'd call it: Firefox provides all the tools for addons to do stuff with containers, but doesn't actually do anything with them itself.

[0] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Add-ons/Web...

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Compare to, say, POSIX or Vim[0] REs, where some punctuation characters are special with a backslash, others are special without, and I can never remember which is which.

[0] Regardless of the state of the "magic" option - the only way to get consistent behavior is to start every single RE with either \v (which works like PCRE) or \V (which works like your proposal).

> “Who does all that? Nobody,” said Sanborn.

I do! It's a little fiddly, but any sharp knife with a point you can slip under the label does a good enough job of slicing those off.

Good to know that helps, actually - I've often wondered whether I was wasting my time bothering with it.

Per the Guidelines, https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:

Please don't submit so many links at once that the new page is dominated by your submissions.

What about numpy (+ its ecosystem, scipy/pandas/etc)? I get the impression that's contributed a lot to Python's growth over the years.

... why indeed? I can't think of any (presumably fairly simple) scenario where that would happen.

In practice, you don't really need one - the safe alternative to "xs !! n" is pattern-matching on the result of "drop n xs", as that's [] if xs has ≤n elements:

https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/standard-prelude.html#$...

Not quite - for example, these both benefit from foldr, despite each producing a scalar:

  and, or :: [Bool] -> Bool
  and = foldr (&&) True
  or = foldr (||) False

The distinction lies not so much in "are you reducing to a scalar?" as "can your binary operation be productive without evaluating its second parameter?" - or, if you prefer, "is it ever lazy in its second parameter?". If so, then foldr may be appropriate.

Erratum: the link meant for "openssl-hook" actually takes you to "otherport".

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ChildNode/r...

I don't know if it implements any techniques from that paper, but it does let you search for definitions by type signature. Of note, it also does a pretty good job of finding results with different-but-compatible types, which is very valuable in a Haskell context given all the polymorphism.