I assume that’s why some open source maintainers don’t bother either - if you haven’t even looked at your diff before submitting then why should they?

While SQLite is often used for comparison (“SQLite for OLAP”), I’ve never seen DuckDB market itself as a “drop-in” replacement. Where did you see that?

I have actually seen proper capitalization and correct conventional-commit types to correlate very well with the author being intentional and the patch being of good quality.

e.g.

- (a) chore: update some_module to include new_func

- (b) feat: Add new_func to handle XYZ case

Where:

(a) is not a chore, as it changes functionality, is uncapitalized and is so low-signal I can probably write a 10 line script to reliably generate similar titles.

(b) is using the correct "feat" commit type, capitalized and describe what this is for. I expect the body to explain "why", as well, and not to reiterate the "how" in natural language.

This is just my experience, but I've seen commit messages where people actually put in some effort to usually come with a good patch, and vice-versa.

https://mypy.readthedocs.io/en/stable/mypy_daemon.html

One day I pop up a practice map in cs:go where one of the challenges is shooting a fixed target after it turns green. If you don’t do it within 250ms or something (nothing crazy in terms of human reaction time), then you don’t score.

I was flabbergasted to see myself miss every single time. My friend even told me “dude, are you pretending? How are you so slow?”

So the next day I got a new mouse and what do you know, I’m actually responding in time, and scored most of the time when the rectangle went green. Just the mouse was not registering it fast enough.

Of course, that didn’t translate into such a huge boost in actual gameplay, but it’s impressive how that made me consistently miss. Likely it had some crazy 50ms+ lag.

Seems like the ideal career is to start somewhere big and successful enough that allows you to specialize (after some poor generalists sabotaged their own careers by making it a thriving environment for specialists). Because even small scale businesses think they should start by hiring specialists.

Have had my RPi on Debian since Debian 9, with smooth upgrades every time.

It took me many hours and a few backtracks to get to a point where I am satisfied with it, and where errors are caught early. I would just suggest anyone starting now to enable --strict --pedantic on ledger-cli from the day 1, and writing asserts for your accounts as well e.g. to check that closed accounts don’t get new entries.

I really miss data entry being easier and not as prone to free-form text editing errors (most common are typos on the amount or copying the wrong source/dest account), but I am confident it matches reality much better than my spreadsheets did.

Content-filtering can and most definitely does block domains entirely, but it can also filter page elements served from the same domain which match a known ad "signature".

Though, if you can't run an adblocker, e.g. your Smart TV's browser then sure, DNS-level blocking is your best bet.

[1] https://superuser.com/a/235965

e.g. someone downloaded the password protected zip on a public computer, logged out of their email, but forgot to delete the file.

    λ uv venv && uv pip install torch --torch-backend=auto
    λ uv run python -c 'import torch; print(torch.cuda.is_available())'
    True

For example, I don’t expect running scripts/build.sh to modify tracked files in the repo. Seeing part of the prompt go from “” to “?2!3” (two untracked, three changed files) makes that glaringly obvious.

A lock file ensures all installations resolve the same versions, and the environment doesn’t differ simply because installations were made on different dates. Which is usually what you want for an application running in production.

Basically, my assumption is that `gq` should return empty, which means I have a clean slate, and can start taking on new work. Otherwise, there is ongoing work that needs attention.

It just lists:

  * modified/untracked files
  * stashed changes
  * local-only branches (not tracking a remote branch)
  * branches out-of-sync with their upstream (either ahead or behind)
  * branches that aren't the main branch (even if tracking and in-sync with a remote upstream)

It's basically inbox-zero for git.

But it only works if you like working with a clean worktree.

I'm not going to claim Vim's defaults are usable for most people, but my god can these IDEs just shut up and let me see my code? I'll go to the settings if I want to.

> The guy who wasn't actually going to work on the issue decided the time estimate of the bug, and then expected the guy who actually worked on the issue to stick to it?

I think he meant that if the ticket was dismissed in a much shorter time than the allotted then it also needs a good reason.

I also believe a bug ticket saying “this shouldn’t happen” is not solved until until “this” no longer happens or everyone involved agrees that it’s okay for it to happen.

I haven’t tried it myself, but since you know commits A and B have already been rebased and had their conflicts resolved, can’t you instead rebase -i on top of the partial-rebase branch and then drop A and B?

I think this way at least you still benefit from the rebase --edit-todo, which you do not when cherry-picking C^..F.