Well Firefox recently integrated a full webpage translation, fully done local on your system. It works pretty well in my experience.

What a wonderful statement.

I don’t know the exact process, but I think its still based on the original, with the changes and additions on top of it. So it depends on the FreeTube team to keep up. I imagine its similar how the Firefox forks work, that still depend on the original Firefox.

How is that a paradox? It’s like saying its a paradox that cameras on phone made it much easier to photograph and as a result, people make more photos. That isn’t a paradox, that is natural. Same for writing software.

Like, Subscribe and ring the bell.

deleted by creator

But it was promised that each electron from my body will be removed, until I’m smoke only. I assume this will take an eternity, but I’m here for science.

Just use Electron.

On a slightly different example, the suckless project has a huge emphasizes on lightweight code, which they call “suckless”. I don’t think in this case faster is the goal, but having less code and be simple as possible (not even configuration files allowed, you just recompile program) and almost no documentation in the code either. But the idea is the same, of having “lightweight” code.

• The fastest code is the code you don’t run.

Not really. The code can be slow, even if I do not run it. Also, sometimes additional code can do optimization (like caching), which is more code = faster. Or additional libraries, complexity and code paths can in example add multicore execution, which could speed up. So, I do not buy the less code is faster logic.

English.

Me too. What happened there? I thought it might be because some of my browser extensions block few scripts and other elements. Enabling some of the stuff didn’t make reveal the article, so I lost interest. Or is it paid?

I was there too doing lot of generalized functions that do everything. And I always hated the code. I am just hobby commandline guy, but even that is horrifying code. Doing this in complex code bases with real world impact is just bad.

Trying to abstract everything away in multiple layers of classes and function calls, just to avoid to write a 2 lines of code twice is the biggest evil in programming. Well probably not the biggest, but a huge problem in my opinion. Adding unnecessary complexity due to being clever is evil.

I don’t trust this company, as they hate Linux. Wouldn’t use their engine if I target Linux, as we don’t know how they will support it in the future. I am not against open sourcing it, that’s not my issue. In fact I applaud it. But can’t trust them. Anyone supporting this project will help making their games better, who do not give a shit about Linux support.

Is there any technical reason to use s&box engine over any other Open Source engine? I ask that from a gamer perspective and don’t know all the differences.

Only if you are dependent on Ai, because you cannot program yourself or don’t want to.

I would just use an old phone, either yours or maybe from your family. A dedicated alarm clock that stays at home and is always charged. It has only one job: alarming. No need to make yourself dependent on a random online website. This can be done offline.

!(r.SendNow || r.DryRun) requires you to read the entire statement and then negate the result. While !r.SendNow && !r.DryRun each part of the statement stands on its own and is negated for themselves. That is how I read. I like the Ai suggestion more, because that is how I would write it myself. What I like about it is, that the negation of is right there with the variable. It gets more important, the more you divide sub-expressions in multiple lines.

JSON output support for various commands, making it easier to parse flatpak command output programmatically

Nice. Instead manually parsing the stdout data, now there is a “proper API” to get information.

It’s actually the first time I used to do Ai assisted unit test creation. There were multiple iterations and sometimes it never worked well. And the most important part is, as you say, think through and read every single test case and edit or replace if necessary. Some tests are really stupid, especially stuff that is already encoded in the type system through Rust. I mean you still need a head for revision and know what you want to do.

I still wonder if I should have just gave it the function signature without the inner workings of the function. That’s an approach I want to explore next time. I really enjoyed working with it for the tests, because writing tests is very time consuming. Although I am not much of test guy, so maybe the results aren’t that good anyway.

Edit: In about 250 unit tests (which does not cover all functions sadly) for a cli json based tool, several bugs were found thanks to this approach. I wouldn’t have done it manually.