TehPers

I dedicated my degree to all the random Indians who had STEM related topics on youtube.

This is the most relatable thing I’ve read all week. No way in hell I would have graduated had they not dragged me by my feet screaming through the math courses. For all of YouTube’s faults, those videos are true gems.

I also ended up relying quite a bit on random old lectures from professors who can actually teach. No idea what schools they were lecturing at, but I wish the one I was at had more professors like them. Instead, they were all research professors who were being forced to lecture (or grad students in the same boat).

I don’t fully understand the question, to be honest, but would a purpose-built language like ActionScript qualify? It served only one purpose, and (debatably - AS3 was alright) served it well.

Otherwise, every general purpose language attempts to serve all its uses at once, which means they rarely specialize heavily into one particular domain. For example, while Rust’s stdlib devs could build a HTTP library, many Rust users don’t need one, good community-maintained libraries exist, and the stdlib devs don’t want to sacrifice stability with something that requires as much churn as a HTTP library needs. It serves their goal of stability really well, but requires extra steps from users who need that.

Then when they need senior devs again, they can make a good offer.

Lol we did something like this at work once and it was pretty fun.

Here’s an idea: it’s a royal pain in the ass to transfer Firefox data from one mobile device to another without using their cloud sync feature. I’d love a way to do that while keeping the data local only.

On some teams, the backlog is just a way to track tech debt. Backlogs have a habit of growing indefinitely making it so lower priority tasks never get done.

Eithet way, tech debt is generally a bad thing. You’re just weighing it against other tasks, which are almost always more important.

.NET is more of a runtime and SDKs than a framework, despite the terrible naming of .NET Framework (which is now an obsolete runtime anyway, new naming is just .NET).

ASP.NET Core (which also is named after the now obsolete .NET Core runtime hilariously) would be closer to the other listed frameworks.

I’m trying to read up on the differences, but is git switch basically just a newer version of git checkout for changing branches? I haven’t had any issues with git checkout before so I’m not sure why it would be an issue.

You can manage Python packages? When I try to pip install -r requirements.txt, it fails because I’m on Python 3.12 instead of 3.11, except it doesn’t tell me that’s why so I spend the next hour debugging that only to later find out that I also installed the packages globally instead of in a venv and now I need to uninstall them to unfuck my other environments.

But hey, if it works for you, then that’s great.

Wait, you’re bringing up Python and saying Rust has the worst dependency system you’ve ever seen?

I’ve seen this in a few places on desktop, and I have no clue why it’s even a feature. I’m not aware of anyone using it anywhere (although to be fair I haven’t thought to ask).

As for why it’s enabled by default, probably for visibility. The easiest way to get people to use a feature is to make them use it and make them explicitly disable it (if even an option). For AI training, they could theoretically just capture typing data and messages regardless of if the feature is enabled/disabled anyway.

GPT, at least from my limited understanding, is a tool designed to continue the input. You feed it a sequence of tokens, it returns a tokens which it “believes” come next. While your impression is valid, it’s still a “completion engine”. ChatGPT and other products use GPT but have built a product around it. They are not simply frontends for GPT - they do a lot more processing than that.

Also, not trying to understate your impression. It’s pretty impressive how good it is, despite the compute needed for it. I would caution against overestimating its responses though. It does not “reason”, “think”, etc. Its purpose is to continue a sequence of tokens following a (super complex) pattern it has been trained on (super basically). When it claims to reason something, it’s because the people it trained off of did reason it.

My favorite tests are the ones I don’t need to remember to write. I haven’t needed to write a test for what happens when a function receives null in a while thanks to TS/mypy/C#'s nullable reference types/Rust’s Option/etc. Similarly, I generally don’t need to write tests for functions receiving the wrong type of values (strings vs numbers, for example), and with Rust, I generally don’t even need to write tests for things like thread safety and sometimes even invalid states (since usually valid states can be represented by enum variants, and it’s often impossible to have an invalid state because of that).

There is a point where it becomes too much, though. While I’d like it if the compiler ensured arbitrary preconditions like “x will always be between 2 and 4”, I can’t imagine what kinds of constraints that’d impose on actually writing the code in order to enforce that. Rust does have NonZero* types, but those are checked at runtime, not compile time.

Man there have been hot take after hot take in the programming communities over the past few days. Here, I’ll give my hot take since nobody asked:

If I have to touch your code and I can’t tell what inputs it’s supposed to accept, what it should do with those inputs, and what outputs it should produce, I’m probably deleting your code and rewriting it from scratch. Same goes for if I can trivially produce inputs or states that break it. If your code is buggy, it’s getting fixed, even if that takes a rewrite.

When working with others, write readable and maintainable code that someone with much less context than you can pick up and work on. It really doesn’t matter if you need to use TypeScript, mypy, tabs, doc comments, or whatever to do it.

When doing your own project, it doesn’t matter. It’s your code, and if you can’t understand it when you come back to it then you’ll probably rewrite it into something better anyway.

It can with some glue code that you better be writing in TypeScript if you care about code quality.

(As far as I know, it can’t manipulate the DOM directly. Maybe things changed in the past couple months since I checked, but I doubt it.)

Do you need to? I feel like learning Python wouldn’t give much benefit here, unless you’re already using Excel to create applications. In that case, learning Python might let you start making applications that better suit your needs.

Wait CSS supports nesting? Since when?

Also, SASS’s mixins, variables (CSS has variables too but they work differently), and many of the other features are hard to beat, which is why I feel like it’s almost never a negative to get it up and running on any project I work on (unless the project is a tiny one-off, then it’s probably not worth it). One thing I like is that it’s close to CSS - increasing the transparency - while still providing abstractions that let you save time and increase consistency across the project.

Then again, some people might think the obfuscation in 20+ classes is somehow a good thing…

I’d argue that CSS is itself an obfuscation (read: abstraction), and isn’t even implemented consistently across browsers. If the abstraction results in less duplication, more consistency across the website, and higher productivity, then I don’t think that’s a bad thing. (Of course, the flip side is that if using the abstraction results in the same learning curve with less transparency, then the benefits might not outweigh the cost.)

Having never used tailwind, I can’t give a personal opinion on that, but I find it hard to work on any decently sized project without SCSS. Sure I can write pure CSS, but SCSS provides so many QoL features over raw CSS that it’s hard to pass it up, and it’s easy enough to get setup.

I would definitely be concerned about the performance in this case, unless you can do some kind of AoT compilation of the scripts being executed (at least in production builds, development builds probably can’t do that if you need hot reloading). Unfortunately the execution time budget is really tight if you want to get frequent updates and decent frame times (although if the system in question runs parallel to the rest of your systems, for example, then it might have more time to operate with).

That being said, with the interpreter pre-compiling those scripts, performance could still be really good. Sharing memory would become less relevant since your scripts would now operate on more than whatever’s in your component storages and could now, in theory, work with variables local to the system, assuming you’re meaning that the interpreter is called ad-hoc basically and isn’t the entirety of the system.

This is all in theory of course, in practice you’d need to find an interpreter that supports pre-compiling (or at least pre-optimizing in some form) all the scripts you’ll want to run if you want to maximize performance.

In this case, would the components be combined into a list? Basically you’d have a BubbleComponent[] attached to the entity instead of just a BubbleComponent? Maybe I’m misunderstanding what the system is, is click_handler in the post a system, and if so, do systems only declare a single component of an entity as their input? From my experience, you often want to work with multiple components of the same entity in a system, for example:

-- Mark characters with 0 or less life as dead
function mark_dead(character: BoundaryComponent) {
    with character as movement: MovementComponent {
        character.x += movement.velocity.x * delta_secs;
        character.y += movement.velocity.y * delta_secs;
    }
}

Would there be a simpler way to query these components in the system, and what if I wanted to query for both BoundaryComponent and BubbleComponent, what would that look like?

Yes. I vaguely remembered that some ECS can apparently do that. If not, you’d probably settle for a branch or an optional type instead.

I don’t doubt this is possible, but I’m really curious how querying would work. On the other hand, a component which essentially is just a wrapper for BubbleComponent[] is possible, but querying is straightforward since you’d just get the full list of BubbleComponents per iteration.

The boundary is supposed to BE the position. So some rendering system would have rendered the speech bubble in the middle of the boundary. Maybe I should have called the boundary area instead…

My idea behind using positions relative to the BoundaryComponent is along the lines of having each new “bubble entity” hold a reference to the “boundary entity”. Then you’d have a script which updates the transforms of the bubble entities to match that of the boundary entity:

function inherit_parent_boundaries(
    child: BoundaryComponent & ParentReferenceComponent,
    boundaries: Query<BoundaryComponent>
) {
    -- This updates the child's boundary to match its parent's boundary
    child.boundary = boundaries.get(child.parent).boundary;
}

This would keep the bubbles as their own entities and avoid the need for a single entity to hold multiple of the same component, which I think would keep the ECS overall a lot simpler. This doesn’t account for parents of parents or anything like that, but if boundaries can be something like Query<BoundaryComponent & ParentReferenceComponent?>, you can recurse up the chain until you’ve updated all the ancestors as well, and all the leaves of the tree will eventually be updated by this system.

function inherit_parent_boundaries(
    child: BoundaryComponent & ParentReferenceComponent,
    boundaries: Query<BoundaryComponent & ParentReferenceComponent?>
) {
    -- This updates the child's boundary and all its ancestors to match the boundary of the root of the ancestry tree
    for (
        var cur = child, var parent = boundaries.get(cur.parent);
        parent != null;
        cur = parent, parent = boundaries.get(cur.parent)
    ) {
        cur.boundary = parent.boundary;
    }
}