Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)KE
Posts
2
Comments
80
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I looked it up and it can indeed go up to 13.5% inclination but they can only run powered cars, no attached wagons. That reduces capacity.

    I don't want to shit on trams. I don't like this bus vs tram bashing in either direction. I'll happily take either improvement over a sea of cars...

  • The tram supremacy doesn't lie in the inherent nature of the technology but in the way we treat it! Trams get:

    • their own lane
    • dedicated signals at intersections (often even priority)
    • infrastructure money and thus planning effort

    In short, they are (usually) treated like public transport. Busses on the other hand are too often treated like just another car that's thrown in with the rest but also has the obligations of public transport. If you treated trams like that (sharing the road, waiting behind cars) they would be even worse than busses.

  • You're missing the point of this. Right now all the aid Ukraine is getting is dependent on piecemeal decisions, which if Europe and America get bored, can dry up extremely quickly. Russia is banking on that and is investing heavily to try and produce this outcome.

    A statement comitting to long term aid undermines that. And at least somewhat shores up Ukraine's aid. I don't know how binding this declaration is to any party but as the article says: it is a signal that the West intends to keep up the aid for as long as Russia keeps up the invasion.

  • The point is to tell an exciting story - there's no right or wrong definition of what that means for you.

    The dice's purpose is to take you down paths you might not have chosen deliberately but the goal is still to have an exciting story. If the DM wants to be like "I recognize the dice have made a decision but given that it's a stupid ass decision, I've elected to ignore it" then he has my full support.

    Maybe a cleaner way would be to decide up front: which outcomes am I ok with? and simply cap the roll at that. You know the paladin only has 17 HP left and you don't want the paladin to go down so the maximum roll you want is 16. So if you have roll 4d6 damage. You do: roll 3 roll 8 roll 12 roll 18 16.

  • You shouldn't be downvoted for this.

    Busses are a great way to introduce some public transport on the cheap: All you really need is - well - the vehicles, enough road capacity to run them and some signs to indicate where the stop is. And you can easily tweak the network to try and optimize it as you learn more about the needs of the travelers.

  • but it’s less portable and more verbose

    you misspelled "less obtuse and more expressive"

    Also it doesn't compete with regex. It's an abstraction layer. You know, the thing programmers have been building since the dawn of programming to make everyone's lives easier. There's a reason why everyone who has the option to has stopped working directly with assembly and C.

  • I disagree. Anyone familiar with regex can debug these statements post conversion. Anyone not familiar with regex is going to have to learn something in order to debug the statement. I'd rather learn something that's expressive and easy to visually parse.

    regex syntax is a vestige of the old "as few bytes as possible" era where every character of code had to be written personally. It's an obsolete way of thinking for the vast majority of programming.

  • Sure. I just very rarely need just basic regexes.

    And once you go beyond these the syntax gets very obtuse. Which means I'm spending an hour+ googling something close to what I need and then using a sandbox to try and tweak it until it does what I need. Then I paste something into my code that I won't understand anymore 5 minutes into the future - which isn't exactly great for maintainability.

  • me for example. I don't write regex often enough to be really familar with the cryptic syntax. But I do use them every once in a while and dread the occasion every time. Having a more expressive way to write pattern matching instructions would be really useful to me.

  • I am very much in the market for a way to do regex without resorting to incantations that look like someone spilled a bag of special characters. Just not on JS...

    You seem to be the author. A suggestion to you. You should really rethink your playground. All it currently does is turning melody into regex, which is important to have for comparison. But you're specifically courting people who DON'T want to deal with regex syntax. What you desperately need is a way to run melody expressions. And - if possible - a way to translate regex into melody wouldn't hurt as well.

    Many (most?) of us tend to google regex on the web and pasting them in our code. Having them converted into a syntax that we can better understand would be hugely helpful.

  • No it's not harder to grasp, just less concise. Summation and Product notation exist for the same reason we don't say "a discernible but subtle level of humidity" and just use "moist" instead - it's more convenient. People can be taught to readily understand "moist" or the summation notation. It's much harder to teach people to read the longer notation more quickly.