brian @ brian @programming.dev

Posts

0

Comments

202

Joined

2 yr. ago

idk if clojure has really faded though. some dialects have done well (jvm, js) and some haven't gotten much use (go, clr), but it feels like a reasonable path. there's a good chance you can tap into a decent chunk of the existing clj ecosystem too

it doesn't matter how it was made once it's secondhand since it doesn't support the manufacturer

I suppose there's people that bought the original item since it had resale value, but I really doubt that's significant overall, especially at most thrift stores

I'm saying we weren't taught when react was the way people wrote sites. if I was writing a site with pure html, css is great, especially modern css.

but if I'm already using react and their abstractions, opinions on that part aside, I'd personally rather lean on the react component as the unit of reuse. tailwind removes the abstraction that you don't need, since many people in react tend towards one scoped css file per component with classes for each element anyway

at this point I'd be more inclined to say for many sites the api and data fetching things are the content and html+css is presentation. csszengarden is cool but I haven't seen the html/css split help an end user, or really even me as a developer.

instead of using classes you just use whatever your ui library provides for reuse. stick a classname string in a variable and you have a class. use a component and it just contains all its styles.

unless you mean that if you look in the inspector you see a mess of classnames. I don't have a solution there

shadcn is the primary one for react at least. they've done a great job filling the space where you're trying to build up a design system but don't want to start from scratch, but they're great if you just want prebuilt components too

all the components build on something else like radix, and are pretty simple themselves. normally just the radix component with styles. Installing a component just copypastes the source into your project at configured locations.

if you've ever fought against something like mui to get it to fit design changes or change specific behavior, shadcn is great. at some point the extension points of a library aren't enough, but if you own all the code that'll never be a problem.

except we generally use higher level abstractions now, like component based frameworks. If you're writing raw html with tailwind and no library you're doing it wrong and css is a better fit.

well written straight css ends up building it's own tree of components. if you're using react too you're either only selecting a single component (inline styles but have to open two files) or writing good css (duplicating the component hierarchy in css).

tailwind is just the former but better since it encourages using a projectwide set of specific sizes/colors/breakpoints and small scope, the two actual problems with inline styles after organization and resuse, which react etc solves.

probably about the same as like vapor smoothing abs with acetone. I think pla has solvents that work too but they're much nastier

I'm sure all of them are just cherrypicked hotfixes from main tho

yeah fair enough. that wasn't really my point and I wasn't paying attention

yeah it's incorrect bc it destroys multibyte characters, but no idea what you're saying about u8 being a different type from unicode. the original code was reading bytes and converting them too? the typing isn't the issue, you can still store utf8 as a series of bytes

python isn't the only language to do "execute everything imported from a particular file and all top level statements get run". both node and c# (but with restrictions on where top level statements can be) can do that type of thing, I'm sure there's more.

python conventions are unique because they attempt to make their entrypoint also importable itself without side effects. almost no one needs to do that, and I imagine the convention leaked out from the few people that did since it doesn't hurt either.

for instance in node this is the equivalent, even though I've never seen someone try before:

    
if (path.resolve(url.fileURLToPath(import.meta.url)).includes(path.resolve(process.argv[1])))
{
  // main things
}


  

ones that can run cli tools do great, they just use npm

because with things that the compiler does, like padding for alignment, it frequently takes up more space than that. that was my argument the whole time. what til are you talking about? I'm talking about an extra layer you've decided doesn't count. ofc sizeof bool will be a byte in all of those languages.

a bool taking up a single byte is a fantasy that those languages use because developers generally don't need to think about all the other stuff going on.

for some people it's nice to start from nothing and build up config, I'd recommend doom for anyone else. it's nice to be given a file with all the settings you can change instead of having to do it all yourself.

a bool is actually a single bit, the rest is all padding

c++ guarantees that calls to malloc are aligned https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/memory/c/malloc .

you can call malloc(1) ofc, but calling malloc_usable_size(malloc(1)) is giving me 24, so it at least allocated 24 bytes for my 1, plus any tracking overhead

yeah, as I said, in a stack frame. not surprised a compiler packed them into single bytes in the same frame (but I wouldn't be that surprised the other way either), but the system v abi guarantees at least 4 byte alignment of a stack frame on entering a fn, so if you stored a single bool it'll get 3+ extra bytes added on the next fn call.

computers align things. you normally don't have to think about it. Consider this a TIL moment.

sure, but if you have a single bool in a stack frame it's probably going to be more than a byte. on the heap definitely more than a byte

things that store it as word size for alignment purposes (most common afaik), things that pack multiple books into one byte (normally only things like bool sequences/structs), etc

gitea has had some organizational problems so a lot of people have been using forgejo instead, which is just a community fork of gitea plus some more features

well the language server plugins all run a binary language server out of sandbox so zed doesn't really do anything safer in particular there either. no ide has solutions, solutions don't really exist right now. it's not a problem of features of the language as much as it is features developers expect in extensions. I suppose there is a hypothetical "the extension wants to make this change to this file, approve" type flow like AI tools have now, but that sounds unpleasant to use. it still doesn't get around things like language servers being designed to run as standalone processes out of sandbox.

by audits I meant you individually go and read all the code of all the extensions you use. of course that's impossible too, but that was my point