Don't reply "just Google it"
thebestaquaman @ thebestaquaman @lemmy.world Posts 11Comments 597Joined 2 yr. ago
cmake comes to mind: I can find the docs for whatever function I want to use, but I honestly have such a hard time comprehending what they mean. It's especially frustrating because I can tell that all the information is there, and it's just me not being able to understand it, so I don't want to ask others for help, cause then I'm just bothering people with a problem that I've in principle already found the answer to, I'm just not able to apply the answer.
Then again, I've heard plenty of other people complain that the cmake docs are hard to understand..
It makes sense when you think about it too: It's a language model, so it should be expected to do a decent job as a glorified dictionary
I use GPT in the sense of "I need to solve X problem, are there established algorithms for this?" which usually gives me a good starting point for actual searching.
Most recent use-case was judging the similarity of two strings: I had never heard of "Levenschtein distance" before, but once I had that keyword it was easy to work from there.
Also: cmake and bash boilerplate
Right chilly today innit?
Fair enough, git clean does exist. However, if the button saying "discard all changes" is really a button that runs git clean
, that's just a plain terrible design choice. git clean
is "delete all untracked files", which is specifically not discarding changes, because there can be no changes to discard on an untracked file. Even talking about "changes" to an untracked file in VC context makes little sense, because the VC system doesn't know anything about any changes to the file, only whether it exists or not.
That's not even mentioning the fact that the option to "git clean" shows up as one of the easily accessible options in relation to a staging process. Especially if you're coming from the git CLI, you're likely to associate "discard changes" with "git restore".
Yeah, I guess I've got to leave it like that now..
Got will not delete untracked files though, which is what happened here. If you want to discard changes to a file with git, you first have to commit the file to the index at some point, which means there's only ever so much damage an erroneous "git restore" or "git reset" can do. Specifically, neither of them will delete all the files in an existing project where VC has just been added.
If you have set up your staging area for a commit you may want to discard (unstage) changes from the staging area, as opposed to discarding changes in the working directory.
Of course, the difference between the two is obvious if you're using git CLI, but I can easily see someone using a GUI (and that maybe isn't too familiar with git) misunderstanding "discard" as "unstage".
Either way, what happened here indicates that all the files were somehow added to the VC, without having been committed first, or something like that, because git will not let you discard a file that is untracked, because that wouldn't make any sense. The fact that the GUI let this person delete a bunch of files without first committing them to the index is what makes this a terrible design choice, and also what makes the use of the word "discard" misleading.
I use gitkraken for two primary purposes:
- Having a visual representation of my project history.
- resolving merge conflicts
Of these, the first is really the only thing I really want a GUI for. I'll just have it open on my side-screen if I'm managing some more or less messy branch structure or quickly want an overview of what has been done on which branches, where common ancestors are, etc. All the actual doing of things is done from the CLI, because it's just better for that.
Absolutely! I remember going from "holy shit this guy is terrifying and we have video evidence of him being able to kick ass" to "what the fuck? These not-as-terrifying looking people are messing him up bad!"
There's a lot of good advice here already, especially that wool is the gold standard - nothing synthetic cuts it. I want to add that the absolute key is about layering, and not over-stuffing.
What keeps you warm is primarily the air trapped between your layers, which means that three thin layers can be a lot better than one thick layer. This also means that you will be freezing if your layers are too tight. If you have two thin layers, and put on a sweater, and that sweater feels tight, that likely means you're pushing out the air trapped in your inner layers, and they won't be as effective. The same applies when putting on a jacket.
So: You want a thin base layer (think light, thin wool shirt + long johns), then an optional medium layer or two (slightly thicker wool shirt, I have some in the range of 200 grams), and finally a thicker sweater for when you're not moving. These should increase in size so that they can fit the thinner layers underneath, and you want your jacket big enough to fit all the underlying layers.
Finally: When you're moving around, you will get stupidly warm and sweaty unless you take off clothes. It's better to take off some stuff and be a bit cold for the first 10 minutes of moving than to get sweaty and be cold for the rest of the day. If (when) you do get cold, running in a circle for 10 min will fix it (run at a calm, steady pace, if you're really cold it might take longer to get warm than you think, but you will get warm if you move).
In short: Being in a cold climate is just as much about how you use your equipment, and how you activate yourself to stay warm, as it is about what equipment you have.
Watch me: My void*
doesn't give a shit about your const
!
I have to be honest in that, while I think duck typing should be embraced, I have a hard time seeing how people are actually able to deal with large-scale pure Python projects, just because of the dynamic typing. To me, it makes reading code so much more difficult when I can't just look at a function and immediately see the types involved.
Because of this, I also have a small hangup with examples in some C++ libraries that use auto
. Like sure, I'm happy to use auto
when writing code, but when reading an example I would very much like to immediately be able to know what the return type of a function is. In general, I think the use of auto
should be restricted to cases where it increases readability, and not used as a lazy way out of writing out the types, which I think is one of the benefits of C++ vs. Python in large projects.
(...) what you said can be construed as offensive.
So what? You have a personal responsibility for being offended. It's not everybody else's job to walk on eggshells to avoid offending you. If you go looking for things people have said that can offend you, you're gonna have a shitty time.
Try making an effort to interpret people in the best possible way, and you'll have a much better time, with much fewer people being perceived as "going after you".
Using the wrong filament isn't Darwin Award worthy. Test firing a newly manufactured weapon with your hand is. And that would be true even if this wasn't an experimental home-made design...
I definitely think the ramping up is going far too slowly, and as such it isn't strange that there are shortages.
This is a huge war- the largest land war since WWII. All of NATO is still operating on a peace-time economy, so ramping up production to the levels required to support a 500 k - 1 mill. strong army like the Ukrainians is taking far too long.
However, as far as I can tell, production in Europe is only heading one way: Up. Not only that, Russia is operating in a war economy, which is, more or less by definition, unsustainable in the long run. Europe has the economic capacity to double its production, and maintain it indefinitely. I just think we should prioritise more heavily, and scale up more quickly.
The amount of people I've been helping out that have copied some code from somewhere and say "it doesn't work", and who are dumbfounded when I ask them to read the surrounding text aloud for me...
Along the same line: When something crashes, and all I have to do is tell people to read the error message aloud, and ask them what that means. It's like so many people expect to be spoon-fed solutions, to the point where they don't even stop to think about the problem if something doesn't immediately work.
It seems to me like most European countries see supplying equipment to destroy the Russian army in Ukraine as preferable to destroying the Russian army on their own soil. Although I do hope Germany picks up the pace rather than reduces it.
However, even without Germany, there are plenty of other European countries that will be capable of buying truckloads of equipment from German manufacturers.
Absolutely, throwing together some simple cmake is actually a great use-case for an LLM. Once I have something basic up and running, I can play around with it and figure out how stuff works much more easily