• 1 Post
  • 59 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 19th, 2024

help-circle
  • Why the heck would 2 projects share the same library?

    Coming from the olden days, with good package management, infrequent updates and the idea that you wanted to indeed save that x number of bytes on the disk and in memory, only installing one was the way to go.

    Python also wasn’t exactly a high brow academic effort to brain storm the next big thing, it was built to be a simple tool and that included just fetching some library from your system was good enough. It only ended up being popular because it is very easy to get your feet wet and do something quick.



  • The difficulty with python tooling is that you have to learn which tools you can and should completely ignore.

    Unless you are a 100x engineer managing 500 projects with conflicting versions, build systems, docker, websites, and AAAH…

    • you don’t really need venvs
    • you should not use more than on package manager (I recommend pip) and you should cling to it with all your might and never switch. Mixing e.g. conda, on linux system installers like apt, is the problem. Just using one is fine.
    • You don’t “need” need any other tools. They are bonuses that you should use and learn how to use, exactly when you need them and not before. (type hinting checker, linting, testing, etc…)

    Why is it like this?

    Isolation for reliability, because it costs the businesses real $$$ when stuff goes down.

    venvs exists to prevent the case that “project 1” and “project 2” use the same library “foobar”. Except, “project 1” is old, the maintainer is held up and can’t update as fast and “project 2” is a cutting edge start up that always uses the newest tech.

    When python imports a library it would use “the libary” that is installed. If project 2 uses foobar version 15.9 which changed functionality, and project 1 uses foobar uses version 1.0, you get a bug, always, in either project 1 or project 2. Venvs solve this by providing project specific sets of libraries and interpreters.

    In practice for many if not most users, this is meaningless, because if you’re making e.g. a plot with matplotlib, that won’t change. But people have “best practices” so they just do stuff even if they don’t need it.

    It is a tradeoff between being fine with breakage and fixing it when it occurs and not being fine with breakage. The two approaches won’t mix.

    very specific (often outdated) version of python,

    They are giving you the version that they know worked. Often you can just remove the specific version pinning and it will work fine, because again, it doesn’t actually change that much. But still, the project that’s online was the working state.



  • Depends, it’s been a bit disappointing to see virtually no change since I started using it, particularly in terms of QoL. It is open source, so that’s on everyone, including me, but I had hoped for more speed, etc…

    Mastodon is way better when it comes to filtering.

    Having the option of a reddit clone is pretty good though and I will stick with it. Who knows when and where it will get that critical bit of momentum.

    It’s already superior to regular forums, in my opinion, so now the question is what kind of format you want to have discussions in, instead of having to default to forums. That choice is a definite upside and I’m glad it exists.


  • In a different time, under different assumptions, meritocracy can happen. Working and working a lot in that kind of environment, enriches yourself, your company and society, without a downside.

    Overtime you put in, may be more work, but it’s temporary, necessary, because you in your job doing the overtime, helps orders of magnitude more, in critical situations, than other people can, or maybe there is actually nobody else to do the job and the job doesn’t get done. E.g. specialized surgeons saving lives. And that effort and overtime would be recognized and rewarded under those assumptions as well.

    Somebody who has worked extraordinary amounts, would have put in extraordinary effort. They would be community champions.


    It’s important to recognize that clash of assumptions.

    seek so much escapism to be away from dealing with the bleak, always-gloomy mentality of work.

    His words, or yours?





  • I don’t think that there is an obligation with that kind of standard, no.

    Banking and security, accessibility yes.

    Specific choice of “user side software”, probably not. And it’s somewhat unlikely to happen too, because if you think about apps on phones, if suddenly a completely new phone OS were to show up and had 30% market share, it wouldn’t make sense to have a law that would legally require them to offer an app on that platform

    And Chrome isn’t “officially bad” in a legal sense.

    The internet standards themselves are a bit… imprecise too. Implementing them in browser is ultimately up to the companies, there is no legal body requiring a browser to have or not have features. They just usually sort of do the same things because going different paths would be stupid. Mostly. Sometimes they totally do that, though, e.g. calendars and contact info have a standard, but all implementations are a mess and transfer is a pain.


  • When things collide, they transfer their movement energy. If things collide like this >- They will continue in roughly the same direction. If they collide like this -> <- their movement will cancel out and they will fall into the sun.

    Satistically, at the “beginning of time”, in a random sphere around the sun, things will not be completely the same. So everything will either collide and fall. Or it will collide and continue in roughly the same direction. What we have now are the leftovers that were moving in roughly the same direction and colliding so little that they didn’t fall into the sun because of that.

    The same is true for the “disk”: If you start with a roughly evenly distributed sphere of gases or something, there is a middle somewhere where there is a little bit more mass than anywhere else. That’s where things will go.


  • It’s not that they are unfriendly.

    But they are 100% there to represent the company’s interest and not yours. If there is any way, to… turn a situation into something where the company gets more money out of it and you get less, it’s their job to make that happen.

    In theory they should have employee retention in mind. In practice, nobody does their HR that way anymore.

    All my interactions with HR have been “professional polite” and appropriately friendly. There is no reason to be unnecessarily mean, they are also just doing their job.





  • I had a phase as a teen when I was constantly swearing. My parents told me that, it can’t be that bad and it’s really annoying.

    And it’s mostly an impulse reaction and we’re kind of above that.

    It doesn’t mean that you can’t express pain or anger. You’re just not insulting people’s ears if you scream “Aaaaah” when you bang your toe against a table leg or something. And your environment really doesn’t deserve it. Most people are somewhat compassionate and you’re just swearing while they try to help… that’s not a pleasant environment for them to be in. It makes it harder to help you.

    No to both questions. I just made a change and that was it. And it has never stopped me from expressing anything.

    If anything, it lends more weight to the regular words.

    A _______ criminal? Or a criminal?

    You can still put the same emotion into the words, they’re just not swear words. :)





  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlAI's take on XML
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m not sure now that I think about it, but I find this more explicit and somehow more free than json. Which can’t be true, since you can just

    {"anything you want":{...}}
    

    But still, this:

    <my_custom_tag>
    <this> 
    <that>
    <roflmao>
    ...
    

    is all valid.

    You can more closely approximate the logical structure of whatever you’re doing without leaving the internal logic of the… syntax?

    <car>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre>      <valve>open</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    </car>
    

    Maybe I just like the idea of a closing tag being very specific about what it is that is being closed (?). I guess I’m really not sure, but it does feel nicer to my brain to have starting and closing tags and distinguishing between what is structure, what is data, what is inside where.

    My peeve with json is that… it doesn’t properly distinguish between strings that happen to be a number and “numbers” resulting in:

    myinput = {"1":"Hello",1:"Hello"}
    tempjson = json.dumps(myinput)
    output = json.loads(tempjson)
    print(output)
    >>>{'1': 'Hello'}
    

    in python.

    I actually don’t like the attributes in xml, I think it would be better if it was mandatory that they were also just more tagged elements inside the others, and that the “validity” of a piece of xml being a certain object would depend entirely on parsing correctly or not.

    I particularly hate the idea of attributes in svg, and even more particularly the way they defined paths.

    https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Tutorial/Paths#curve_commands

    It works, but I consider that truly ugly. And also I don’t understand because it would have been trivial to do something like this:

    <path><element>data</element><element>data</element></path>