I mean, there’s these ones, for example:
You can download them as Flatpaks and then this guide supposedly allows running Flatpaks under Windows: https://github.com/AbelFalcon/Run-Flatpak-Windows11
I’m guessing, the Xming thing is needed for graphical applications? I have no idea, if that’s what people generally use for that…
> C:\
> on linux
Absolutely illegal.
Sure. Mastodon is written in Ruby on Rails, for example.
It is, yeah, but you can also use it to host a static webpage: https://codeberg.page/
Personally, I use it together with mdBook, so I write my texts in Markdown and then get a webpage with search and such. There’s lots of “static site generators” out there which do something similar.
It’s a little tech-y for what you’re hoping to do, but you could make use of the code tooling for collaboration. People could open issues, if they just want to make a suggestion, or they could create a pull request with a concrete change.
Casually torpedoing the Buy European movement…
Personal pet theory that may also play into it: Trans people are also often in information security roles. Potentially, because when you have to hide your real identity, you start to get good at it.
And Rust also has various security benefits, especially when compared to C, but also when compared to garbage-collected languages (race conditions are largely prevented).
Yeah, did they deploy it development mode or something? It just needs to display static HTML, so just ignoring the error would fix this.
There’s always been a tendency of folks reading programmer humor to be beginners rather than seasoned devs. I think, there’s just more of those in general, as there’s lots of fields where entry-level coding skills are good enough…
I guess, they noticed:
This article is currently inactive!
🫠
Ah yes, intentionally misunderstanding someone’s comment. We’ve all seen them.
I mean, what the heck is this passive-aggressive comment? If you disagree with me, then come at me.
It’s a programming language, which is particularly relevant for Linux, because it doesn’t require a runtime (separate program that runs the code). This allows it to be used in the kernel.
But it also means that it’s very good for building libraries. With a small bit of extra work, virtually any other programming language can call libraries implemented in Rust (like you can with libraries implemented in C).
Add to that, that Rust allows for performance similar to C and makes lots of typical C bugs impossible, and suddenly you’ve got folks rewriting all kinds of C libraries and applications in Rust, which is something you might have also heard about.
Yeah, as I understand, in the terms of language design theory, it is technically still “manual memory management”. But since you don’t end up writing malloc() and free(), many refer to it as “semi-automatic” instead, which certainly feels more accurate.
The thing is, everyone would agree that it’s a strength, if the Debian-specific format was provided in addition to a format which runs on all Linux distros. When I’m not on Debian, I just don’t get anything out of that…
Really not sure an estimate for algorithmic complexity is the right way to specify this. 😅
But if your supposed input unit is days, then I guess, yeah, that kind of works out.
Yeah, if middle management micromanages you, that’s likely because their boss makes them answer some uncomfortable questions, if anything goes wrong.
Wildly depends on the complexity of the feature. If it only takes 4 hours to implement, you might have good enough of an idea what needs to be done that you can estimate it with 1-hour-precision. That is, if you’re only doing things that you’ve done in a similar form before.
If the feature takes two weeks to implement, there’s so many steps involved in accomplishing that, that there’s a high chance for one of the steps to explode in complexity. Then you might be working on it for six weeks.
But yeah, I also double any estimate that I’m feeling, because reality shows that that ends up being more accurate, since I likely won’t have all complexity in mind, so in some sense my baseline assumed error is already 100%.
Well, I think your idea would be simpler, if we weren’t talking about Java.
Pretty much everything is an object in Java. It’s only logical that a type would also be an object and have associated fields.
Similarly, what you’re thinking of as “reference types directly” doesn’t make sense in Java, because it lacks many of the systems to make that actually usable like a type. What you get from .class is a Class object, which you can’t stick into a generic type parameter, for example.
It basically uses reflection to give you e.g. the name of that type and you can also instantiate an object of that type, if no parameters need to be passed to the constructor function.
And then, yeah, I think for explaining that you merely get an object which roughly describes the type, the separate .class field is a good idea.
Yeah, don’t use YAML for storing serialized data. It’s intended to be hand-written.
I don’t quite understand. Do you just want to type e.g.
k pikachuand that expands tokrabby name pikachu? Can you give an example of how you’d want to use it?