If I decide to add it, which solution should I pick, battle tested Sorbet or core team endorsed RBS?

once you realize that the world isn't what you think it is it's very easy to grab onto something else and grab onto some kind of weird conspiracy well that's the thing you've been describing thus far as well sorry to in just say but like the openness requires structure

I am just surprised that there is no clear official name for such a popular and well known convention.  Internet searching seems to indicate that the common term used is "Red Squiggly Line", but it seems like a term quickly made-up just to describe something for which we know no name.  There's a technical name for the dot on an "i" for goodness sake (tittle).

(in its practitioners' perverse terminology) as “secure boot”

On many occasions, I've opened up requests for support in the form of a Github pull request. This way, I am telling the author: I have found a potential problem with your library, here is how I fixed it for my circumstance, here is the code I used for reference. You get extra internet points if you open the pull request with: "I don't expect this pull request to get merged, but I wanted to you show you what I did".

Not everyone has time to adhere to the specific coding styles for a project, so if you can't do a full blown pull-request, there is NOTHING wrong with opening a pull-request that only has the intention of showing the author how you solved the problem.

Let your operating system handle daemons, respawning and logging while you focus on your application features and users.

Less system administration, easier debugging, simpler code, all because you leveraged the init system to do the work for you!

hash digest returns an alphanumeric message which is the digest. that is incorrect, this alphanumeric message is a representation of the digest. The digest itself is a string of bits with a fixed length

used to be

likethe place in a face where the eye has been taken out.

most of the great religions in the world have been attempts to to restrain or reform uh human nature or at least uh channel our worst impulses into something 01:10:48 more productive or higher something loftier um and in this this is exactly what we need here it's something that will create a form of altruism which doesn't only extend to people we see around us now but extends 01:11:00 to the future generations

we strive to heed upstream's recommendations on how they intend for their software to be consumed.

Interest

These can then be used to develop a definition that states the essence of the living thing—what makes it what it is and thus cannot be altered; the essence is, of course, immutable.

The Aristotelian method dominated classification until the 19th century. His scheme was, in effect, that the classification of a living thing by its nature—i.e., what it really is, as against superficial resemblances—requires the examination of many specimens, the discarding of variable characters (since they must be accidental, not essential), and the establishment of constant characters.

What they say is this is due to is new EU policies about messenger apps. I'm not in the EU. I reckon it's really because there's a new Messenger desktop client for Windows 10, which does have these features. Downloading the app gives FB access to more data from your machine to sell to companies for personalized advertising purposes.

“Various people asked to do various things with it, and they referred them to this guy who didn't respond,” Brand says. “And so it was just frustrating for decades.”

what you're referring to is the idea that people come together and through language culture and story they have narratives that then create their own realities like the 00:12:04 sociologist abely the sociologist wi Thomas said if people think people believe things to be real then they are real in their consequences

One loss due to this change is the ability to represent an invalid UUID (vs a NIL UUID).

Given the security implications of getting the implementation correct, we strongly encourage you to use OAuth 2.0 libraries when interacting with Google's OAuth 2.0 endpoints. It is a best practice to use well-debugged code provided by others, and it will help you protect yourself and your users. For more information, see Client libraries.

I think the problem with after_destroy is that it is triggered before the database commits. This means the change may not yet be seen by other processes querying the database; it also means the change could be rolled back, and never actually commited. Since shrine deletes the attachment in this hook, that would mean it might delete the attachment prematurely, or even delete the attachment when the record never ends up destroyed in the database at all (in case of rollback), which would be bad. For shrine's logic to work as expected here, it really does need to be triggered only after the DB commit in which the model destroy is committed.

For lost googlers:

They sound like "argument by prestige". If MSDN says it, or some famous developer or author whom everybody likes says it, it must be so.

Stop to think about "normal app" as like desktop app. Android isn't a desktop platform, there is no such this. A "normal" mobile app let the system control the lifecycle, not the dev. The system expect that, the users expect that. All you need to do is change your mindset and learn how to build on it. Don't try to clone a desktop app on mobile. Everything is completely different including UI/UX.

As an aside, I think I now prefer this technique to Python for at least one reason: passing arguments to the decorator method does not make the technique any more complex. Contrast this with Python: <artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=240845>

When you call 'foo' in Ruby, what you're actually doing is sending a message to its owner: "please call your method 'foo'". You just can't get a direct hold on functions in Ruby in the way you can in Python; they're slippery and elusive. You can only see them as though shadows on a cave wall; you can only reference them through strings/symbols that happen to be their name. Try and think of every method call 'object.foo(args)' you do in Ruby as the equivalent of this in Python: 'object.getattribute('foo')(args)'.

def document(f): def wrap(x): print "I am going to square", x f(x) return wrap @document def square(x): print math.pow(x, 2) square(5)

S

That tends to be the biggest cop out excuse for libraries. Just do a major version release. The fact this library lies about the encodingis extremely problematic and causes numerous bugs. Any program currently using this library is already incorrect because of this behavior. Actually exposing the problem makes it easier for people to fix.

Agree, but we're stuck with API compatibility for a good while.

Imagine what happens when subscribers change activities, interests, or focus. As a result, they may no longer be interested in the products and services you offer. The emails they receive from you are now either ‘marked as read’ in their inbox or simply ignored. They neither click the spam reporting button nor attempt to find the unsubscribe link in the text. They are no longer your customers, but you don’t know it.

If you are going to crawl sites you better use Ferrum or Vessel because you crawl, not test.

Until now, we had a lot of code. Although we were using a plugin to help with boilerplate code, ready endpoints, and webpages for sign in/sign up management, a lot of adaptations were necessary. This is when Doorkeeper comes to the rescue. It is not only an OAuth 2 provider for Rails but also a full OAuth 2 suite for Ruby and related frameworks (Sinatra, Devise, MongoDB, support for JWT, and more).

So far for the obligatory warning. I get the point, I even agree with the argument, but I still want to send a POST request. Maybe you are testing an API without a user interface or you are writing router tests? Is it really impossible to simulate a POST request with Capybara? Nah, of course not!

This is ugly by design, as an inducement to test properties instead of specifics.

Related: #45017 ActiveRecord silently triggers a rollback when return is used in the transaction block.

i was a bit unsure what to think of it, as i wished to go into this 100% blind. And boy am i glad i did.

I like it. I’m biased though since I’m a sucker for opportunities to simplify like this one.

The bash manual contains the statement For almost every purpose, aliases are superseded by shell functions.

Also, the chances of breaking something are really high, because not even you remember how the code actually works.

The rules recorded in natural language are readable not only by humans but also by the computer and therefore no longer need to be programmed by a software developer. This task is now taken over by openVALIDATION.

Such schemas cannot easily be refactored without removing the benefits of sharing. Refactoring would require forking a local copy, which for schemas intended to be treated as an opaque validation interface with internal details that may change, eliminates the benefit of referencing a separately maintained schema in the first place.

an equivalent of R's signif function in Ruby.

So when should you use rbspy, and when should you use stackprof? The two tools are actually used in pretty different ways! rbspy is a command line tool (rbspy record --pid YOUR_PID), and StackProf is a library that you can include in your Ruby program and use to profile a given section of code.

I don't understand the hesitation here to accept a really useful addition to rspec. Maintenance burden. Forseen internal changes required to do it. Unforseen internal changes required to do it. Formatter changes to handle new output status for a spec that passed and failed It's simply not a previously design use case of RSpec. It will be hacky to implement.

We already have a very wide configuration API. The further we expand it the more unwieldy it becomes for users. At this point we generally require new features to be implemented first as extension gems, and then to see support, before considering including them in core.

It sounds like the OP's needs have been met, but for future explorers, here's some tools to tell if something is clickable.

It feels like « removing spring » is one of those unchallenged truths like « always remove Turbolinks » or « never use fixtures ». It also feels like a confirmation bias when it goes wrong.

All seem focused on rendering the 404 page manually. However, I wanted to make rescue_from work. My solution is the catch-all route and raising the exception manually.

Interleaving is a learning technique that involves mixing together different topics or forms of practice, in order to facilitate learning. For example, if a student uses interleaving while preparing for an exam, they can mix up different types of questions, rather than study only one type of question at a time.Interleaving, which is sometimes referred to as mixed practice or varied practice, is contrasted with blocked practice (sometimes referred to as specific practice), which involves focusing on only a single topic or form of practice at a time.

the more effort they had to put into the study strategy, the less they felt they were learning.

The focus of the dev container specification is to describe how to enrich a container for the purposes of development, rather than acting as a multi-container orchestrator format.

Instead read this gems brief source code completely before use OR copy the code straight into your codebase.

it is highly encouraged to switch to zeitwerk mode because it is a better autoloader

Not what you asked, but as this question is linked to from a few places I hope someone finds this answer useful.

StopTheMadness is a web browser extension that stops web sites from making your browser harder to use

"The good news is that you can wrest control of your browser back from these malicious, control-freak sites."

I am open to discussion but I don't want to jump on the conclusion.

The biggest reason is that we still have several options, so I didn't want to restrict the future possibility.

because it is in a central location and contributed to by many people, problems are found quickly, and fixes are for everyone—not just one specific template.

Instead of render props, we use Svelte's slot props: // React version <Listbox.Button> {({open, disabled} => /* Something using open and disabled */)} </Listbox.Button> <!--- Svelte version ---> <ListboxButton let:open let:disabled> <!--- Something using open and disabled ---> </ListboxButton>

having inconsistencies when all the "subtle" conditions were met is unfriendly. it requires the user to have much deeper understanding of the nuances of the language.

Tip for those who run into the same error message and find this bug report by Google: Your cause for this error message might be a different cause entirely. To find your cause, set a breakpoint, and look at the call stack.

I am firmly convinced that asserting on the state of the interface is in every way superior to asserting on the state of your model objects in a full-stack test.

Okay thank you. I'll need to do some thinking then on how to apply that to things like git config --global core.editor

const palette: { [key: string]: string } = {...

what is the TypeScript Way™ of handling the implicit any that appears due to object literals not having a standard index signature?

Just for fun, I did a little experimenting at home to show how some of these different types of cement hold up. I started by cementing a bunch of materials together with a bunch of different types of cement. I waited 24 hours, then cut each one roughly in half, down the middle.

The number of complaints across the issue tracker and the lack of substantive followup on many of those complaints should be ample evidence that these frustrated users exist and are likely about to leave Fenix behind in droves, if they haven't already.

How can we get action on the bugzilla bug mentioned above to cause this to be fixed?

The problem is that Webpack created convenience by automatically polyfilling and then now suddenly took it away.

Three days before Labor Day, on Friday, September 2, 1921, the U.S. Army intervened on the side of coal companies against striking coal miners, marking the end of the Battle of Blair Mountain in southern West Virginia. The battle was the climax of two decades of low-intensity warfare across the coalfields of Appalachia, as the West Virginia miners sought to unionize and mining companies used violent tactics to undermine their efforts. The struggle turned deadly.

We human beings pride ourselves on our ability to reason, but the truth is we use our brains nine times out of ten to justify what our gut wants, not what is rational to do.

Seeing what you want to see, and failing to understand the why and the how

This library on GitHub solves the cross-domain problem, along with making sure the iFrame stays sized to the content when things change. github.com/davidjbradshaw/iframe-resizer

This will obviate the need for a helper function of any kind.

Noticed that with 100+ s, I am not alone here. There are definitely a lot of devs wanting this feature. So I took some time out and decided to give this a go myself. I have created a PR for the same

that's why I bolded "same column" with the or query. I can delete the comment altogether, but thought it would be helpful for people perusing "or" query SO questions.

Our members are technically self-pay; however, 100 percent of our members pay their bills. All we—and they—ask is that healthcare providers not penalize them for this technical designation. Please give our members the same consideration in terms of discounts that insurance companies receive for negotiated contracts.

In mutations, when errors happen, the other fields may return nil. So, if those other fields have null: false, but they return nil, the GraphQL will panic and remove the whole mutation from the response, including the errors!

However, this request-by-request mindset doesn’t map well to GraphQL because there’s only one controller and the requests that come to it may be very different.

There are many projects that does not use the master branch as default. For example, Next.js uses the canary branch, the npm CLI and many more other projects uses stuff like prod, production, dev, develop, release, beta, head.

On existing projects, consider the global effort to change from origin/master to origin/main. The cost of being different than git convention and every book, tutorial, and blog post. Is the cost of change and being different worth it?

My 3 projects were using your lib and got broken thanks to the renaming.

The main (IMO) feature of MQTT – quality of service – doesn't make sense in our case: if a WebSocket server is down and doesn't receive broadcast messages (through HTTP/Redis/queue), it's likely not to handle client connections too.

This meant that we owned both sides of the product implementation. For unit testing on the frontend, we stayed with Angular’s suggestion of Jasmine. For unit testing on the backend, we went with rspec-rails. These worked well since unit tests don’t need to cross technology boundaries.

We used testing tools that were in the same ecosystem as our backend technology stack for primrily three reasons: We owned both ends of the stack Team experience Interacting with the database

Configuration style is exactly the same for env_bang and env_setting, only that there's no "ENV!" method... just the normal class: EnvSetting that is called and configured.

Programmers should be encouraged to understand what is correct, why it is correct, and then propagate.

I'm not sure why MSFT decided to change these codes in the first place. While it might have been a noble goal to follow the IETF standard (though I'm not really familiar with this), the old codes were already out there, and most developers don't benefit by the new codes, nor care about what these codes are called (a code is a code). Just the opposite occurs in fact, since now everyone including MSFT itself has to deal with two codes that represent the same language (and the resulting problems). My own program needs to be fixed to handle this (after a customer contacted me with an issue), others have cited problems on the web (and far more probably haven't publicised theirs), and MSFT itself had to deal with this in their own code. This includes adding both codes to .NET even though they're actually the same language (in 4.0 they distinguished between the two by adding the name "legacy" to the full language name of the older codes), adding special documentation to highlight this situation in MSDN, making "zh-Hans" the parent culture of "zh-CHS" (not sure if it was always this way but it's a highly questionable relationship), and even adding special automated code to newly created "add-in" projects in Visual Studio 2008 (only to later remove this code in Visual Studio 2010, without explanation and therefore causing confusion for developers - long story). In any case, this is not your doing of course, but I don't see how anyone benefits from this change in practice. Only those developers who really care about following the IETF standard would be impacted, and that number is likely very low. For all others, the new codes are just an expensive headache. Again, not blaming you of cours

I feel the pain. It is a normal thing that standards do evolve over time, though, and our software needs to cope with it.

I'm not sure why MSFT decided to change these codes in the first place. While it might have been a noble goal to follow the IETF standard (though I'm not really familiar with this), the old codes were already out there, and most developers don't benefit by the new codes, nor care about what these codes are called (a code is a code).

get: function(target, prop, receiver) { return "world"; }

We want the GraphQL API to be the primary means of interacting programmatically with GitLab. To achieve this, it needs full coverage - anything possible in the REST API should also be possible in the GraphQL API.

They have to ask you the dumb questions, either because their employer demands they do, or sometimes because their computer system doesn't let them get to the next part of the script unless they play ball.

Another will employ smart people who apologise to you profusely for having to go through all the pointless steps, but that's just what they have to do!

There's nothing to stop you from doing initializer code in a file that lives in app/models. for example class MyClass def self.run_me_when_the_class_is_loaded end end MyClass.run_me_when_the_class_is_loaded MyClass.run_me... will run when the class is loaded .... which is what we want, right? Not sure if its the Rails way.... but its extremely straightforward, and does not depend on the shifting winds of Rails.

I don't believe the sprockets and sprockets-rails maintainers (actually it's up to the Rails maintainers, see rails/rails#28430) currently consider it broken. (I am not a committer/maintainer on any of those projects). So there is no point in "waiting for someone else to fix" it; that is not going to happen (unless you can change their minds). You just need to figure out the right way to use sprockets 4 with rails as it is.

The use of U+212B 'Angstrom sign', which was encoded due to round-trip mapping compatibility with an East-Asian character encoding, is discouraged, and the preferred representation is U+00C5 'capital letter A with ring above', which has the same glyph.

What is the equivalent of unbuffer program on Windows?

Of course you must not use plain-text passwords and place them directly into scripts. You even must not use telnet protocol at all. And avoid ftp, too. I needn’t say why you should use ssh, instead, need I? And you also must not plug your fingers into 220 voltage AC-output. Telnet was chosen for examples as less harmless alternative, because it’s getting rare in real life, but it can show all basic functions of expect-like tools, even abilities to send passwords. BUT, you can use “Expect and Co” to do other things, I just show the direction.

perl -ne 'chomp(); if (-e $_) {print "$_\n"}'

xargs -i sh -c 'test -f {} && echo {}'