I’m still waiting for better Windows Git Auth integration in GitButler. I don’t want to enter my key password for each remote action (fetch or push).

lol, the T-shirt with the trademark text paragraphs

sounds like a skin disease.”

I mean… it does occasionally make my skin crawl

If Markdown formatting is enough for you, I would look into using a static site generator, like Hugo or Jekyll.

If you want to keep your existing content as static files but same website skeleton and layout instead of copying and editing files you’ll copy one and create the layout template. Then content and new posts and pages can be generated from Markdown files. If you set up CI they won’t need to run Hugo or what you’re using, only push the Markdown files to your Git repository.

Whatever you want to do primarily depends on: Your formatting, styling, functionality, and interfacing needs for the editor, and what you’re willing to use or invest for setup.

Hugo runs from a single binary. The source layout is reasonable. With a single layout the folder structure doesn’t have to be complex.

I’m not very familiar with alternative [Markdown] static site generators.

You’re good to keep your skepticism. If you trust them, the ones creating the tutorial to have vetted to a degree, or that a very popular package like that is vetted to a reasonable degree, you’ll just go ahead with it. (Like most people do without questioning it.)

You’ll need considerable experience and insight to do good, reasonable risk assessment. Without that, you can either trust and hope in others, or skip the ecosystem and look for alternative technologies.

It’s also worth noting that your potential impact is considerable lower if you’re only doing local test and development work, not publishing or publicly serving anything. I’m not personally familiar if or to what degree running arbitrary local commands has been limited in the npm ecosystem by now.

They make valid points, and maybe it makes sense to always prefer them in their context.

I don’t think exceptions always lead to better error handling and messages though. It depends on what you’re handling.

A huge bin of exception is detailed and has a lot of info, but often lacks context and concise, obvious error messages. When you catch in outer code, and then have a “inaccessible resource” exception, it tells you nothing. You have to go through the stack trace and analyze which cases could be covered.

If explicit errors don’t lead to good handling I don’t think you can expect good exception throwing either. Both solutions need adequate design and implementation to be good.

Having a top-level (in their server context for one request or connection) that handles and discards one context while the program continues to run for others is certainly simple. Not having to propagate errors simplifies the code. But it also hides error states and possibilities across the entire stack between outer catch and deep possible throw.

In my (C#) projects I typically make conscious decisions between error states and results and exceptional exceptions where basic assumptions or programming errors exist.

Does the performance cost of error checking/result types they discovered in C++ apply to languages that have native result and option types like Rust?

I would hope they were able to find efficient, performant implementations, and that branch prediction picks the expected non-error branch in most cases.

I recently watched a presentation (on YouTube from a conference/offline presentation) about Systemd which also went into its focus/baseline of Linux, not Unix, and how NT supported a stronger service concept from the beginning. It was quite interesting to learn about the differences and the presenter’s assessment and reasoning of the necessity of Systemd or something else that replaces or extends init and rc.d.

• The Tragedy of Systemd

Somehow it’s clunky to use.

huh?

I find developing GitHub CI in YAML clunky.

I don’t find configuring a simple service via YAML config, with a preset showing me and explaining what I can do clunky.

The server sidebar has an uptime stat. Could also have a simple monthly costs covered percent stat.

with this in mind

With what in mind? Evading NULL?

Languages that make use of references rather than pointers don’t have this Dualism. C# has nullable references and nullability analysis, and null as a keyword.

What does your reasoning mean in that context?

The items don’t seem concise and always clear. But seems like a good, inspiring resource for things to consider.

If it is expected that a method might fail, then it should fail, either by throwing an Exception or, if not - it should return a special case None/Null type object of the desired class (following the Null Object Pattern), not null itself.

I’ve never heard of evading null with a Null object. Seems like a bad idea to me. Maybe it could work in some language, but generally I would say prefer result typing. Introducing a result type wrapping or extending the result value type is complexity I would be very evasive to introduce if the language doesn’t already support result wrapper/state types.

It’s an operating system that demands more of you than does the commercial offerings from Microsoft and Apple.

Does it?

It’s different, but I imagine they’re not fundamentally different if you exclude established knowledge/already being used to something.

Normal office use for non-techy people is launching apps, editing documents, and surfing the web. That doesn’t work much differently, not fundamentally different, and not fundamentally more difficult.

I wish standards were always open access. Not behind a 600 dollar paywall.

When it is paywalled I’m irritated it’s even called a standard.

TOML instead of YAML or JSON for configuration.

YAML is complex and has security concerns most people are not aware of.

JSON works, but the block quoting and indenting is a lot of noise for a simple category key value format.

It doesn’t analyze only one repo

How is that related? I don’t see it.

This is not my experience at all.

It seems we search for and look at different kinds of questions.

At least that’s a testament to neutrality - in a shitty way.

fake internet points

Your take is a valid one, but not very fair.

Points are a reputation system. People who are contribute and provide quality get increased trust and power.

It’s not “fake”. It’s a designed system of points with meaning.

A casual surfer not being able to vote is by design. Which has a cost of missing out on valid votes, but the benefit of evading trolls and misuse.