Pyro

Perhaps try making a simple web chat application. I recommend it for a myriad of reasons:

• You’ll get to touch upon all the layers of a web app (DB/backend/frontend) in a manageably small way.
• You’ll be able to make multiple choices to learn different technologies - like which database type to use (SQL/document), which message passing method to use (requests/sockets), which frontend framework to use (Solid/Svelte/HTMX/etc), and so on.
• Getting a minimum working system is very fast. You can easily spend less than a day completing this, even as a novice.
• Once completed, there are many extra goals you can set yourself. Try adding roles, commands, enable sending pictures, embedding metadata for links, etc. You need only look to your favourite chat app for your next idea!

“Will ever finish”, not “has already finished”. It needs to predict.

It’s a reference to this.

It’s not even that. I can generally read a C-like language, but when the first line I see is a long-ass array of bytes with zero documentation it just makes me not want to even try.

While I agree with the premise of the article, the code is completely unreadable to me. I took a look at the first snippet and just thought “Nah.”

I used to only use C#, and I liked the simplicity of only using one symbol to access any prop/field/method. But now I’ve used Rust for a while I do prefer separating the two for the same reasons you mentioned.

So no, you’re not alone. Even cross-lang!

1.12 is a long way off from a full release

Looking at the size of previous updates, there’s only ~5 more lines of code to write!

That’s horrendous, I love it.

I quite like the term Software Alchemist.

To me, the words “engineer” and “developer” both imply that a well thought out and structured plan is in place for them to do their job. Not so with “alchemist”, which implies a fair amount of experimentation and uncertainty, both of which are very common in the software industry.

I get the advantage, and if I could change our schema with a click of my fingers I would, but it’s not that easy. We do use the native date type in our schema, but the dates we store in there are in local time. It’s bad, I know. It was originally written by a couple of people about 15 years ago, so software standards were a lot more lax back then.

We already have many customers with lots of data that are currently using this product, so it’s unfortunately non-trivial to fix all of their data with the current systems we have in place.

We developers often want to fix so many things but we’re often told what to do based on what the business cares more about, rather than what we actually want to fix. That’s why we always end up building shit on top of shit, because the business doesn’t want to pay us to rewrite 15-20 years worth of legacy code despite in doing so it would make the product an order of magnitude better in every conceivable way.

I think what they meant is requiring that only UTC time should be in the database. This prevents ambiguity when pulling dates/times out as with many poorly designed systems it’s not possible to know whether a date represents UTC time or local time.

At my work we store local time in our database and I hate it. We only serve customers in our country, which only has one time zone, so that’s fine for now. But we’ve definitely made it harder for ourselves to expand if we ever wanted to.

Inko looks like it copied Rust’s homework and changed it a little.

I don’t really see what it offers that I couldn’t get from another lang. What’s the USP?

The did not follow the hivemind of “Rust good, JS slow, C complex, PHP bad” which clearly means they are in the wrong /s

I took a look at Unison a short while ago when I saw it mentioned elsewhere on Lemmy and I’ll say what I said before: Their Hello World example, and by extension the rest of the language, looks very weird and unwieldy to me. With the repeating identifiers and relatively alien syntax I’m having a hard time seeing this catch on.

Crystal is very similar to Ruby, but is compiled to native code instead. Would you consider that? Why or why not?

Fira Code was my font of choice for a while, but now I use JetBrains Mono! Cascadia Code is also acceptable.

I’d give it a try, but I can’t see anything before being asked to sign up.

Websites that do that just leave a bad taste in my mouth, asking for your information before they’ve even shown you what you’ll get for doing so.

It’s a stretch, but the only thing I can think of is that it might be a bit better for dyslexic people because the letters are a bit more diverse, but I don’t think it’s nearly enough to be considered an actual dyslexia font.

Neon and Argon: Seem okay. They’re really quite similar though. It’s like the designers couldn’t decide which they liked more and so just decided to release both.

Xenon: It feels alright. The horizontal serifs give everything a more uniform look, but you can also get that with any other serif font.

Radon: Uh, no thanks. It’s like someone took the weird letters from Dank Mono and said “what if we did that but for the whole font?”

Krypton: What if we just took OCR A and added ligatures? Alternatively, “Floating Point Precision Error: The Font”

Overall, none of these are compelling enough to make me want to try them. I quite like the Texture Healing feature, but it’s not enough to make me want to move to it.

Also, using multiple different fonts in one code file sounds horrendous.

I really want to like Podman Compose but since the very beginning it’s been noticeably tougher to work with than Docker Compose. I get that it’s because it’s just an extra script rather than a first party tool, but still.

It’s perfectly acceptable to not want to use a certain tool.

You would be the kind of person on SO to reply to a question saying “how do I do A” with “nobody does A, do B instead”. That’s not constructive.