sandywaffles

How is this production grade? The last few things CF posted with AI were outright lies or omitted large swaths of functionality.

If your stance is assuming we have an existing implementation of something in the training set, and we have a robust test harness already, and we have thousands of dollars to throw at tokens, and we're not at all concerned with "works" THEN this is viable then sure? But that doesn't seem to be what most boosters are saying.

I think that was already common knowledge as hansjorg above suggests

> If it takes them 7 interviews to decide on a candidate don't bother with that company.

I don't think I share that opinion. The best jobs I've had were after 7+ rounds of actual interviews: code challenge, several peer panels, systems design, hiring manager, Senior manager, Cutler fit, etc.

That of course doesn't mean there aren't companies out there abusing the system or who have less than genuine tactics. But my point is mere number of rounds isn't a good indicator of anything in isolation. I've also worked at places with less than 3 rounds that were absolutely terrible.

I was interested in this back when it was a next gen terminal, now not so much. From the marketing I can't even tell if this is still a terminal? I was quite confused for a while wondering if I was looking at the right "Warp" or if this was something new using the same name.

> [..] a workflow they have been optimizing for decades.

it sounds the opposite of optimized to me. Unless we're optimizing for something other than developer experience and efficiency?

It is more likely your GPS placed you in the vicinity (regularly?) with another AD ID that regularly searches for, purchases, or visits dog centric locations. It's also entirely possible that the other AD ID's (your grandma) dog food schedule is predictable and you happen to be visiting within a time frame of dog food purchases.

> I want are things like function effects

And it's not a cut and dry issue to add. Function effects would add a lot of cognitive load to the developer along with more implicit bounds which increases accidental API break changes. You talk about the compiler implicitly adding the bounds to functions, but what happens when I now add a line in my function that allocates when before it didn't? I just broke my API unless I was also defensively testing all implicit bounds. And if I was testing all implicit bounds, can the language no longer add new bounds? Reversing that and requiring the callee to defensively declare all bounds is a borderline non-starter because it'd such a huge burden to write any function or refactor anything.

No one is forcing you to use a dependency. Write the code yourself just like you would in another language. Or vendor the dependency and re-write/delete/whatever the code you don't like.

I'm using the Cosmic alpha in Fedora and loving it. There are little bugs here and there, but nothing show stopping that I've seen. It's the first desktop that's been able to pry me away from KDE with tiling.

I think that's because all the press talks about actual battery life per laptop and the Apple Silicone laptops ship with literally double the size battery of any AMD based laptop without a discrete GPU. So while the efficiency may be close, actually perceived battery life of the Mac will he more than double when you also consider the priority Apple puts into their power control combined with a larger overall battery.

structopt became part of clap proper (as `clap_derive`) when clap v3 was released.

Well considering I just saw a post recently saying `find` + `mkdir` is Turing Complete, I sure as hell hope C99 is as well.

I use du-dust over gdu, but otherwise my list is almost identical to yours.

Because eBPF is no longer just packet filtering? It's now used in loads of hook pionts unrelated to packets or filtering at all.