svnpenn

on mine it is 1,354 KB. I prefer the 10x LOC savings over a megabyte of hard drive, but you do you.

> it is pretty much identical to go.

Its not.

with Go you have ONE go.mod file, at the module root. you may have 100 sub packages or sub sub sub packages, but still only ONE go.mod file. then any time you need to add a new import at ANY level, you just go "go mod tidy", and DONE. please dont try to compares apple and orange and say they are both apples.

> I make no claims about use of generics making your code being absolutely good or bad, but I do make claims that use of generics can make your code less error-prone and safe.

Right. this is the issue right here. people only see that Go didn't have generics, and they never stop for a second to think WHY Go didn't have them. Generics have an implementation cost for the Go project, and maintenance cost for the Go project, and end user negative impacts in regards to time and memory. but advocates often dont know or care about these drawback, and only howl that GENERICS ARE MISSING until they are added, consequences be damned.

I'm just saying that while generics are useful in some cases, they are not always the right answer, and it shouldn't just be assumed that every language needs them, nor that any non-generic language "sucks".

well, he could have done nothing, and where would we be? if you say "exactly where we are now", I think you are being dishonest with how the situation played out.

No, he didn't write the code or make the schedule, but he stood up and said "this is not right", and took steps to protect his and other small sites.

numbers look like garbage, I think this is the culprit:

    font-family: system-ui, 'Noto Emoji', sans-serif;

Here is Go version. works exactly as expected, no surprises. People just need to grow up and use a modern language, not a 50 year old out of date language:

    package main
    
    import "fmt"
    
    func main() {
       var i, iterations, meters float64
       for iterations = 100_000_000; i < iterations; i++ {
          meters += 0.01
       }
       // Expected: 1000.000000 km
       fmt.Printf("Expected: %f km\n", 0.01 * iterations / 1000)
       // Got: 1000.000001 km
       fmt.Printf("Got: %f km \n", meters / 1000)
    }

> the user must be able to clear it when clearing site data and this what makes it currently an unviable solution

What are you suggesting here? That extensions should have some special storage, that can't be (easily) deleted? Noooooooo thank you. Firefox has "forget about this site" and similar tools, which I use near daily. Don't fuck with my ability to do housekeeping.

I am fine with this. I personally have no interest in Copilot, but my understanding is its not small feat to offer a service like this. I think it would be understandable if the "free tier" was severely rate limited. GitHub has plenty of crappy business practices, this seems pretty tame. The honeymoon is over. If people want this technology, they can pay up.

Not sure if this is still the case, but last time I checked Microsoft Office had student discount, but was not generally free. This seems like a similar situation.

if they do, so what? even if 10 people cut in front of you, with a 30 minute drive, how much time are you really losing? 50 seconds?

> drivers cutting in when large gaps form

if they do, so what? even if 10 people cut in front of you, with a 30 minute drive, how much time are you really losing? 50 seconds?

I work in IT. I manage our mobile devices, and I was shocked to recently find out that iPads (and I assume iPhones), have no option to choose the resolution of the resulting pictures.

Why is Apple like this? I dont always need a 9 MB or whatever photo size, it would be nice to be able to take lower res images to save space.

this is the exact opposite of the point the comment you replied to is making. Rails is not simple. we are talking about SIMPLE, like CGI. Rails is a classic example of a slow bloated framework.