vincentdm

I don't like the prefix idea: besides the duplication of information, it also becomes a liability if you ever rename things.

Imagine you prefix all customer IDs with `cus_`, but at some point decide to rename Customer to Organization in your codebase (e.g. because it turns out some of the entities you are storing are not actually customers). Now you have some legacy prefix that cannot be changed, is permanently out of sync with the code and will confuse every new developer.

I see some Clojure examples in the article. We use Clojure almost exclusively and this would be a great replacement for line-based Git diffs, providing much more insight in actual changes.

Is there any chance such an alternative differ could be used in Git (and adjacent tools like GitLab), or are we stuck with line-based forever?

We adopted it in 2017 and got rid of it in 2021. It introduced a lot of complexity, while still leaving a lot of issues up to us to figure out. E.g. deployment strategies.

Also: our main reason to adopt Kubernetes was to stay cloud-agnostic, but we soon realized that this is as unrealistic as writing a complex app's SQL in a vendor-independent way.

Instead, we decided to embrace our cloud (AWS) by using their CDK tooling and leveraging their features as much as possible. If we ever need to switch to another cloud we will bear the cost then, but for now it is clearly YAGNI.

No they are a genuine lab with scientists; but I agree that the homepage is misleading.

HN could allow the submitter to optionally configure up to 3 multiple choice questions about the article.

A user would need to answer all of them correctly before being able to comment. An incorrect answer would add a delay of ~1h before they can comment (without needing to do the quiz again).

Even though it’s fairly easy to cheat or work around, it might be enough to tilt the incentives towards just reading or at least skimming the article.

Thanks for sharing this, I had no idea about the existence of these things!

Something I never understand when defence spending is compared: how do they account for differences in PPP and different levels of grease/corruption?

E.g if the US spends twice as much as X on fighter planes, but they are built in an uneconomic place because of politics and wages there are double than the average of X. I would say it might mean it actually spends only half, no?

This obituary turns an anonymous "Muslim victim" into the portrait of an admirable, wholesome human being, whom I can eerily relate to, despite being an atheist who is weary of Islam.

I applaud that The Economist wrote this weekly obituary. It puts a crack into the us-vs them narrative that the perpetrator undoubtedly wanted to exploit by murdering Muslim worshipers.

As a Clojure user I very much agree with Rich's careful way of designing software.

But in case of the Clojure language itself, I'd personally prefer a big-bang version 2.0 with significant backwards-incopatible changes to clear up some accumulated inconsistencies, over a fork into yet another language with a new name. Such a fork risks splitting the community in two, each below a critical level, and also makes the decision to upgrade more open-ended (i.e. a 2.0 release explicitly supersedes 1.x and thereby communicates that it is supposed to be better and recommended. A fork is much more open-ended and provides more arguments to part of the community to stay behind).

But there is obviously a point where the original is sufficiently unrecognizable that a new name is more fitting.