Is it just me, or this article basically just an ad, and not a particularly well written one?
Is it just me, or this article basically just an ad, and not a particularly well written one?
You are probably thinking about Humble Games, which is a sibling company. Humble Bundle has been a multi pack sale company for its entire existence.
Choosing to have a child later on generally has fewer negative consequences than unchoosing a child you have already had.
Have you really not heard of it? It is a new architecture that is a bit better than x64_64.
Every one had already been launched.
Easy: recognizing bird calls on my phone.
Because some of us are bitter at the trees for generating so much pollen at this time of year and want revenge.
Spotted the INTERCAL programmer.
I see a lot of enthusiasm here, and there is nothing wrong with that, but… am I the only one who actually found the movie to be kind of disappointing?
Yeah, I miss living in Australia where you didn’t have your own waiter but on the other hand that meant that it wasn’t rude to flag down any of the wait staff if you need anything rather than being restricted to having to go through a single person.
Ah, yes, the good old git off --my lawn
command.
Yes. My rule of thumb is that generally rebasing is the better approach, in part because if your commit history is relatively clean then it is easier to merge in changes one commit at a time than all at once. However, sometimes so much has changed that replaying your commits puts you in the position of having to solve so many problems that it is more trouble than it is worth, in which case you should feel no qualms about aborting the rebase (git rebase --abort
) and using a merge instead.
The way I structure my commits, it is usually (but not always) easier and more reliable for me to replay my commits one at a time on top of the main branch and see how each relatively small change needs to be adapted in isolation–running the full test suite at each step to verify that my changes were correct–than to be presented with a slew of changes all at once that result from marrying all of my changes with all of the changes made to the main branch at once. So I generally start by attempting a rebase and fall back to a merge if that ends up creating more problems than it solves.
I’ve only met one other person that knew who/what Dvorak was/is, and also reportedly used that keyboard layout.
I experimented with it in University–I actually got a screwdriver and pried up and rearranged all of the keys on my keyboard within a week or so of starting–but after graduating I noticed that I was still slower at typing on Dvorak than I was on QWERTY so I gave up and changed back.
I’m not the one you asked, but what I like isn’t really about PHP itself, but the fact that I can get dirt cheap hosting with PHP and MySQL.
Oh, wow, I looked a little into this and hosting really is dirt cheap! That is a benefit that I genuinely was not expecting.
Either way, it’s an awesome language, happily been using it for decades now
Mind taking a moment to share why you like it? I am not very familiar with it.
The explanation given to you makes it sound like ==
was deliberately designed to be a more convenient version of ===
, but what actually happened was that ==
used to be the only equality operator in JavaScript, which meant that if you didn’t want it’s auto-coercing behavior then you needed to go out of your way to add additional type checks yourself. Because this was obviously a tremendously inconvenient state of affairs, the ===
operator was introduced later so that you could test for equality without having to worry about JavaScript doing something clever underneath the hood that you weren’t expecting.
Sure, but it is also a very gratuitous and pointless design constraint.
Land mines are painted red in my shop. You want to change the language to remove a land mine that everyone competent already knows enough to step around. The problem has already been solved, so why are you continuing to complain about it?
Just to be clear, I’m not actually calling for JavaScript to change, I’m just pointing out that people are right to point out this as being a problem. Having said that, if everyone competent uses linters now so that this feature isn’t used in practice anymore, then getting rid of it shouldn’t even break anything, and arguably code which would break is already broken because it uses an operator that no one should be using, so you shouldn’t be using this code anyway.
Not true at all. They started as a game bundler, and branched out into publishing games..
Also, all of their bundles and sales continue to feature donations to charity.