This guy is now behind two of the products that I wish the most: the Small Android Phone and the Pebble watch. I hope they succeed! :)
Do you have a link to the 'Small Android Phone'?
Readit Newsedwintorok commented on We're bringing Pebble back repebble.com/... · Posted by u/erohead
Some interesting things happening in the structured concurrency / "Direct style" space. It looks like it could become a powerful and readable way to compose (asyncy type) things. Simpler code, usable stack traces, better traceability, less function colouring concerns.
It's early days in that regard, with some folks doing some really interesting things: Odersky himself / the Ox project.
With OCaml 5 and effects it might be possible to use direct style, and rely on effect handlers to schedule IO.
Here is an example of how structured concurrency in OCaml could look like https://ocaml.org/p/picos_std/latest/doc/Picos_std_structure...
I 100% agree. The lack of clear scoping and function call grouping syntax just turns it into a word soup. It becomes difficult to parse for humans and I spend a stupid amount of time just getting the semicolons, begin/ends, etc. right.
It's like... when you mismatch brackets or braces in a C-style language, except to resolve the problem you can't just find the bracket that's highlighted in red and count; you have to read an essay.
I don't know why there are so many people here defending it. It's pretty clearly very elegant, but extremely inconvenient.
That can be indeed very confusing when you initially learn the language.
However there are 3 things that can help:
* An auto-formatter (ocamlformat integration in your editor, or ocaml-top) that shows how the actual nesting looks like
* You can add ;; at the end of a top-level function to get a syntax error at a better location
* Use the LSP integration of your editor which will show you where the error is as you type, so you catch the problem early
edwintorok commented on Show HN: Bullshit Remover bullshitremover.com/... · Posted by u/adrian-dzieg
Works also the other way round:
> PLEASE ADD BUSSWORDS AND OTHER BULLSHIT TO THIS: > We track everything you do on our site. Accept it or get lost.
results in
> Leveraging cutting-edge data analytics and user-centric engagement metrics, our innovative platform seamlessly integrates a comprehensive suite of proprietary tracking solutions to synergistically enhance your browsing experience. By accepting our state-of-the-art privacy policy, you empower us to deliver personalized, value-added content tailored to your unique digital footprint. Should you opt to forgo this transformative opportunity, we regretfully cannot accommodate your online journey at this juncture.
Lets try it on itself:
> add bullshit: Paste crap, get truth.
Output: > Revolutionize your digital content strategy by leveraging our cutting-edge AI-powered semantic transformation platform to seamlessly transmute suboptimal textual inputs into crystal-clear, paradigm-shifting prose that resonates with your target demographic and drives engagement metrics through the roof!
Use above as input and get as output: > Use our AI writing tool to make your crappy text suck less and maybe get some clicks.
Slightly different one as input: > add bullshit: Bullshit Remover. Paste crap, get truth.
Output: > Introducing our revolutionary Linguistic Veracity Enhancement Solution™! This cutting-edge, AI-powered content optimization platform seamlessly transforms convoluted verbiage into streamlined, high-impact messaging. Simply input your suboptimal text, and our proprietary algorithms will distill it into pure, unadulterated truth nuggets. Elevate your communication paradigm today!
Reverse: > Bullshit translator: We made an app that cuts the crap out of your writing. It's not revolutionary, it's just a fancy spell-check. But hey, at least you'll sound less like a pompous ass when you use it.
Again: > We made an app that edits your writing. It's basically spell-check on steroids. It'll make you sound less pretentious.
Again: > We made a glorified spell-checker. It'll stop you sounding like a pompous ass.
Again: > We made a fancy autocorrect. It'll keep you from sounding like a pretentious jerk.
Again: > We made spellcheck. It'll stop you sounding like an idiot.
Again: > We fixed your typos. You're welcome.
Again: > We changed your words without asking. Deal with it.
...
edwintorok commented on QUIC is not quick enough over fast internet dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/35... · Posted by u/Shank
TCP has a lot of offloads that may not all be available for UDP.
edwintorok commented on Gnome Files: A detailed UI examination datagubbe.se/gnomefiles/... · Posted by u/dominikh
> It's worth mentioning that I agree that the modern design paradigm probably is friendly to beginner users in many ways. But at some point, people stop being beginners. People who use computers several hours per day, performing a wide variety of tasks in many different programs, should also be taken in to account when designing software. As such, my critique comes from the point of what's usually called a "power user". It's also worth considering that the more an interface hides, the less it offers by way of opportunities for a user to grow and learn.
After that I find it a bit rich to complain that one has to use a keyboard shortcut (even as others have said that's even incorrect), especially for a function that requires using the keyboard anyway.
I also find the arguments about no up button and the list view unconvincing. The list button was immediately obvious to me from the screenshot (and I don't use gnome or any filemanager) and I actually appreciate a window that does not put lost of buttons that present duplicate functionality everywhere (and it's harder to hit? What argument is that, by his own admission he's been using computers for 35 years, but can't use a mouse to hit a path?).
This really just reads like one of the typical rants where someone become somewhat proficient with some system, now considers themselves a "power user" and expects everything else to work exactly the same. The same people often complain that terminals break with "standard shortcuts" because they can't copy with ctrl-C...
How do you find out what that keyboard shortcut is?
I only found out when reading a similar article as the OP many years ago that complained about the removal of the textbox.
Otherwise I never would've known it is possible to activate the path textbox with a keyboard shortcut.
A UI needs to be both easy to use and discoverable. If "power users" have trouble discovering where the features they need are, why do we think the rest of the UI is easy to use/discoverable for everyone else?
(Although TBH I rarely use UI, and normally just use the terminal, except when upgrading the firmware of my keyboard, in which case I use Jade's file manager).
Unfortunately the world runs on Word and Excel and unless you want the even worse Office 365 experience, you often do need some M$.
Is there a case where Google Docs or LibreOffice cannot open a docx or pptx correctly?
I haven't used Word or Excel since their '97 version. Even at work I can't remember a situation where I specifically needed the MS implementation.
edwintorok commented on The return of the frame pointers brendangregg.com/blog/202... · Posted by u/mfiguiere
No, LBR is an Intel-only feature.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/AMD-Zen-4-LbrExtV2 LBR is supposed to work on AMD too, except it doesn't. I'll have to open a bug report (it records the data, it just can't parse it afterwards)