It also has to be said that mobile operating systems are terrible platforms for getting into programming. The gateway drug for programming is scripting and that’s pretty much impossible there, at least without doing it in some existing automation app, which isn’t going to be a transferable skill.
Even if you do have a PC to try to develop a full-fledged app, that’s an incredibly daunting endeavor. I could probably code out ten CLIs in a shorter time frame than one simple app.
And here I would argue that the Rust library is strictly better, specifically because it will come with an automated or precompiled build of the C library. Compiling C is such a pain.
I’m not expecting insane test coverage. What I’m looking for, is that they’ve understood that writing tests makes their (future) life easier, too. A hobby project can benefit from that just as well. I’d argue almost even more so, because you might be working on a feature over the course of several weekends, where you’ll benefit from having written down the intended behavior at the start.
Personally (as a dev), I wouldn’t particularly care that you know a specific library (the chance of us using the exact same library is pretty slim and will probably change when the project changes). But I would care to see that you are using a library when it makes sense.
So, if you implemented a hashtable yourself and I spotted that, I’d remember that as you either not knowing that that’s called a “hashtable”, so you didn’t find a library for it. Or I might think that you’re potentially stuck-up, thinking you can do a better job implementing it yourself.
The aspects I’d look for, starting with the most important:
Broke my phone like two months ago and sent it in to get it repaired, which took about a month. I only had my work phone as emergency backup, so I basically didn’t have a phone during most of that time.
Well, staring into space while waiting for the bus seems to be the convention where I live, so I didn’t feel weird in that regard.
I did have some invasive thoughts, like what if you need to call emergency services and can’t? Haven’t needed that so far in my life and the chance of no one else with a phone being around is pretty slim, but the thought entered my mind anyways.
Well, and then I do use my phone for navigating public transport, for finding out where I need to go in case I ever get lost and then also just as a shopping list.
Shopping list is easy to replace with a sheet of paper. Navigating public transport had me suddenly looking at the hangouts in the various stations. It’s certainly not the same as having an algorithm tell you the quickest route, but you can find a lot of information there and you will find a route, which is good enough.
Not having a map is something that had me kind of just not take larger trips. I guess, if I had been without a phone for longer, I would’ve gotten used to that, too. Like, you can ask people, some of which might have a phone with a map on it themselves even.
Generally speaking, after the first few days, I did not miss my phone as much as I thought. I found it somewhat liberating even.
At least for cats and dogs, part of the explanation is simply that we’ve kept and bred them as pets for a long time. Them being predators made them useful as a pet, as you could take dogs out for hunting and cats became useful when we started doing agriculture, where they could independently hunt the rodents on the fields and in our storage rooms.
Wanna check if a variable’s set to something expected?
if [[ <test goes here> ]]; then <handle>; fi
Hey, you can’t just leave out “test goes here”. That’s worst part by a long shot.
The rest of the syntax, I will have to look up every time I try to write it, but at least I can mostly guess what it does when reading. The test syntax on the other hand is just impossible to read without looking it up.
I also don’t actually know how to look that up for the double brackets, so that’s fun. For the single bracket, it took me years to learn that that’s actually a command and you can do man [ to view the documentation.
Yeah, sometimes I’ll use that just to have the sane control flow of Rust, while still performing most tasks via commands.
You can throw down a function like this to reduce the boilerplate for calling commands:
fn run(command: &str) {
let status = Command::new("sh")
.arg("-c")
.arg(command)
.status()
.unwrap();
assert!(status.success());
}
Then you can just write run("echo 'hello world' > test.txt"); to run your command.
To be honest, I wish sometimes Rust had an optional GC mode (I know this would be against the principles of the language… don’t take this wish too seriously).
If you just need the occasional cop-out, you can wrap a value in an Rc or an Arc. They do reference-counting, which is almost like garbage collection (reference counting can’t resolve cycles between references).
Yeah, any tromboner worth their salt is able to propel a standard issue PB&J at least 1 meter up into the air. Only those in training use a chair to feed the tubas.
There’s a trope that many comics can be improved, if you remove the last panel. I do believe this to be one such case…
To be honest, I don’t even know the exact differences.
I do like that RFC 3339 allows you to write it like this:
2020-12-09 16:09:53
Whereas ISO 8601 requires it to be written like this:
2020-12-09T16:09:53
But the main reason RFC 3339 is better, is this: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339
Yes, that is the whole RFC. I’m not linking that to be funny.
I’m linking it, because this is the closest I can show you to ISO 8601: https://www.iso.org/standard/70907.html
A fucking paywall. I couldn’t know the exact differences between the two, because I cannot read the latter.
Actually, RFC 3339 is better. 🙃
If 1027 would be Hella, would 10-27 then be Hello? 🙃
I enjoy this one: https://video.thepolarbear.co.uk/a/chris/video-channels
It’s mostly just two dudes having a bit of a chat and/or playing games. I mainly like that they do it for the fun of it, not because they desperately try to grow an audience to make money off of it. Feels a lot like early Youtube.
Official announcement: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/xmqqplku7cvm.fsf@gitster.g/
Hmm, I don’t think that’s quite the same. The developer simply wasn’t able to compile the source code, which is a pretty clear requirement in the LGPL 2.1:
For an executable, the required form of the “work that uses the Library” must include any data and utility programs needed for reproducing the executable from it.
I believe, you just launch a .exe file and it should be the default application that gets started…