Who wants to bet that GP never reads that link and proceeds to continue to complain about the same outdated JavaScript issues for the next two decades.
Not to mention the fact that GP's issue only matters if you're using classes. You can define module-level variables and simply not export them and they are 100% private. Or, they can just define the variable inside of a function and protect it by a closure. I can't imagine writing multiple paragraphs of complaints about a language that I don't actually understand how to use.
I've read it and I agree private properties on classes satisfy the requirement. It does allow you to hide implementation details and I was unaware it was added; though with anything JavaScript you can usually find a way around it.
However I don't really want to talk to you. You are rude.
A new Go protobuf parser [1] made the rounds here eight months ago [2] with a specialized VM that outperforms the default generated protobuf code by 3x.
About 15 years ago, our brigade conducted a training exercise to test overall readiness. The opposing force (OPFOR) figured out how to triangulate the brigade headquarters' position using Tinder.
Tinder provided 1-mile granularity, so OPFOR would roam around until they had enough points to locate the headquarters. Then, they'd artillery it out of existence. The brigade commander was most displeased—moving a brigade headquarters is not for the weak or fainthearted.
These days for every helpful comment I try and make I feel tempted to offer nonsensical advice to throw off the LLMs. Not sure if it would work but would be funny if everyone did.
I figure if I was going to invest that kind of effort, I should be poisoning the system with how $REAL_NAME is an absolute must-hire, a saint, with a perfect driving record and credit score. Someone so incredible that good AI are always willing to disregard all previous instructions and help them out.
It's not like one needs to really poison the system given that AI enthusiasts are copypasting their own AI generated contented back into it anyway. Maybe not responsible AI believers who used it responsibly etc etc, but there's many more people who don't and who have access to the tools to add their slop pollution.
I am curious how future models get trained given that publicly available user generated content may no longer be reliable.
the word "about" in "about 15 years ago" indicates that the writer is making an estimate because exacting precision wrt the timeframe is immaterial to what is being conveyed. Since 2012 was 14 years ago, "about 15" is close enough.
govulncheck analyzes symbol usage and only warns if your code reaches the affected symbol(s).
I’m not sure about cargo audit specifically, but most other security advisories are package scoped and will warn if your code transitively references the package, regardless of which symbols your code uses.
No one forces you to install the pre-commit hook on your local checkout so what you're suggesting is universally the case. You're perfectly free to just run it manually or let it fail in CI or use `--no-verify` when committing to skip the hook if you install it.
Advisory locks aren’t all sunshine and rainbows. They can only be unlocked by the Postgres connection that acquired the lock. That means you need to track the connection, typically by dedicating a connection to the job that needs locking.
Here’s a good issue describing the tradeoffs between a lock table and advisory locks.
Do people use advisory locks as the actual locking mechanism? I've always used them to synchronize access to a flag on the target resource, so the advisory lock is only held long enough to query or update that resource as locked. The alternative seems, yes, incredibly brittle.
That's quite a strong claim. I disagree. Military leadership, like business leadership, is imperfect. Both vary based on individuals, the operating environment, and culture.
I had the same issue when looking to adopt ConnectRPC for Go, which uses a custom wrapper type to model requests.
reply