I am more than happy with Jetbrains and Visual Stuido to do most of my work. While VS has some annoying irks, I just like things more visual such as handling merges through seeing the code as I used to instead of a text like visualization.
I do occasionally need an empty commit, visit the reflog because I fucked up or just do some check on existing commits on a branch. But no, daily I just do pull, merge, commit and push through my IDE.
Norway has something similar, you own the inside usually and the HOA own the outside, including the houses themselves. Live in one, largely a good thing but some things come slow since they need to be voted for of course. Generally worth it, since you get good deals on things like internet. It's cheaper but it's also something you usually have to use and the only option. Eg only that provider of internet.
I'm my case, they are also responsible for my balanced ventilation, my exterior doors and my water heater. So when the time comes, they handle it. Shared costs cover snow plowing, the shared community building, upkeep of garage, outdoors and the buildings, and things like water bills and taxes paid. In particular, HOAs purchases do not need to pay a 2.5% of the purchase price fee when you purchase a home. This itself saves you quite a bit, and makes up for some of the extra you pay in monthly costs. (but pretty much all of those are at least going somewhere that benefit you anyways)
The downsides are, there are special rules so some people that have membership may have a right to take over the winning bid in a sale. I myself used this to purchase my place, having gotten 10 years of seniority in "HOA company". You spend the seniority with your purchase, but also are not allowed to own more than one part. Also, no long term renting so there aren't any companies buying and renting out and things like that. You have to live in the HOA.
But nothing is forcing you to check exeptions in most languages, right?
While not checking for exceptions and .unwrap() are pretty much the same, the first one is something you get by not doing anything extra while the latter is entirely a choice that has to be made. I think that is what makes the difference, and in similar ways why for example nullable enabled project in C# is desired over one that is not. You HAVE to check for null, or you can CHOOSE to assume it is not by trying to use the value directly. To me it makes a difference that we can accidentally forget about a possible exception or if we can choose to ignore it. Because problems dealt with early at compile time, are generally better than those that happen at runtime.
It can be pretty convenient to throw an error and be done with it. I think for some languages like Python, that is pretty much a prefered way to deal with things.
But the entire point of Rust and Result is as you say, to handle the places were things go wrong. To force you to make a choice of what should happen in the error path. It both forces you to see problems you may not be aware of, and handle issues in ways that may not stop the entire execution of your function. And after handling the Result in those cases, you know that beyond that point you are always in a good state. Like most things in Rust, that may involve making decisions about using Result and Option in your structs/functions, and designing your program in ways that force correct use... but that a now problem instead of a later problem when it comes up during runtime.
If I had a cent every time an artist on patron had their computer die on them and lost works in progress or all their old stuff... I'd afford a few coffees.
I think Destiny is a good argument. If D1 ends, then playing starting D2 won't be the full experience. And new players can start many years into a game. D1 is also stuck on a console, while D2 is so big they removed content from it. You literally can't play the base campaign in D2, a huge part of the story is no longer there. A great game that "you had to be there" to play.
It's the extreme case but leaving games to die instead of having at least the chance for private servers is sad and a loss for everyone long term that don't get a chance to play it.
If Reddit back in the day had asked a few dollars for me to stick with using 3rd party apps using the API I would have. But they did the opposite, so here I am. First time actually donating to something, a measily $2 dollars a month, but hopefully a start to fund some of the free stuff I use.
I still find it amazing people believe the same constant child like lying.
Everyone says... A close friend of mine said... A professor said... Everyone knows...
...That I have the bestest (health/speech/IQ/humbleness/big hands)
I largely agree with this nodding along to many of the pitfalls presented. Except numbers 2s good refactor. I hope I won't sound too harsh/picky for an example that perhaps skipped renaming for clarity on the other parts, but I wanted to mention it.
While I don't use javascript and may be missing some of the norms and context of the lanugage, creating lamda functions (i don't know the js term) and then hardcoding them into a function is barely an improvement. It's fine because they work well with map and filter, but it didn't address the vague naming. Renaming is refactoring too!
isAdult is a simple function with a clear name, but formatUser and processUsers are surprisingly vague. formatUser gives only adult FormattedUsers, and that should probably be highlighted in the name of formatUser now that it is a resuable function. To me, it seems ripe for mistaken use given that it is the filter that at a glance handles removing non-adult users before the formatting, while formatUser doesn't appear to exepct only adult users from it's naming or even use! Ideally, formatUser should have checked the age on it's own and set isAdult true/false accordingly, instead of assuming it will be used only on adult Users.
Likewise, the main function is called processUsers but could easily have been something more descriptive like GetAdultFormattedUsers or something similar depending on naming standards in js and the context it is used in. It may make more sense in the actual context, but in the example a FormattedUser doesn't have to be an adult, so a function processing users should clarify that it only actually creates adult formatted users since there is a case where a FormattedUser is not an adult.
He may have used the wrong word, but maintaining the same function signature across two files (while made easier by IDE tools) sucks ass to do. It was one of the major pain points for me doing a C++ course (along with the abyssmal compilation error messages). Not that I have tried Zig, but I do not see a reason to involve header files in my life if I can avoid it.
What's fun is determining which function in that list of functions actually is the one where the bug happens and where. I don't know about other langauges, but it's quite inconvenient to debug one-linres since they are tougher to step through. Not hard, but certainly more bothersome.
I'm also not a huge fan of un-named functions so their functionality/conditions aren't clear from the naming, it's largely okay here since the conditional list is fairly simple and it uses only AND comparisons. They quickly become mentally troublesome when you have OR mixed in along with the changing booleans depending on which condition in the list you are looking at.
At the end of the day though, unit tests should make sure the right driver is returned for the right conditions. That way, you know it works, and the solution is resistant to refactor mishaps.