![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://midwest.social/pictrs/image/282c379c-7e70-43db-81d3-c50a0e47f1cc.png)
The hopping spaghetti monster… before it could fly.
The hopping spaghetti monster… before it could fly.
TrueNAS scale helps a lot, as it makes many popular apps just a few clicks away. Or for more power-users, stuff like the linux cockpit also really helps.
To directly answer your questions…
I think they are intended to, and they actually do… once (child teeth). Probably just broken due to genetic decay or environment (e.g. if humans are no longer fully maturing and what we call adult teeth are actually “intermediate” teeth). I suspect a deeper understanding of the recent tooth-regrowth drug(s) may provide a clue as to why it is currently broken.
I would whole-heartedly recommend Robert Martin’s clean coding lecture series. It may be many hours of your life, but it is free on youtube and well worth the time. I don’t exactly recall what he says about testing in his lectures, but it’s probably pretty close. If nothing else, it will teach you to critically consider programming structure in the abstract (instead of following formulae), and to write code with the intent for it to be read and maintained by humans.
I think he also has a series that includes “structured programming” (like early return vs deep nesting), but was unable to find it last time I looked for it. I recall having a shocked epiphany when he (i THINK it was Martin) demonstrated the exact way to clean up a function, that started out ugly, and ended up being reduced to literally nothing (the function was removed).
I was going to post something to CL a month or two ago, but was shunned away by new & intrusive PII collection… seemed offensive and discordant with the original spirit of CL, and I ended up “nope’n out” instead. RIP another internet era/icon.
Many code-reviewers likewise devalue tests, giving only a cursory skim over the unit-test section of PRs, if they examine them at all, and sometimes code-review itself is devalued to the point of a rubber-stamp (e.g. “great, we need someone from team X to approve it too… doesn’t matter who, though…”).
If I could tell you, you would be SHOCKED at how high-profile and recent this sordid project was; it’s literally in the news and discussed in my podcasts.
I think it rubs people the wrong way because (though it looks like code) in some sense it is not programming… it’s like the negative image of a program… like a mold or specification-box that contains and fits around the code, which reverses several key principles.
It also can highlight if the code needs to be moved or reorganized, and let me tell you… the LAST thing that devs want is to interpret the struggle to write a unit test as a sign the code needs rework, they would MUCH rather keep unit tests as an after-thought; like some kind of mandated torture-ritual that produces a thing of no value.
Speaking of not valuing tests… I’ve literally seen devs blithely invert test assertions (that where clearly valid), those that made sense in context, and even some that were PART OF THE TEST’S NAME… just to brush the “meaningless failures” out of their way… as if they could not be bothered to even read one sentence to understand the “why”… uggh.
Anyway, I digress and ramble. If you really want more of me in the industry, I can provide one more! If you happen to know of any teams that need a professional-unit-testing-developer, I’m recently on the market! :)
Apparently no-one wants to write unit tests, but I enjoy it, do it well, and even find it relaxing.
I’m always confused by my peer’s reluctance and grumbling thereabout, and horrified to see the incomprehensible mess of (often useless) tests they produce in the end.
I’m convinced that Linux’ mere presence has already stymied the development of the worst possible technocractic nightmare. I shudder to think of the thick tech-chains that would bind us if there was not an anchor/reference point… or if there was not even the small contingent that knows what it is like to use a liberating platform.
Thanks, as you wish!
Yes, and such pairings occur way more frequently than “one of a kind”.
When you stare into the AI, the AI stares back at you.
Maybe minix? Because microkernel.
You might look into mind-mapping software like gingko, nulis, minder, vym, etc.
It’s just Diablo… the new fully-immersive experience.
True for digital goods THEY are supposed to own, but also consider how dominated we are with OUR digital property. I have witnessed how readily tech giants will abuse their position, abuse the power of defaults, weaponize psychology, and feign deletion… even against my lowly grandma. They think nothing of effectively stealing one’s digital photos, using them for their own purposes, and giving them to the police, so they can destroy your life and your dog.
Sounds ripe for a legal challenge, but neo-ownership of digital-goods is already so fragile.
AFAIK, TPMs are usually socketed.
Hand-holding? Condescension?
Livin’ in a bubble :)