My understanding Quantum field theory says virtual particles can be created out of vacuum fluctuations, which makes me think there will be more energy after expansion. Again, I might be getting it wrong.
It makes no sense. How people know the word that should not be normalized? I’m non-native speaker and after all blah blah in this thread I still have no idea what is the word. So if someone says it, I won’t even know I should call out that person. Don’t we normalize using slurs by softening reporting? If slur censored why would bigots stop using it if they are not properly shamed? All it does is just hiding issue from media with no effect IRL. IRL, US elected bigot
Depends on what I’m trying to achieve. Coding something that requires less thinking but staying more focused and keeping up energy - techno, EBM/industrial, phonk. If it requires more cognitive effort, I choose more background-ish music like lo-fi hip hop. When not coding - same plus synthwave/vaporwave, jazz, funk
I believe it’s a result of news corpos go “free” online. People used to pay for newspapers. Good news ment good sales. Online news except few profit from ads, so now you have profit less dependent on product quality (news). If businesses can do less they will
No, that means you falling into author’s bait where they misuse term “delete”. Refactoring is not equal to deleting. One can be result of another. But the truth is that extendable code needs to be modular to be extendable. And modular code is easy to refactor. Author couldn’t not name it “Write code that is easy to refactor, not easy to extend” coz it’s even more dumb
Right, but my initial comment was about article’s statement being wrong. Refactoring in the way you described will make code harder to delete which is bad according to the article.
My current project has mostly easy to delete code and not easy to extend. Why? Coz shit was copy-pasted 50 times. It’s not fun to work in this project.
After closer look I can say this is great idea. Initially I thought this messes with Lit’s lifecycle bringing React’s lifecycle drawbacks but seems like it’s not. I think at some point you should get in touch with Lit devs and see if it can become part of Lit lab or even Lit itself
Library built this way because it supposed to be flexible and provide ground for complex usecases. It can only be flexible if your API works with simple abstractions which you can then compose. It’s not driven by “I need this specific utility for this specific scenario”. That would be zoo you have in JS where you have 10 ways to iterate over array and 9 of them wrong for your scenario.
Java’s OO is great because they design library with SRP in mind making sure there is few but good ways to do things.
BufferedReader cannot accept file name because it makes arbitrary reader… well buffered. It’s not BufferedFileReader, even that would accept something like Path or File, not string, because File can be remote file, should Reader now know all possible local and remote protocols and path formats? What else it must do?
Having it designed the way it is, allows Java to have utilities for various scenarios. Your scenario covered by standard lib too. See Files.readAllLines which, surprise-surprise, built on top of BufferedReader.
My understanding Quantum field theory says virtual particles can be created out of vacuum fluctuations, which makes me think there will be more energy after expansion. Again, I might be getting it wrong.