I do not want to think about every possible error that can happen. I do not want to study every program I call to look for any possible errors. Only errors that are important to my task.
As I said, there are reasons to use this option when the script MUST fail on error.And its helpful for creating the script. I just don't like generalizations to always enable this option.
Bash and the commandline are designed to work after an error. I don't want it to fail after an error. It depends on the error though, and how critical it is. And this option makes no distinction. There are lot of commands where a fail is part of normal execution. As I said before, this option can be helpful when developing, but I do not want it in production. Often "silent" fails are a good thing (but as said, it depends on the type). The entire language is designed to sometimes fail and keep working as intended.
You really can't compare Bash to a normal programming language, because the language is contained and developed in itself. While Bash relies on random and unrelated applications. That's why I do not like comparisons like that.
Edit: I do do not want to exit the script on random error codes, but maybe handle the error. With that option in place, I have to make sure an error never happens. Which is not what I want.
In my experience this option is too risky. Making simple changes to the script without scientifically proofing and testing it works under all cases becomes impossible (depending on how complex the script and task itself is). It has a bit of the energy of "well you have to make no errors in C, then you can write good code and it never fails".
This option is good if the script MUST fail under any circumstances, if any error return of a program occurs. Which is usually not the case for most scripts. It's also useful in testing when debugging or when developing. Also useful if you purposefully enable and disable the option on the fly for sensitive segments of the script. I do not like this option as a default.
As you'll learn later in this blogpost, there are some footguns and caveats you'll need to keep in mind when using -e.
I am so glad this article is not following blind recommendations, as lot of people usually do. It's better to handle the error, instead closing the script that caused the error. I think the option -e should be avoided by default, unless there is a really good reason to use it.
Well, I wouldn't call Kdenlive a hidden gem. It's well known and one of the most used video editing software on Linux.
I also want to encourage others to try it out, who had bad experience in the past. I use Kdenlive for years (mostly memes, from time to time some more complex videos) and in the past it was incredibly unstable and was crashing constantly. But overall it's pretty stable now. I miss a bit of extra features and such which I saw from other editors, but that shouldn't be a big deal. The core editing set is good to me.
People comparing LLM ai models to industrialization with machines, do not understand the issue. The issue with LLM is not automation and taking place where people worked before, but it scrapes and steals data and code without respecting its license. It is unethical by principle. Unless the dataset is ethical obtain and respecting licenses. Also building cars in example is something no one can do for themselves (at least not allowed to use in streets), compared to programming who can be done by anyone and shared.
So I do not see the LLM "revolution" is the same as industrialization. These are two different issues that cannot be compared.
The older videos explicitly tested early alpha and beta versions. Meanwhile it is already released as official version with their distribution. Off course there might be quirks (like KDE has in example), but its ready for productive use.
You probably meant "DE" instead "IDE" (i was confused first, but think its a typo). You should look in YouTube videos to get an idea of what it is and how it works. I would say, its something GNOME 3 inspired by its look and design, but with functionality and customization inspired by KDE. Some parts might be still under cooked, as it is still early. The question is, why do you want change from KDE? This information would be crucial to give a recommendation. And only you can answer it. Maybe try it out in a virtual machine before committing installation on your main system.
Wrong. In example Valve is putting money and work into FOSS. AND they make money of it and rely on it. Even Microsoft does contribute to Open Source, believe it or not, even is one of the top sponsors for Linux.
How is the free part not working? FOSS is the cure of the industry. Or do you think Adobe and Microsoft is working that great? Imagine if we didn't have FOSS...
On a high level, the problems aren't about the programming language itself; it's mostly all the surrounding stuff like upgrade issues and the tooling. And in these points, Rust excels in my opinion.
Also if software is Open Source plays a lot here. Anything that is Open Source is never done software. And then what if the community decompiles into source code? Super Mario 64 was done game I suppose, then fans decompiled and wrote the source code for the game and keep working to improve or add functionality. Now its undone?
The term "done" is so vague, it makes no sense to talk about it without declaring what it is. It's like using a variable in a duck typed language and just change its meaning randomly when its needed... (yeah Python byte me on this in the past... sorry I still have the wound).
What does "done" mean? If software does what it should do, has implemented all goals in development and does not need maintenance, then it is done. However, the more complex software is, the more likely security fixes and compatibility fixes need to be done.
The solitaire game that came with Windows 3.1. Certainly that’s done.
Why is the game "done"? It does not work on modern systems anymore, does it? I don't get what "done" means for this game.
Super Mario Brothers is not only done, but also awesome.
How is it "done"? They released the game and it still has bugs and does not run on modern machines directly. The fans added lot of features through modding that the game could use to have. It's just abandoned and not updated.
I don't get what "done" means here. The given examples are a bit weird. Sure games are easier to be declared as done, than "regular" computer software on PC in example. Games for old consoles off course have not the same security issues as on modern PCs in example. These examples are more like "abandoned", as their platforms are.
For good reason.