(no subject)
Monday, June 27th, 2011 16:26“Redux” is related to “reduce” only etymologically; that similarity was enough that I didn't look up what it actually meant for a long time.
“Redux” is related to “reduce” only etymologically; that similarity was enough that I didn't look up what it actually meant for a long time.
(Link) Insufficiently known POSIX shell features by apenwarr.
“The most important constraint [on naming this] is that it's a good pun.”
It appears that everyone From The Internet lives in California.
$ cat ~/bin/maken
#!/bin/sh # Make files and view the results. make "$@" && open "$@"
UPDATE: Turns out I posted this previously, with further thoughts: Avoiding repeating myself (on the command line).
Weird thing: Once upon a time I did a lot of work with MOO-code. Ever since then, if I’m writing something and my typing gets ahead of my thinking, I often type “#-1
”. It’s not meaningful in the context, it’s not a joke to myself — I have no idea what’s going on there.
(In MOO #-1
is the canonical value which is an-object-reference-but-not-a-valid-object, like null
in Java.)
“Extended subset” makes perfect sense as long as you don’t think about it with set theory.
This, for example, is a link: Kevin Reid
This is not a link, but a URL: http://switchb.org/kpreid/
The people who have come to rely on features that are actually implementation errors are called ‘mistakeholders’.
I have a simple guideline for real life interactions with others that carries over quite well on-line, "Deal with issues; ignore details."
It's amazing how well this works in person, especially when trying to get something done. My number one question to another is probably, "Is that an issue or a detail?" We can almost always decide together which it is. Then, if it's an issue, we deal with it, and if it's a detail, we move on to the next issue.
This has also saved me countless hours and aggravation on-line. If I post something and someone disagrees, I quickly decide whether or not it's really an issue and only engage the other if it is. I realize that this is just a judgment call, but I'd estimate about 90% of on-line disagreements are just details. In these cases, I think it's best to simply move on.
I thought this was, even if not necessarily a rule to immediately apply oneself, at least a concept worth thinking about. (Read the further discussion as well.)
Photo taken by me in a Staples store. Text added with Zach Beane's roflbot.
I blame a certain English teacher last year for introducing “FAIL” into my vocabulary.
Every time you write “ |
” in shell, that's concurrent programming.