Threads for gnusosa
-
Upgrading my Home network setup to new shiny Ubiquiti Components.
-
-
- Finishing the setup of my network
- Adding an new Netgear dumb switch
- Trying to at least get a Blog post out
- Finishing the setup of my network
-
For anybody looking for a vanilla kit with low entry keybindings configurations, checkout Magnar’s .emacs.d repo. That’s what I currently use with some custom configuration per language and task for my setup.
-
monit
-
Just like 3 years ago, I still live in Emacs XMonad T430s coreboot Debian Stretch.
-
Happy Birthday GNOME!
-
I use a Moleskine notebook with a mix of bullet journaling and org-mode markup to log times, events that happen, doodles and diagrams. I try to transcribe as much as I can back to my Org-mode files. I keep a
$workdaytag, and separate eachorg-agenda-fileby each task type likebackend,ops, and such. For most cases, I keep everything in my org-mode files, just like someone else mentioned in their reply, it’s quite useful to rely on the capture capability, to capture interruptions, meetings, and quick notes. The big win of Org-mode are the capture templates. I can have notes and attendees of a meeting all setup in a heading with multiple sub-headings in one key stroke, ready to be edited, and filled up while the meeting is clocked. This makes sharing meeting notes or transcribing your notes to another document a breeze. I clock all my tasks and do effort estimates for each task which can later be filled back in any Bug Tracker. I follow as close as I can Norang’s Org-Mode document.I wish I could spend more time on my notebook, but I’ve become accustomed to this workflow. It’s hard to break the habit now.
-
Is there any other known template for commits? or another alternative for a verbose commit?
-
I’m an Ocaml user and, except for a few rare conditions, I’ve found I much prefer a result type to exceptions. My response will be based on Ocaml which may not be the same as F# so if they don’t apply there then ignore it.
Some points I disagree with the author on:
AN ISSUE OF RUNTIMEI didn’t really understand the example here. How is the author accessing an optional value? In Ocaml we have to use an accessor that would throw an exception if the value is not present or pattern match the value out. This doesn’t seem to have anything to do with exceptions or results, just an invalid usage of an option.
AN AWKWARD RECONCILIATIONThis is the case in Ocaml as well, which is why many libraries try to make exceptions never escape the API boundary. But writing combinators for this are really quite easy. A function like
BOILERPLATE(unit -> 'a) -> ('a, exn) resultis available in all the various standard libraries for Ocaml.The author should be using the standard applicative or monadic infix combinators. Maybe F# doesn’t allow that. In Ocaml the example would look like:
WHERE’S MY STACKTRACE?let combine x y z = pure (fun x y z -> (x, y, z)) <*> x <*> y <*> zThis is the one I disagree with quite a bit. If I am using exceptions then yes, I want stacktraces, because it’s a nearly unbounded GOTO. But the value result types give me is that I know, using the types, what errors a function can have and I have to handle it. This makes stacktraces much less valuable and the win of knowing what errors are possible and being forced to handle them. I’d much rather have this than stacktraces.
THE PROBLEM WITH IOThe problem here doesn’t have anything to do with exceptions, it’s that the return type should be a
STRINGLY-TYPED ERROR HANDLINGresultwhere theErrorcase is a variant of the various ways it can fail. Ocaml makes this much much easier because it has polymorphic variants.Yeah, use a variant not a string.
INTEROP ISSUESThis can indeed be a problem. It’s also a problem with exceptions, though.
-
-
-
WHERE’S MY STACKTRACE?
This is the one I disagree with quite a bit. If I am using exceptions then yes, I want stacktraces, because it’s a nearly unbounded GOTO. But the value result types give me is that I know, using the types, what errors a function can have and I have to handle it. This makes stacktraces much less valuable and the win of knowing what errors are possible and being forced to handle them. I’d much rather have this than stacktraces.
This is a case where you can eat your cake and have it too. Java has checked exceptions which the compiler enforces are handled. When call a function that can throw a checked exception, the calling a function either has to handle the exception in a
tryblock, or include in its signature that it can throw an exception of the specified type.You can also do the opposite and add the stack trace to the result type. Most languages provide some way to obtain a stack trace at runtime, so all you need to do is attach the stack trace to the error when it is instantiated.
-
Checked exceptions in Java are a nice experiment but a rather colossal failure, unfortunately. Since the compiler cannot infer checked exceptions you have to retype them all out at each level and it becomes unwieldy. The situation is even worse with lambda’s where one has to turn a checked exception into an unchecked one.
-
Is it simply type inference on function declarations that you see as the difference here? I am curious because as a Java programmer by day, I don’t see a ton of difference between “
-> Result<FooVal, BarException>” and “FooVal someFunc() throws BarException { … }”.Granted the implementation is quite different (unwinding the stack and all that), but is it simply ergonomics that makes the latter a “colossal failure” in your mind?
-
No, the difference is that results are just types and values. From that you get all the great stuff that comes with types and values. For example:
- Type inference. I only specify the types of my functions at API boundary points.
- Aliasing types. If I have a bunch of functions that return the same error I can just do
type err = .....rather than type all of the errors out each time. - They work with lambdas!
- They work with parametric polymorphism. I can write a function like
'a list -> ('a -> ('b, 'c) result) -> ('b list, 'c) result. - And, probably most importantly, it does not add a new concept to the language.
That checked exceptions do not compose with lambdas in Java basically tells me they are dead. All the Java code I’m seeing these days makes heavy use of lambdas.
-
Gotcha, thanks for the reply. I don’t disagree strongly, but I feel like what you are arguing for is Java, minus checked exceptions, plus more pervasive type inference, plus type aliases, plus several other changes. Which, that’d be pretty cool, but I think at this point we’re discussing sweeping language changes as opposed to the merits of checked exceptions strictly.
For example, simply replacing checked exceptions in modern Java with use of a
Resultwould (at least as far as I can imagine) still result in a lot of verbosity. You’d just be typing “Result<Foo, Bar>” a lot as opposed to typing “throws Bar” a lot.Not to be overly argumentative or anything. But “colossal failure” seems a little strong to me! :)
-
-
-
-
-
Calculating expenses given that I have to move out of my friend’s collo. Don’t know if to go AWS or DigitalOcean or a Mix of both. The not so bad part is that I already have everything in provisioning code.
-
-
My workplace acquired/hired a product and the sole developer a while back. His title is now Head of Development. He has worked on this product for some 15+ years. I was assigned to work on the same product. I quickly sold him on the idea of using the version control software we are using internally (he wasn’t using any).
I tried my luck on selling CI while I was at it, but I didn’t have the same success. I deployed CI anyway. 2-3 days per week, the builds are red because he checks in something that doesn’t even compile. He doesn’t notice. The C# code base is a mess with home-grown crypto instead of HTTPS. User passwords are essentially stored in plain text. We have no automated tests. Up until last week we didn’t have a release plan. He just released whenever he deemed appropriate.
We’re now working on mobile apps as well that will work alongside our webapp. Someone told him about JSON, which he liked over XML. I suggested we opt for a restful API, showing off various examples like api.github.com but he prefers inventing his own API (which we already know will be consumed by others at some point).
Just today he asked me if I knew of a best practice around formatting dates. I pointed to ISO 8601. He didn’t want to deal with that sort of complex formatting.
I’ve turned to meditating.
-
-
-
o7
Godspeed.
EDIT: You might point out RFC3339 as simpler than 8601, which it is–it leaves out the interval stuff.
-
-
-
I was recently in a similar situation. I came to a behemoth, 12 separate, identical web applications that should have shared code but instead each one was kept separate and changes were diffed and merged by hand. No release plan. No best practices. Ugly code being spat out by WebForms. jQuery plugins and front-end frameworks littered all over the place. I just quit and found a better company to work for.
-
-
At work, reaping the benefits of my recent Org to JIRA undertaking. It’s not a complete implementation, but it’s handled everything I’m likely to use in a JIRA issue / comment. I usually write a private Gist where I put the master note, update it there then export to JIRA and paste into the issue. Works quite well :-) Very nice for tables, or checklists (with statistics cookies) which Orgmode handles very nicely and the default JIRA editor not at all.
We’re a remote company and last week the entire tech team met up at HQ, which was nice.
-
-
-
Oh cool! I’m glad you like it. I’ve tried to get org-jira to work, but I’ve had no luck. We use the hosted implementation at $foo.atlassian.net, and I’m wondering if they don’t provide the SOAP API by default? I’m getting a
soap-load-wsdl-from-url: Error retrieving WSDL: 404error :-/Update: it looks like the SOAP API was removed some time ago :-(
-
-
-
-
I’ve finally created a base host property list for my nodes in Propellor, the only thing left is applying extra tweaks for specific nodes, and I will be fully provisioned and configured with
Propellor. Aside from that, I’m moving all my Gentoo nodes to Debian, it’s been a great ride, but I just don’t have the time anymore to commit to Gentoo. As an extra-endeavor, I will try to finish the Haskell exercise from Exercism. Maybe ;-)At $WORK, I’m doing a performance test on our
Kafkasetup, finishing our disaster recovery service inScala, and playing with moreClojurescript.
-
Got tired of running
go testin a terminal inside Emacs so I wrote a plugin to do just that. Who knew writing Emacs plugins was so much fun and easy.-
This is neat! I pretty much exclusively use compilation-mode for this purpose, which works fairly well. But, I don’t have an easy story for “run test at point”!
-
-
I just mean, i have no way to do what squeak does without typing the whole go test command out.
-
Ah, right. That’s precisely what I wanted to do with it, since
go-modealready provides function name detection. I also wanted something to make it easy re-run tests while modifying the package code.I was thinking of expanding it into other things, e.g.,
go buildwhich would detect errors Flycheck doesn’t usually detect (like missing packages or undefined variables), and generally using theoracletool to do all kinds of magic (find usages). So the plan is not to be exclusively a test utility library, but more of a utility kit on top ofgo-mode. Time will tell!-
Relatedly, check out https://github.com/alecthomas/gometalinter and https://github.com/favadi/flycheck-gometalinter
-
-
-
-
-
Not to discourage you about your plugin, but have you used the
M-x compile. You can runcompileonce, set it togo test -v, this will open a new window with the result and clickable line errors, and after that you can doM-x recompileto re rungo test. You can utilize it for build or any other option you need from thegotoolkit.-
I have. The behaviour, usability and appearance of
M-x compileare exactly the reasons why I wrote this plugin.To be specific, I did not want to:
- …initially write the compilation command after typing
M-x compile - …have a new buffer appear every time the command runs
- …read a bunch of redundant information that can be compressed into a single line
- …type the name of a single test after
go test -run ...myself - …alter the test to be run when I want to run another unit test
What I did want was something that
- provides simple bindings that do what I mean and work in any Go file
- requires no typing effort
- compresses information into a concise one-liner
- IDEs have already provided since the early 00s
I understand the point of
M-x compileis generic and the point of this plugin is to be specific.In the future I’ll implement highlighting of succesful and unsuccessful tests using Flycheck or something that lets me put stuff into the gutter.
- …initially write the compilation command after typing
-
-
Nice! I’ve been using flymake plus a custom script for the last couple years. Basically by default
go buildis ran. If I’m editing a _test.go file thengo testis ran. go vet is run on everything. -
-
-
When I’m close to one of my machines, I make use of org-mode in Emacs to record my notes into org-headings or notes. When I don’t have any of my machines close to me, I always carry a couple of HipsterPDA TODOs and Meetings index cards, along with a Moleskine for long and detailed notes. My pen is a Muji Fountain Pen.
The cards and the notes from my Moleskine are later recorded into my org-mode headings. This helps in two ways, one, while you type down the org-heading you revise and review the task, making it easier to understand and remember, and, two, paper is not a reliable data format.
I sync my org-files with a git repository that I keep in all my machines.
-
Coreboot on T430s, GuixSD and Propellor. Trying to make this year, a Haskell year.
-
- Posting an update to Prose for Programmers
- Helping DevOps team finalize continuous delivery pipeline for UI libraries
- Putting together presentations/workshops to help developers get up to speed with our UI dev stack
- Writing a Yeoman generator to scaffold our UI projects
-
I agree with these, but it depends on the level of the task you’re solving. We can use any language or tool to solve a problem, but shouldn’t we chose the correct and efficient tool to solve a problem the fastest way? That’s the main problem with this kind of classification. I love Python and Ruby , but I won’t write an app that will take many requests with either. But with that said, I will definitely write a fast script or tool to transform text with it, a CLI tool, and a repetitive shell task. The same goes for Guile or Lua which are best for extensions. Each language has a strength, make use of it.
I’ve followed this guide (most of it) as my bible, since March 2015 (https://gnusosa.net/log/2015-03-15-alife-of-todos.html), and let me tell you that, oh boy, I can’t emphasizes how great it is once you get used to it. Specially, the capture capabilities, and the archival preferences. This guide covers real life situations, and translates them into functions of org-mode If you want to nail down how much time you spend in meetings and interruptions, this guide has examples and functions for it. Want to punch-in, and know how much time you spend working per day? this guide has a section for it. This guide in a way also composes all the scarce tools of org-mode into a one view form. The sad part of this document, is that it’s so long and sparse, that it alienates individuals that want to read everything before trying it out. If there was a mini version or a tutorial with links to each chapter of the sparse guide, it will help it to gain more traction.
I also wish there were more guides like Norang’s. It has been my personal experience that a lot of newcomers are looking for a standard workflow that they can lean on to start with, but they end up recreating the world from their newcomer perspective, thus leading to frustration, and ultimately moving to another tool. Those who stick around with org-mode, create their own system that half works most of the time, in turn this pays given that people become aware of the internals of org-mode, but not every user desires to take that long route.