The way French INSEE measures productivity is log(revenue / employees). Basic but efficient. Not sure how to translate this to a subset of employees such as programmers though.
So for a non-commercial open-source project, productivity is always zero, and for a project run by volunteers rather than employees it’s always NaN? :)
One could generalise it from “revenue” to something like “value generated” and from “employees” to “individuals working on project”. The trouble is quantifying that value.
In economics, productivity is defined as the ratio, in volume, between production and the resources used to obtain that production.
Production means goods and/or services produced. The resources used, also called production factors, mean labour, technical means (installations, machines, tooling, etc.), the capital invested, intermediate consumption (raw materials, power, transport, etc.) as well as factors less easy to grasp but extremely important, such as the accumulation of know-how.
Nice layout designer. But when you click ‘produce code’ it will produce Litho, ComponentKit, or React, but not the actual HTML+CSS? That is some bullshit.
The “excuse” is they look nice. I like them and people generally like or don’t mind them. They are a good place to put auxillary controls on restricted screen space. Nobody’s losing notable performance to hamburger menus.
I saw a completely fine, HTML + CSS hamburger menu contained within the nav element, on the front page just the other day - what’s inaccessible about that?
And I’m not sure what you mean by “adding them in HTML”, yes we’re talking about HTML attributes, but you don’t necessarily want to re-generate the whole HTML on the backed just to add one (1) attribute to a tag.
I see. Like I said higher in the thread, the way I solved simple one level menus is by using <details> with <summary> which I hope don’t need this attribute as they should implement that natively. (But I have to admit that there’s no indication in the docs if my assumption is right.)
Nobody’s losing notable performance to hamburger menus.
I saw […]
Not to nitpick, but the precise point is that they are hard to navigate for vision impaired people. It’s a spectrum and can be hard to understand when you take your vision for granted.
I’m nowhere near legally blind, but I do have vision impairment, and sometimes I just can’t see the hamburger menu. At other times I can’t click them properly because their reason for existing is to fit the visual layout, not to be clicked. (Too close to other clickable things with my fat fingers.)
On desktop I navigate at 200% text size, and often hit the “mobile version” of pages where the hamburger menu was not properly tested. They often don’t work because they were approved based on their mere presence. So I dislike them not just because they’re often hard to press, but also because they’re a second-class citizen: covering many items that were not important enough to highlight, but not unimportant enough to discard. A true token of design by committee accident.
They aren’t great for people with conventionally good vision either. My doctor says my vision is perfectly fine but I have a short of mental blindness for hamburger menus. I will look all around a website for navigation clues and just not see the hamburger icon. Sometimes that is because the designer used really low contrast but mostly it is because I have a specific idea of what I want to find (e.g. “investor relations” and doesn’t look for a generic “more stuff hidden here” signal.
The article is about tail call support in WebAssembly. This is important because it is useful when compiling programs into WebAssembly. In C++20, proper tail calls are used to implement coroutines, even though C++ doesn’t have proper tail calls as a user-accessible feature. Likewise in Swift, proper tail calls are used to implement async, even though Swift doesn’t provide this feature to users. The clang implementation of C/C++ has a non-portable ‘musttail’ attribute that marks a tail call, and it has been used for some stunning performance hacks, such as this:
Zig, a new systems language, already has proper tail calls, and other systems languages will follow.
Because proper tail calls are now important for high performance systems programming, they are no longer some weird niche academic functional programming thing, like they were in 2009 when Guido wrote that now very dated blog post.
tangential but it’s a bit disappointing to see this (and others) today. I thought the internet had kind of come to the consensus that ‘april fool’ intentional misinformation posts like this have been done to death and we sort of moved to creating fun toys (like the reddit pixel thing).
I’ve never been big on April’s Fool myself, but I felt the OCaml team played it well this year. Seems, however, we’re at the point we can’t even agree if it’s OK to share something (subjectively) funny here.
Arguably quickcheck could have been a killer library for Haskell
I don’t see how quickcheck as a library would be useful. Its main use-case is to be wrapped in a binary an ran once in a while on totally separated bash files (project-wise).
Warmly surprised by the readability, interactivity and altogether well-thought practicality of this website. Definitely not the dry read that I was expecting from the tag. :) Congrats @hafiz, it’s really a pleasant read!
Just meant to highlight it as a Twitter look-alike, if anything I’m happy for deejayy to take some ideas from it and reimplement them without the involvement of the Soapbox creator.
Congratulations to the release team!
Oh that’s the kind of title that I love to read! Faster tooling for Haskell!! Faster!!
🐴🤠
Are there existing ISO standards for measuring productivity in other fields?
The way French INSEE measures productivity is
log(revenue / employees). Basic but efficient. Not sure how to translate this to a subset of employees such as programmers though.So for a non-commercial open-source project, productivity is always zero, and for a project run by volunteers rather than employees it’s always NaN? :)
Turns out non-commercial open-source doesn’t fit in the national format for capitalistic productivity, indeed.
One could generalise it from “revenue” to something like “value generated” and from “employees” to “individuals working on project”. The trouble is quantifying that value.
That’s pretty much how the definition goes:
flora.pm uses Soufflé to process packages’ categories from Hackage: https://github.com/flora-pm/flora-server/blob/development/cbits/categorise.dl
Nice layout designer. But when you click ‘produce code’ it will produce Litho, ComponentKit, or React, but not the actual HTML+CSS? That is some bullshit.
Is it though? They’re all facebook technologies. It sucks but it makes sense. :/
I use uBlock Origin
The “excuse” is they look nice. I like them and people generally like or don’t mind them. They are a good place to put auxillary controls on restricted screen space. Nobody’s losing notable performance to hamburger menus.
I saw a completely fine, HTML + CSS hamburger menu contained within the nav element, on the front page just the other day - what’s inaccessible about that?
Actually CSS is not really the best way to make accessible interactivity. You need a bit of JS to add aria attributes when your menu opens. :)
Which attributes? And is it possible that adding them in HTML is an option?
This one: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Accessibility/ARIA/Attributes/aria-expanded
And I’m not sure what you mean by “adding them in HTML”, yes we’re talking about HTML attributes, but you don’t necessarily want to re-generate the whole HTML on the backed just to add one (1) attribute to a tag.
I see. Like I said higher in the thread, the way I solved simple one level menus is by using
<details>with<summary>which I hope don’t need this attribute as they should implement that natively. (But I have to admit that there’s no indication in the docs if my assumption is right.)Reading from the following page, I believe we cannot fully rely on screen reader support in a cross-platform way for
summary: https://a11ysupport.io/tech/html/summary_elementGood resource, thanx a lot.
This artickle posted here previously has some more links regarding a11y hamber menus.
IIRC some of the “css only” versions are simply invisible or hard to navigate via screen readers.
Not to nitpick, but the precise point is that they are hard to navigate for vision impaired people. It’s a spectrum and can be hard to understand when you take your vision for granted.
I’m nowhere near legally blind, but I do have vision impairment, and sometimes I just can’t see the hamburger menu. At other times I can’t click them properly because their reason for existing is to fit the visual layout, not to be clicked. (Too close to other clickable things with my fat fingers.)
On desktop I navigate at 200% text size, and often hit the “mobile version” of pages where the hamburger menu was not properly tested. They often don’t work because they were approved based on their mere presence. So I dislike them not just because they’re often hard to press, but also because they’re a second-class citizen: covering many items that were not important enough to highlight, but not unimportant enough to discard. A true token of design by committee accident.
They aren’t great for people with conventionally good vision either. My doctor says my vision is perfectly fine but I have a short of mental blindness for hamburger menus. I will look all around a website for navigation clues and just not see the hamburger icon. Sometimes that is because the designer used really low contrast but mostly it is because I have a specific idea of what I want to find (e.g. “investor relations” and doesn’t look for a generic “more stuff hidden here” signal.
So when are Prime prices gonna be reduced then?
how dare you deprive Jeff of his next space rocket?
Belated shitpost reply: I wouldn’t mind as much if he built rockets that actually worked.
bruv we have been talking about this for some years now in France, no need to translate it to your language and claim paternity on it…
Many thanks to the release team!
I became pretty sceptical on tail call optimization after I read the Guido van Rossum reasoning of not having it in Python: http://neopythonic.blogspot.com/2009/04/tail-recursion-elimination.html
The article is about tail call support in WebAssembly. This is important because it is useful when compiling programs into WebAssembly. In C++20, proper tail calls are used to implement coroutines, even though C++ doesn’t have proper tail calls as a user-accessible feature. Likewise in Swift, proper tail calls are used to implement async, even though Swift doesn’t provide this feature to users. The clang implementation of C/C++ has a non-portable ‘musttail’ attribute that marks a tail call, and it has been used for some stunning performance hacks, such as this:
Zig, a new systems language, already has proper tail calls, and other systems languages will follow.
Because proper tail calls are now important for high performance systems programming, they are no longer some weird niche academic functional programming thing, like they were in 2009 when Guido wrote that now very dated blog post.
tail call optimization is required for scheme, it isn’t required for python.
it’s a completely different style of programming. even if you prefer python, it’s valid.
This is only a problem if your language’s only method of error reporting is based on exceptions and stack traces.
tangential but it’s a bit disappointing to see this (and others) today. I thought the internet had kind of come to the consensus that ‘april fool’ intentional misinformation posts like this have been done to death and we sort of moved to creating fun toys (like the reddit pixel thing).
The internet is made up of billion of people, why do you expect consensus on anything?
True that. It’s impossible to agree on anything and to please everyone.
I’ve never been big on April’s Fool myself, but I felt the OCaml team played it well this year. Seems, however, we’re at the point we can’t even agree if it’s OK to share something (subjectively) funny here.
It’s ok! people enjoyed it.
“zero-overhead” is a bit taking the piss when this is using LLVM… :p
cURL, nginx and PostgreSQL.
Special mention for GHC, the Haskell Compiler.
I don’t see how quickcheck as a library would be useful. Its main use-case is to be wrapped in a binary an ran once in a while on totally separated bash files (project-wise).
EDIT: I was thinking about shellcheck :facepalm:
You’re thinking of ShellCheck. QuickCheck is for Property-Based Testing. :)
haha! oops sorry, indeed I had this in mind. Now that makes far more sense. Indeed a killer feature that inspired everyone to do the same.
Warmly surprised by the readability, interactivity and altogether well-thought practicality of this website. Definitely not the dry read that I was expecting from the tag. :) Congrats @hafiz, it’s really a pleasant read!
thanks!
niiiiiiice
webא let’s go
Let web be unbounded
web…5?
Continue working on a mastodon frontend which is looking exactly like current twitter :)
Have you seen Soapbox?
The Mastodon frontend made by some of the most heinous and hateful people of the Fediverse?
While I don’t use it anymore, it’s still excellent software. Also, it’s a Pleroma frontend.
Just meant to highlight it as a Twitter look-alike, if anything I’m happy for deejayy to take some ideas from it and reimplement them without the involvement of the Soapbox creator.
Thank you! It looks like a quality product, although the 500+ issue is a bit frightening :)
Btw, my progress can be followed here: https://mastodon.social/@deejayy/109355794379702462
functional.cafe fits me just right.