My guess would be that they initially named the classes like the colors and then decided to swap those two colors.

Hmm, maybe my opinion is just shit in that regard. I don’t code terribly much low-level, so I’m probably overestimating the complexity and underestimating the options for cleaning things up.
That was kind of just a random example, I felt like there were many more cases where low-level code is complex, but I’m probably basing this off of shitty low-level code and forgetting that shitty high-level code isn’t exactly a rarity either.

Not sure, if you’d actually want to use this, but I found this: https://bmortella.github.io/captains-log/

And of course, there’s also the matching Linux desktop environment to complement it: https://lcarsde.github.io/

I actually didn’t do much walking in them. It was a lazy Sunday afternoon/evening, with me mostly seated in an armchair and my legs put up, so the wet shoes didn’t soak my furniture.

Personally, I even thought a bit of pressure might have stopped my skin from bloating quite as much.

This is why, in retrospective, I’ve really fallen out of love with Pokémon. I could have spent that time learning about real-world animals and plants, since it’s so arguable, whether Pokémon are even cooler to begin with.

In my opinion, it strongly depends on what you’re coding.

Low-level code where you need to initialize array indices to represent certain flags? Absolutely comment the living shit out of that. → See response.
High-level code where you’re just plumbing different libraries? Hell no, the code is just as easily readable as a comment.

I do also think that, no matter where you lie in this spectrum, there is always merit to improving code to reduce the need for documentation:

• Rather than typing out the specification, write a unit/integration test.
• Rather than describing that a function should only be called in a certain way, make it impossible to do it wrongly by modelling this in your type system.
• Rather than adding a comment to describe what a block of code does, pull it out into a separate function.
• Rather than explaining how a snippet of code works, try to simplify it, so this becomes obvious.

The thing with documentation is that it merely makes it easier to learn about complexity, whereas a code improvement may eliminate this complexity or the need to know about it, because the compiler/test will remember.

This does not mean you should avoid comments like they’re actively bad. As many others said, particularly the “why” is not expressable in code. Sometimes, it is also genuinely not possible to clean up a snippet of code enough that it becomes digestable.
But it is still a good idea, when you feel the need to leave a comment that explains something else than the “why”, to consider for a moment, if there’s not some code improvement you should be doing instead.

A few months ago, I bought some fake/vegan leather shoes and they didn’t quite fit. So, I figured, I’d try the old leather shoe trick, where you fill them with water, put them on and let them dry+shrink to fit your feet.

And it actually kind of worked. But I had decided to just leave them on for basically the rest of the day. And that wasn’t a great idea.

My foot soles had soaked with water and gotten wrinkles that carved about a centimeter deep. Even after taking the shoes off, I was in pain for a few hours. It felt like the soaked skin was constantly pulling on my flesh, because their shapes didn’t fit together anymore.

So, yeah, I imagine, the same would happen, if you bathed for 8 hours. You could somewhat mitigate it, by covering your whole body in vaseline or some other form of fat.
I guess, you could also try bathing in rapeseed oil or such directly…? I’m not actually recommending this, though. 🫠

For a moment, I thought, this was a misprint and they had to officially get out a spray can to complete the word…

I’ve often seen NSFW used as basically just “contains nudity”. You could have a woman in skimpy clothing shaking her everything in a manner clearly trying to evoke sexual thoughts, but because her nipples and genitalia are technically covered, it would get posted as “SFW”.

I don’t really care how it looks precisely, so long as its semi-professional and consistent in its style.

Like, I change the font to Fira Sans, because Noto Sans gives me depression, but the rest of my customizations are all just to carve out my ideal workflow.

Welp. I didn’t want to make it too difficult either, especially with how funky some of the real projects are. Would be cool, though, if more psychology software existed. Surely, there’s a lot you could do with video games / simulations.

What the hell, the logistics must be crazy.

With canned beans or something, you could just get a few pallets from what’s stockpiled anyways.
But with brisket, you gotta slaughter that shit pretty much as it’s being handed out, ideally have it cooled the whole time, but then it also has to be cooked before consumption. If people have to evacuate their homes, you gotta do the cooking for them, too…

Ah, interesting. So, it’s different from just statically linking against the latest driver lib every 6-12 months, because the Flatpak runtime gives you a bit of a guarantee that there won’t be breaking changes in the meantime.

Sure, but through your link, I found the list of projects. In hopes that a project always has a repo associated, here comes the quiz: Can you guess which 2 of these projects I made up? 🙃

Main + Artwork + Astronomy + Biology + Chemistry + Electronics + Geosciences + Mathematics + Physics + Psychology + Science + Retirement + Emacs + GNU Emacs + Spacemacs + XEmacs

I did expect there to be lots of random words, but man, I seriously had to think for a moment to find a field of science that isn’t covered…

I am inclined to write “Main +” and then just some random words, to see if you guys could tell they’re not repos. 🙃

Hmm, okay, that doesn’t sound too bad.
Does the sandboxing get into the way much? Can a user tell it to poke a hole into the sandbox, to use some specific folder, for example?

I think, my real problem is that I don’t actually use Flatpak for any software I have installed. 😅
I’m not opposed to using Flatpak, but I disabled Flathub pretty quickly on my distro’s software store thingamabob, when I accidentally installed some proprietary software from it. Fuck that shit, no matter how much sandboxing I get.

Sure, but presumably AppImage/Flatpak/Docker cannot help with that either…?

Yeah, alright, packaging assets makes sense. I’ve always been fine with just a .tar.gz, but having it be a singular file without compression is cool.

I guess, since AppImage emulates a filesystem, you can also have your application logic load the assets from the same path as if the assets were installed on the OS, so that’s also cool.

So, like, dumb question. People here assumed that I mean AppImages, whereas I actually meant just a statically linked binary. Is that really the only reason why AppImage exists? So, that dynamically linked applications can be distributed like statically linked ones?

Yeah, that’s the fun part. Hooking into some auto-update mechanism would be useful to me.

But my stuff is mostly in the scratching-my-own-itch stage, so setting up a FlatHub account, Flatpak metadata, sandbox rules, probably an icon and screenshots and whatnot, and automating the build+releases, just to get auto-updates, yeah… no.

I could code a whole nother project in the time that would take.