implying that any developer actually reads warnings
Find me on Mastodon, if you want.
implying that any developer actually reads warnings
I want to like Forgejo but the name is really terrible.
Is it “forj-joe”? Nah, that double-J sound is way too awkward.
Do you then merge the J sounds to make “forjo”? If so, why not just call it that?
Is it maybe “for-geh-joe”? That seems the most likely to me, but then that ignores the “build < forge” marketing on their website.
I know it’s pretty inconsequential, but it feels weird using a tool that you don’t even know how to pronounce the name of.
Seems like a “haha JS bad” kind of joke, but OP seems to forget that Python is also in a similar boat.
You at least have to know that it’s a meme format. Otherwise it just looks like someone complaining about async with a bad crop.
Interestingly, this JXL loads in Boost, but the one in the post doesn’t. Perhaps it’s because it’s inside a comment?
I would say finding that the bug is in a library is worse than finding it in your own code.
If it’s your own code, you just fix it.
If it’s in a library you then have to go and search for issues. If there isn’t one, you then go and spend time making one and potentially preparing a minimum reproducible example. Or if you don’t do that (or it’s just unmaintained) then you have to consider downgrading to a version that doesn’t have the bug and potentially losing functionality, or even switching to another library entirely and consequently rewriting all your code that used the old one to work with the new one.
Yeah, I’d take my own bugs over library bugs any day.
Last I checked, almost none. They provide a JS API for common functions, so as long as you’re keeping things relatively simple you might not have to touch much Rust at all.
Perhaps a paper hilt. It’ll trick some people into thinking it’s safer but as soon as you begin using it you realise it still has all the same problems as before.
Probably off-by-one errors