Any editor that support LSP has the same (or better) auto complete. All IDEs also have the same (or better) auto complete, don’t even need LSP.

Safety rules are written in blood. When you spend at least 8hours/day doing the same thing, even if that thing has a very small chance of generating an accident, that’s a lot of time spent doing something risky. Everyone has bad days, any one of those could kill you/severely injure you if you don’t take safety protocols seriously.

I feel like browser support is such a niche. I don’t understand why many IDEs dedicate so many resources to make it work on the browser. There are already many options to code on the web if you need it.

Why would they copy VSCode including the aspect people hate most.

Had they made it in a native gui I might actually consider it. Otherwise, why wouldn’t I just choose vscode.

This synthetic benchmark is nice a general wisdom thing. But I’d love a more complete analysis taking into account loading from memory, caches, SIMD, CPU pipeline and all of that.

Probably when taking all those things into account (specially loading values from memory) the performance difference of a div and a mult should be negligible.

What controller costs >$400?

Docs should be written for someone experienced in programming but inexperienced with the API. If it is about a niche subject (for example VR).

Whenever an explanation contains something about that niche subject, you don’t need to explain everything, but maybe provide a link towards another place (for example wikipedia) that explains it.

Untyped function definitions + *args + *kwargs + args that can be of many types + strings used as enums don’t help. The language that imo needs the most documentation is at the same time the one that lacks it the most.

The definition of “operating systems” is not really clear. Some say the operating system is what is called the “kernel”. In the case of Linux operating systems, that kernel is called “Linux”. Most people, however, say that the operating system is the whole thing you install. That is, the kernel + a bunch of other apps.

For example, in windows: notepad, internet explorer (now edge), paint, and all those apps are part of the operating system, that’s what people mean when they say “windows”. It’s the whole package. Other less obvious parts are drivers for example.

In the case of Linux, most distributions ship with a bunch of GNU programs.

“Akschually people” argue that the GNU parts are as important (if not more) as Linux itself for the operating system, so they feel like all the hard work of the GNU developers is shadowed by the people that say “Linux”.

Why not respond with the appropriate HTTP Code, and then also put the same code in the json?

Why do ISPs rotate IPv6 prefixes? Aren’t they basically infinite?

The main reason I want IPv6 is so I don’t have to use fancy DNS for dynamic addresses.

I know that the end user is the focus of GPL. But me, when choosing a library, as a user, I tend to avoid using GPL ones, because they restrict my freedom. In consequence, my end users (of which there are aproximately 0 anyway) don’t get GPL code either way.

How does GPL prevent Raytheon from using their software?

Open source is open source.

If I don’t want my software being used to make weapons I just won’t make weapon-related software. If they wanna use my 3D graphics library to display their missiles, cool, idgaf, that’s like putting ethical burden on a restaurant that serves food to soldiers because a military base was built nearby. The restaurant was there before the military base opened, and it’s not like they’re gonna use their food to kill people.

Well, it did improve someone’s live, didn’t it? I’m not claiming my library that has 3 stars on GitHub is gonna revolutionize all of humanity. But it’s a little improvement. That contributes to having a more complete software ecosystem.

That code is now available to everyone that wants it. If they need it, it’s there to use. Better than every company having to reimplements for the thousandth time the same closed software.

Which brings me to another point I didn’t mention before. If a company uses an open source library, even if they are not required to publish their improvements to the library, they might do anyway because it is easier than maintaining their own fork and migrating every upstream change.

Yes, of course GPL is good for some things. But it being called the pinnacle of freedom is just wrong. It claims that it’s freedom for the users, but that’s not true.

In the case of libraries, the users of the libraries are not the end users of the program. The users of the library are the developers. GPL is NOT freedom for developers.

I completely agree that programs having a GPL license is positive. You can even use them with complete freedom in commercial settings!

You can, but for most software companies that would mean changing the business model.

If a company has to change its business model just to use a library, they just won’t use that library.

Yes, end products licensed as GPL are good. I use many of them. Libraries, however, are just avoided by companies and they just develop their own.

I prefer my libraries MIT licensed because then there’s a chance that people out there use it to develop products. If I make a GPL library then only products that were already GPL would use it. And there are way more proprietary products than GPL.

GPL means big corporations just won’t use it. If they have to make their software open source, they will just search for an alternative or make their own.

If I choose MIT it’s because I don’t care if people “steal” the code. This meme is stupid and condescending, if he didn’t mind that Intel used it’s code it’s because he didn’t mind, that why he chose MIT. Why is Intel beating him in the meme? It makes no sense. You are proyecting your thoughts onto him as if that’s how he felt, but then you show that he didn’t feel the same way you do. Why?

When I see a GPL license I don’t see freedom. I only see forced openness, which makes me immediately avoid that library, since I can’t statically link to it.

Freedom means that everyone can use your code. Yes, that means for-profit corporations. For free, without restrictions.

If I want to make a piece of software to improve people’s lives and I don’t care to do it for free, I’ll choose MIT. If it gets “stolen” by a for-profit corporation it only makes it better, because now my software has reached more people, thus (theoretically) improving their lives.

I unironically do this. There was one update that wiped one guy’s Documents/Downloads/Images/Videos. So I made my own and store my things there.