Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Svoka's commentslogin

I wonder if the support made it to Caddy yet

(seems to be WIP https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/issues/7399)


It works, but as another comment mentioned there may be quirks with IP certs, specifically IPv6, that I hope will be fixed by v2.11.

IPv4 certs are already working fine for me in Caddy, but I think there's some kinks to work out with IPv6.

This is strangest read I had in a while. It is like saying that operating a submarine is very counter intuitive, I know how to operate an airliner, both are vehicles.

More like, operating a submarine that's being designed and built-up around you as you travel in it, with half the components being obscure military secrets that - for reasons unknown - don't come with operator manuals anymore, and the other half being done by children copying designs they saw in TV shows with duct-tape and plasticine.

That's how modern software industry feels like.


It was my first taste of Swift, and has destroyed any lingering curiosity I had about it.

As a Swift dev, I have to say this was a frustrating read.

Apple’s documentation is often very poor, and I will note that Swift Packages (especially CLIs) doesn’t always feel great. As another commenter noted, anything other than Xcode feels like fighting an uphill battle.

But many of your frustrations could be solved by checking not API docs, but just the Swift language guide. You seem perturbed, for example, that the Package initializer expects ordered arguments. It is a basic part of Swift’s design that arguments are always ordered and exclusively are either named or unnamed (never optionally both).

The ghost’s use of semaphores with async/await is a massive red flag in terms of mixing two asynchronous frameworks (Concurrency and GCD). I’d not be surprised if it worked, but that’s really against the grain in terms of how either framework were designed. This is the shortfall of relying on bottled ghosts to learn new tools. I know from experience that the documentation on Concurrency (async/await) is pretty good, and lays out a clear rationale for how it’s intended to be used, but that is a huge piece of documentation and it’s a big hill to climb when all you’re building is a small tool. This is the risk we run when asking AI for help when it itself is ignorant of the actual intended use of the apis and is only trained on the output of developers. Here it’s easy to see that it was faced with a problem of synchronous access to an async function and reached for a common solution (semaphore), despite the fact that semaphores are part of a 10 year old framework, and the async/await keywords are only 2-3 years old!

Anyway, the article reminded me of the challenges of learning a new (programming) language. There’s more to it than just following tutorials and blindly directing AI. I know the feeling, having to currently learn c# at the moment. I can write simple functions and follow the syntax, but I can’t intuitively understand what’s happening like I can with Swift. Is that because Swift is better than C#? Not really- it’s just that I’m fluent in one but not the other. Ironically I guess you probably get this already from learning Mandarin, but you’ve not written an article about how frustrating it is that it inexplicably insists on using tones to express meaning, when English is fine without it(!).

I’m sorry you had a bad experience with Swift. I do genuinely think it’s a great language to write, and the open source Swift Evolution team are great. They are continually pushing for more openness and more cross platform compatibility, and I do like the way that the core of the language is strongly opinionated in a way that makes it clear what’s happening if you do understand the syntax. What’s hard is then the application of Apple’s APIs which are wildly inconsistent and often incomplete. Some are maintained while others are still wrappers for 15 year old objective C that have no concept of modern Swift paradigms. That said, I’d still encourage you to persevere with Swift. Once you get past those rough edges of stdio and UI and get into the heart of a Package, I would expect most of these complaints to disappear!


Pixelmator probably is Lightroom. And adobe has "Photography Bundle" with Lightroom and Photoshop for $20/mo.

No, Lightroom is a dedicated photo editor and DAM.

Pixelmator is closer to Photoshop, you can do some photo editing, but its not focused on it, and does not have asset management.


No, Photomator (and Photos) is Lightroom. Pixelmator is Photoshop.

This channel contains videos of journey from setting up environment and busy wait embedded LED blinking, to basically re-inventing and then using Embassy. 4 oldest videos.

https://www.youtube.com/@therustybits/videos


His videos are gold! I'm really impressed

Wow, this dude is good! Thanks for sharing.

Ah, C has stable ABI unlike C++, never would get tired of unresolved std::__1 symbols.


What stable ABI?

First of all, ABI is a property of the OS calling conventions, which happen to overlap with C on UNIX/POSIX, given its symbiotic relationship.

Secondly, https://thephd.dev/to-save-c-we-must-save-abi-fixing-c-funct...


What would be a reason to bring Zig in?

For example, Rust has additional memory guarantees when compared to C.


Zig has better ergonomics over C but not as complex as Rust.


You can just not use it at all, there are alternatives.

Why do you want to get rid of something which you are not forced to use?


How do you manage macOS desktop apps with those, I am confused. The article is about set up of a personal workspace.


I hired many many people and never once I cared about GitHub stars. Not even sure what signal it suppose to be.


It's a quick signal that the developer is capable of writing and maintaining code that can be used by many others.


Or that they're just a person who knows how to game stars. As Goodfart says, "When a measure becomes a target, it gets gamed beyond usefulness."


Although commits can be gamed on GitHub, stars are significantly harder to game as they require human accounts to be doing so.

You could game a few stars with sockpuppet accounts, but it's infeasible to game 100+ stars.


> You could game a few stars with sockpuppet accounts, but it's infeasible to game 100+ stars.

It’s not only feasible, it’s trivial.

https://the-guild.dev/blog/judging-open-source-by-github-sta...


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36151140

> This package costed me 8.19 Euros for 100 stars which is €0.08/star.

Shoot for the stars, I guess.


I would not be surprised if you can buy quite a lot of them for cheap.


Yes, developer/platform advocacy/evangelism.


Very excited to see this. I thought that speed does not matter much for python tooling, but then I tried uv, and realized that I was wrong. The experience is just better. Looking forward to see more high performance quality tooling for Python.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: