This article is missing a "What are signals" section. And yes, this does not do the job:
> Within JS frameworks and libraries, there has been a large amount of experimentation across different ways to represent this binding, and experience has shown the power of one-way data flow in conjunction with a first-class data type representing a cell of state or computation derived from other data, now often called "Signals".
For decades now, whenever I've tried to make a street deal, the vendor has sidled away, saying "I think you're a cop". I don't have much hair nowadays.
You sound really full of yourself and entitled. A job should last several years, why not spend half a day applying? You don't sound like you really want a new job anyway, but maybe try to put yourself in the shoes of people who do, or who actually _need_ a job.
Because what are the odds that I'm going to land this job? Surely not 100%. If they were, sure, I could spend half a day applying.
But what if my odds are only 10%? Then, on average, I'm going to have to apply to 10 jobs to land one. 10 x half a day is a full working week. Make that two weeks if my odds are only 5%, three weeks if they're only 3%.
That's a problem, especially if I currently have a job. I also have a life; I don't have three spare fulltime weeks to burn to try to land a new job.
> The second quote was not escaped because in the regex $tok =~ /(\\+)$/ the $ will match the end of a string, but also match before a newline at the end of a string, so the code thinks that the quote is being escaped when it’s escaping the newline.
The only time you'd want to write assembly in production code would be if you need to hand roll some optimisation. So I don't really understand your point here,
Small thing but postgres should deprecate the names it uses for the CLI commands like "adduser" "createuser" etc; they should have a prefix like "pg-adduser" or more modern, be subcommands of a single "pg" or "pgctl" command. Has there been a move toward that yet?
I have literally no idea why people care so much about typing latency. If you type that fast, I suggest that you seriously consider finding a more intellectually challenging task.
Typing speed (throughput) and latency are (somewhat) orthogonal.
Some people appear to be sensitive to throughput, some to jitter, some to absolute latency. I'd even argue that "fast" typists may be less sensitive to absolute latency as there's more of a streaming approach than with "slow" typists which is more event-based.
But it's also personal. Whatever my typing speed is, I want things to happen ~"right now".
I think latency on its own is not as much of an issue as fluctuations of it (jitter) when it comes to human perception. At least myself is very susceptible to jitter so I appreciate post author's work documenting those stats, though jitter is not addressed directly.
It's not like the typing latency is blocking. You can keep typing and issuing commands. The screen will catch up. I feel like anything under 50ms (20fps) is probably fine; the other various feedbacks like tree-sitter and LSP and what-not will probably be bigger bottlenecks anyhow. (Ed: whoa, uh, was surprised how slow these editors are, but that seems to be for full screen / little-whitespace redraws?).
As a vim user I can be going full steam ahead without looking at feedback. People used to come by and ask, how do you read that screen, everything is so small, and in jest I'd say I don't need to, I already have perceived everything there. My internal model of where I am and where I want to go and what I want to change is only semi-gated on seeing things. I'm not particularly great at navigating between things, but it still feels like a lot of this moving-between-things and changing-things-around stuff is pushed down to a semi-subconscious layer. The brain thinks and somehow the fingers do, and it doesn't feel like I'm really paying attention as these things happen.
One of my favorite pieces of anticipation and matching, that I haven't done in a decade, is Mass Effect 2, which had a pretty neat "hacking" mini-game that involved trying to recognize which of multiple windows of scrolling code was the "right" of code, from shape. Something about that really spoke to me as one of the finer arts of coding, of pattern recognition, of being able to discern place & identify patterns & location quickly from lo-fi moving screens. Being able to navigate code & yourself by look and feel is awesome. https://masseffect.fandom.com/wiki/Bypass#Hacking
Terminals ought to be fast though. We should expect it. I respect that. Some of these terminals do seem unreasonably slow, and that should be improved. And maybe ghostty just rocks everyone & we all find we're way better after it, after terminals get way faster, but I also expect there's rapidly diminishing rapidly returns somewhere. But it'd be cool to set up on a 540 Hz monitor with a fast as sin emulator and find out if that's true or not.
If you need the visual check, that's probably a colossal amount of latency already. Even if the screen updates are instant, the act of reading & comprehending is - I believe - slow.
It does help to have fast response. Agreed. I use Debian's aptitude, and man, even on a beastly desktop there is a lot of waiting >1s+. On my ultra-portables it's even worse (really should go back to atomic system images via btrfs to avoid this). Latency sucks. But I feel like there's significantly outsided attention paid to whether a terminal is 10ms or 40ms. Once we start getting to 100ms, it's starting to be a real issue, is problematic. But I think generally most devs pretty quickly reach a point where as they type and do work, they use feel & their mental model way more than the screen to achieve their goals. The feedback, when it's fast, stops being visual.
Just saying something isn't open source isn't a valid criticism, and it's not an interesting contribution to HN. You could say the same about any software at all that's not open source; it has no positive contribution to the discussion of this piece of software.
I don’t like this trend of closed source projects releasing on GitHub personally.
It makes it difficult to determine the license (which is important) at a glance.
Even some projects that offer only APIs on GitHub make it seem like they’re more open source than they are, putting the whole project info into the readme.
Some people care about visibility into the software that runs on their machine.
People who don't like significant whitespace are just people who don't use a proper text editor / IDE. A lot of them think you have to manually insert the whitespace. It's the same with people who complain about parentheses in lisp.
Presumably all the structure and section headings that they recommend don't have to be rendered by a browser as visible to humans. The LLMs should be smart enough to understand HTML directives that don't add a lot of unnecessary visual structure.
It can go too far. Too many section headings and it becomes unreadable, like an undergraduate textbook where you're constantly being distracted by sections and boxes.
Endemic to X means that it's geographical distribution is confined to X. The (original) geographical distribution of basically all bird species is fairly well known, due to the efforts of 19th and 20th century scientists and their collection of museum specimens. The reference work here is the "Peters check list", completed over the course of several decades in the 20C by various ornithologists.
Of course, you have to check when they say "species" whether they're referring to a subspecies "elevated to species status" by dodgy "phylogeography" genetics studies.
> Within JS frameworks and libraries, there has been a large amount of experimentation across different ways to represent this binding, and experience has shown the power of one-way data flow in conjunction with a first-class data type representing a cell of state or computation derived from other data, now often called "Signals".