For the benefit of anyone reading this later, the function to check end-of-file should be feof
, not foef
.
For the benefit of anyone reading this later, the function to check end-of-file should be feof
, not foef
.
I know this will come as a shock to a lot of people, but a lot of software doesn’t do CI/CD. Especially CD. Basically only webapps can do CD, although Dropbox is close with weekly releases. A lot of enterprise and industry software still does quarterly or even semiannual releases. Hospitals, banks, and government agencies in particular have stringent vetting procedures that mean they can spend months verifying and approving a new major version before upgrading, so there’s no point throwing one at them every couple weeks.
Just what we’ve been waiting for!
That’s a great point. In any sort of enterprise system, you should be unit-testing your front end when you commit, and you should be UI-testing your front end before you deploy. If you’re in a CI/CD pipeline, that normally happens right after the build step. If you need to have the pipeline running anyways, you might as well build.
Re: too lazy for Let’s Encrypt, a) last I used LE (for my personal site), your site had to be publicly available on the Internet so that you could prove you controlled the site. Most test servers are not public. and b) many (most?) companies would throw a fit if you started generating your own certificates for their domains.
But there are always solutions. I was able to talk my company into getting properly signed certs for our test servers.
I’m not sure I want my banking apps to store anything on my phone in the first place. But maybe that’s just me. I don’t even use banking apps.
If you use JavaScript, you’ve probably seen a monad, since Promise is a monad. Unit is Promise.resolve()
, bind is Promise.then()
. As required, Promise.resolve(x).then(y) === y(x)
(unit forms a left identity of bind), y.then(Promise.resolve) === y
(unit forms a right identity of bind), and x.then(y.then(z)) === x.then(y).then(z)
(bind is essentially associative).
You even have the equivalent of Haskell’s fancy do-notation (a form of syntactic sugar to save writing unit and bind all over the place) in the form of async/await. It’s just not generalized the way it is in Haskell.
Rather than messing with the EventListener, wouldn’t it be easier to just throttle the function that it calls? You can find a bunch of articles online that will explain how to implement a throttle (and also a debouncer, which is similar, but not quite what you’re looking for; a throttle allows a function to be called immediately unless it’s already been called too recently, while a debouncer waits every time before calling the function and restarts the wait timer every time someone tried to call the function).
Me too. I got a MacBook for testing Safari, but sometimes I take it to meetings because it’s easier than extricating my usual machine from its dock (which unplugs the Ethernet cable so all my SSH sessions die along with anything running in them). But as somebody who likes having things in full screen (it bothers me if I can see the desktop peeking through), I get very annoyed needing to scroll through every app I’ve got open until I stumble across the one I want every time I have to switch context.
Unless you’re on a contract. If you’re in the US and you’re not sure if you’re on a contract, you’re not on a contract. At-will goes both ways.
If you’re random Joe Schmoe who happens to need a database, I don’t expect you to contribute. But when you’re of the largest tech firms in the world…