https://github.com/madox2/vim-ai

Weird, they used the latest version of C++ at my university. Had to use Assembly and C in embedded though.

How accurate is this map? If the Irish call football soccer, it would be most shocking thing I’ve learnt in 2024.

As I’m sure my home instance reveals, I do like the idea of focused instances. I think a general sports focused instance would be better than sport specific instances though, at least with lemmy’s current size. It’s not sustainable to pop up an instance for every sport out there, like strongman or arm wrestling.

And people would also have to be able to sign up to the instance. Which if I remember correctly you had a very different opinion on when you spoke to Snowe on !meta@programming.dev about programming.dev. Just from a technical standpoint, the federation latency and general wonkiness is real and is why my football bots are running on Lemmy.world despite programming.dev being my preferred instance. Near real-time communication is important during live games where minutes may drastically change the topic.

And while I’m sympathetic to your cause, inertia is a real thing and lemmy.world is competently run, even if I strongly disagree with their VPN restriction.

If you somehow managed to convince the other sports communities to migrate to a common instance I’d happily follow along though, but I find it very unlikely happen. ReadyUser31@lemmy.world is the one primarily in charge of !football@lemmy.world

I’d be interested in hearing the thoughts of some admins - would !football@lemmy.world be interested in moving to !football@soccer.forum, given the right organization?

I’m not the main mod of !football@lemmy.world so it’s really not my decision to make, but moving the community to a domain with the word soccer in it is a tough pill to swallow. As silly as it may sound, there’s a lot of people that don’t like having football referred to as soccer.

Moving away from lemmy.world and their annoying VPN restrictions would be nice though.

I don’t want to get into an Internet argument over pedantry. Linter is often used as a catch-all term for static analysis tools.

Wikipedia defines it as

Lint is the computer science term for a static code analysis tool used to flag programming errors, bugs, stylistic errors and suspicious constructs.

Catching type errors and attribute errors would fit under this description, if you use a different, more precise definition at your workplace, cool, then we just have different definitions for it. The point is that your IDE should automatically detect the errors regardless of what you call it.

OP suggested that linters for python won’t catch attribute errors, which they 100% will if you use type hints, as you should.

What happens at runtime is really relevant in this case.

class MyClass:
    def __init__(self, x: int):
        self.whatever: int = x

def foo(x: MyClass) -> int:
    return x.whatevr

Any decent IDE would give you an error for unresolved attribute. Likewise it would warn you of type error if the type of x.whatever didn’t match the return type of foo()

Once operational, the energy generated is cheap and will still be in demand

The sea should be marked as C considering that’s what you’ll discover when you get deep into it.

The author pointed out how exceptions are often faster than checking every value. If your functions throws an error often enough that Exception handling noticeably slow down your program, surely you got to take a second look at what you’re doing.

They both have their place. I just recently discovered a bug in lemmy bot I wrote where the lemmy API module will raise an Exception if login fails (response status code != 200), which feels extremely out of place, as the error/status code do matter in that case.

Other times exceptions make more sense as Phillip pointed out. It’s easier faster to ask for forgiveness than permission after all.

I don’t think you become the best tech CEO in the world by having a healthy approach to work. He is just wired differently, some people are just all about work.

It’s just a research paper, not a product. It’s about discovering and learning new possible methods and applications.

You could always ask someone to vouch for you. It could also be that you have open communities and closed communities. So you would build up trust in an open community before being trusted by someone to be allowed to interact with the closed communities. Open communities could be communities less interesting/harder for the bots to spam and closed communities could be the high risk ones, such as news and politics.

Would this greatly reduce the user friendliness of the site? Yes. But it would be an option if bots turn into a serious problem.

I haven’t really thought through the details and I’m not sure how well it would work for a decentralised network though. Would each instance run their own trust tree, or would trusted instances share a single trust database 🤷‍♂️

A chain/tree of trust. If a particular parent node has trusted a lot of users that proves to be malicious bots, you break the chain of trust by removing the parent node. Orphaned real users would then need to find a new account that is willing to trust them, while the bots are left out hanging.

Not sure how well it would work on federated platforms though.

They are probably the most complex machines ever created by humanity though, and requires expertise across the whole world to build. Even if they had blueprints, it would take years just to get the manufacturing right.

That’s what PieFed changes though. You can still track how someone votes

You need a way to identify which profile is tied to the vote profile so that you can deal with the root account.

Admins need a way to track votes to detect abuse/bots though. And anyone can be an admin if they set up an instance, so votes will still be public.

Don’t get high on your own supply, as the saying goes.