>I honestly love Ruby and Ruby on Rails, but I can't understand why companies like Shopify and Github go through so much effort to scale Ruby especially at their size. Maybe I am wrong, but couldn't this effort be put to rewriting parts of it in a more performant language like Go or Rust? One has to imagine that they have a large code base, how much developer time is spent writing Tests for Ruby? How much time was spent debugging odd monkey patching gems over the life of the codebase?
Me neither, especially there is crstal, a Ruby like syntax, that runs 3 times fast than go. Invidious, (youtube proxy) is written it it. Ruby developer ought to just switch to that for speed.
Crystal is not production ready. It doesn't even have production-ready parallelism (and there has been no discussion about it for a couple of years), so it can't be compared to Go.
I'd love to see large-scale adoption, but it's stuck in the typical vicious circle of no users <> little development.
Additionally, if they don't release parallelism support quickly, they'll be forever stuck with an ecosystem designed with the assumption that only one thread runs at a time¹. This was a deal-breaker for me, when I've evaluated it for use at my company.
¹=this is a very serious problem. Ruby has implemented parallelism (via Ractor), but the vast majority of the libraries assume a single thread running at a time; creating a project that uses parallelism will likely have many subtle bugs caused by the libraries.
sounds more like for maintainers from tauri. deno/rust/websymboly capacitorjs PWA group seems got the stuff right in this webview directions than monolitic electron. If we must go the chrome route, then NWJS would also be more preferred than Electron.
a few years back working on Java project. Used H2 instead of postgres, and included H2 db as in application memory access. It speed up quries tremendously. There is just no beating in application db.
>There's absolutely nothing wrong with tables when properly used for data.
No, the most annoying thing with front end is new front end developer trying to convert data grip that is obviously meant for tables to divs. Seems like young people trying to be cool to not use tables. Use freaking tables when it is looks like grid, div for other stuff.
>I still have an inkling of hope that I will be able to move my sim back to the pro1 after whoever is responsible for the 3G shutdown gets their bonus and they stop going after unsupported devices aggressively.
ATT is just about one of worst telco company around. It doesn't surprise me they are doing stuff like this for bonus or whatever reasons. They have in the past selectively blocked email, calls before (for their customers without notices) and now phones. If you can do NOT use ATT as a telco provider.
Personally I prefer mithril or Soild over all other front-end framework. They light and fast. And Mithril author had in depth knowelge of the other frameworks.
>It's breathtaking to see the pendulum swing so obviously and definitively back in favor towards HTML-first and SSG/SSR-first solutions—to the degree that even the JS-framework-hotness-du-jour braintrust is going all-in on SSG/SSR.
The pendulum swings large due to under-educated (and I don't only mean CS degree in school) developers, now days the industry is fill with developer wanna be jumping on the band wagon, many if not most are not really interested in software development. SPA was created to split up front-end/back-end development to cater to these new bee 'front-end' developers. That way the only thing they can screw up is the front end. The way how these Reactive app does thing, makes it easier to split that up. Front end is client/browser, backend API. It make sense from management point of view. It is stupid from a true software developer point of view. SPA also allow to control what user can and can not do. e.g: Link that doesn't allow user to open link in another page. SPA became so popular that w3 even made what so called web components to try to be like React.
However, it is stupid to recreate browser rendering functionality in JS, and try to build desktop like apps in a document based system, even if V8 really made that fast by JIT compiling the JS.
I do like the 2 way binding the vars. And if I'm going to us a reactive app, I would use Solid/Vue/Mithilral before I event touch React/Angular with 10 feet pole.
The fact that someone would write this on a blog give me the sense that he/she is over analysing this dating thing. Analysis works for accounting and engineering, it does not work for dating. So stop analysing and go have some fun in life.
Sometimes people are not aware of limits that even cursory research would have shown them. They then produce the impossible, because they didn’t know it was impossible.
Technical Example: I remember reading awhile back about a demoscene contributor who used to watch amazing 3d scenes and never understood they were not rendered in real time, so he worked at it until he figured out how to render 3d scenes as quickly as some of the other examples he had seen but his were real-time. He was so sure that others were doing it, he kept trying to optimize/improve until his were grossly better.
Dating Example: Lookup the first interview between David Letterman and Nick Offerman (Ron Swanson from Parks and Rec). They talk about how he’s married to Megan Mullally (from Will and Grace). He didn’t know who she was when he met her (she would have been quite famous at the time), and complimented her and asked her out. His ignorance of basic known things allowed a confidence to succeed at something ordinary that would otherwise intimidate a lot of men.
To be clear, I think it definitely helps to look into things, but ignorance can sometimes counter-balance doubt, which can grossly affect outcomes.
That is gambling which does produce the occasional miracle, but that is only a superior tactic in the aggregate. Sow 100 dandelion seeds so that 5 of them actually germinate somewhere.
To consider that the superior tactic you have to be willing to accept the failure rate and treat your one and only entire life as just one of those hapless shots in the dark.
Besides this is isn't a valid analogy anyway because we're only talking about self-awareness not engineering a partner.
And the comment you just wrote yourself, about self-inflicted limits, was an example of advice and learning, and every reader is better for having read it and become less ignorant about that.
Being knowingly ignorant is less ignorant than being unknowingly ignorant. Over systematization of dating creates illusory knowledge that impedes connection.
I've seen how the obsessive-analytic mindset fares in dating. I'll take bumbling along any day.
The advice not to over-analyse is itself an analasys and a piece of wisdom, which you and anyone you tell it to is better off for knowing. You have improved your and any readers life by becoming less ignorant. Your analasys is actually merely about optimization, specifically over-optimization or mis-directed optimization. And that is just one of the many thhings that are valuable to know, and which you can only know by thinking about it.
Maybe you're a thoughtless person and you only get it after years of unthinking miserable victimhood. Maybe you're a thoughtful person and this understanding occures to you on your own before you waste your life. Maybe you have the good fortune to have a parent that doesn't think ignorance is bliss and they imparted the wisdom to you. But one way or another, to have the understanding, you had to think about it, it had to be a tbought that existed in your head.
But you know who really does advocate for ignorance? Predators.
Yes, the article decries some systems. But it's still over-thinking and over-systematizing in it's own way.
People saying "don't overthink it" aren't advocating for ignorance. They are recognizing that over-systematizing and over-thinking is its own form of ignorance. It's a particularly seductive form of ignorance for engineers because we carry tacit assumptions about how systems can be broken down and analyzed. These assumptions are a bad fit for dating and many other non-technical domains such as people management.
In art classes beginners are often taught to "see like an artist." That is, in terms of shape, color and composition rather than objects and logical descriptions. It's not that the logical view is factually incorrect. It's that it emphasizes the wrong sort of knowledge.
>But you know who really does advocate for ignorance? Predators.
This and your "miserable victimhood" comment make me wonder if your views aren't being driven by some personal pain or trauma. If so then it might be worth unpacking your experiences with a therapist. Overthinking doesn't protect you from pain or abuse. It is the opposite if anything.
I listed 3 exam0les. Why aren't I equally as likely to be the thoughtful person who arrived at the understanding on their own, or the person fortunate enough to have a parent who gave sensible advice?
Do I now get to take my fair turn at attacking the person instead of their argument? For instance maybe your fondness for ignorance is consistent with being ignorant of the fact that abuse is a thing that actually happens, and that manipulation is how it happens, and relies on the victim being unaware of recognizable patterns and processes. You can become aware of a problem even if you've had the good luck or the good sense to have avoided suffering it yourself. For instance I don't have to be a female myself to at least try to guess at the plight of females in general in the world we all share.
"It might be worth unpacking your lack of empathy with a therapist."
It is true, however ignorance and analysis are not mutually exclusive. Just because one analyse it doesn't mean one can avoid being ignorant. Certain things are just not meant for analysis. Dating, Love fun are in those things for my personal experiences.
One can not travel a mile without travelling a mile.
The fact that you can run in circles does not mean therefor running produces nonresults and the only way to travel is to rely on the luck that you magically land where you want, even though that does happen to a few people.
Me neither, especially there is crstal, a Ruby like syntax, that runs 3 times fast than go. Invidious, (youtube proxy) is written it it. Ruby developer ought to just switch to that for speed.