It’s not helping if some bitch on her menstrual cycle comes and spams her keyboard without any valid points

You’ve already previously been given warning for breaching our Code of Conduct section 3.5 (Hate Speech: Do not make remarks directed at sex, gender…). This is your third strike within 2 months and your account is now at risk of receiving a permanent ban if further breaches are made within 365 days.

Since this is strike 3, your account will be given a 14 days site-wide temporary ban.

- The programming.dev community team

If you don’t have anything positive or helpful to say, it would be better to just not reply. If you think the post shouldn’t be posted here, use the report function instead.

Please don’t stalk/harass our users, it can and will lead to a site wide ban if reported.

The discussion has gotten completely off-topic. I’ll lock the the thread until the moderators (@anzo@programming.dev @dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev) starts responding to reports.

Please follow our Code of Conduct when interacting with our instance. Hate speech violates section 3.5 and in this instance is severe enough to lead directly to a temporary ban instead of the usual warning. Repeated offences may lead to a permanent ban.

When on programming.dev’s communities, please follow our Code of Conduct. Your comment currently violates section 3.2 and 3.5

This is your second warning to not break our CoC (3.2).

A third warning will result in a temporary ban from programming.dev.

Just a reminder that our instance CoC applies even on communities outside our instance. Please try to avoid calling people slurs per CoC 3.2 and 3.5. Failure to do so may lead to a temporary or permanent ban.

Looking at your instance handle, I hope/assume that your comment is supposed to be in lighthearted jest. However that would only be an assumption on my part and in general it’s not ok to say someone’s job/work tool is for [remarks directed at sex, gender, ethnicity, orientation, disabilities, etc…] per CoC 3.5.

Please take into consideration that members on this instance may be of different backgrounds than what you’re used to and interpets what you say differently. Further breaches of our Code of Conduct may lead to temporary or permament ban.

That should actually work great, in the absence of being part of the API, thanks! Funnily enough the copilot autocomplete suggested that when I was formatting the url param.

Please refrain from harassing our users, keep whatever argument you have contained to the thread it started. Following and harassing users across communities/instances is not tolerated.

You will only be given a temporary ban of one week from our instance, but if it continues after that it will changed to a permanent ban.

Per our Code of Conduct, please avoid insulting users when commenting on our instance, even if “they started it”.

Please refrain from using slurs and disparage people for no good reason on our instance.

Please refrain from using personal insults in this community. You’re free to express your opinion, but personal insults does nothing but make the community more toxic. c/programming is a gathering ground for both inexperienced and experienced programmers, so this level of lashing out is uncalled for.

You can, but you may need to edit some registers to avoid windows reseting them.

Might as well start with a solid foundation from the start though. The extra work is minimal so there isn’t much of a time cost to it. I wouldn’t call it overengineering, it’s just a different way to write code, and the way many naturally default to without really thinking about it.

I get the point the author is coming from. When I was teaching first year engineering students programming, the one on the left is how everyone would write, it’s simply how human intuitively think about a process.

However, the one on the right feels more robust to me. For non trivial processes with multiple branches, it can ugly real quick if you haven’t isolated functionalities into smaller functions. The issue is never when you are first writing the function, but when you’re debugging or coming back to make changes.

What if you’re told the new Italian chef wants to have 15 different toppings, not just 2. He also got 3 new steps that must be done to prepare the dough before you can bake the pizza, and the heat of the oven will now depend on the different dough used. My first instinct if my code was the one on the left, would be to refactor it to make room for the new functionality. With the one on the right, the framework is already set and you can easily add new functions for preparing the dough and make a few changes to addToppings() and bake()

If I feel too lazy to write “proper” code and just make one big function for a process, I often end up regretting it and refactoring it into smaller, more manageable functions once I get back to the project the next day. It’s simply easier to wrap your head around

bakePizza() 
box()```
than reading the entire function and look for comments to mark each important step. The pizza got burned? Better take a look at `bakePizza()` then.

All it took for me to switch to GitLab was a larger free lfs quota which I wanted for a project. The superior webpage UI made me migrate every old project to it too.

I assume you meant that both Rust and C compiles into machine code? Python compiles into bytecode that is then run in a VM, Rust and C usually doesn’t do that as far as I know.

I was mostly curious if it was as easy as in C. Turun’s reply answered that question though. Cheers.

Interesting stuff, might give me an excuse to look into rust in the future. Thanks!