• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 19th, 2024

help-circle


  • Why the heck would 2 projects share the same library?

    Coming from the olden days, with good package management, infrequent updates and the idea that you wanted to indeed save that x number of bytes on the disk and in memory, only installing one was the way to go.

    Python also wasn’t exactly a high brow academic effort to brain storm the next big thing, it was built to be a simple tool and that included just fetching some library from your system was good enough. It only ended up being popular because it is very easy to get your feet wet and do something quick.


  • The difficulty with python tooling is that you have to learn which tools you can and should completely ignore.

    Unless you are a 100x engineer managing 500 projects with conflicting versions, build systems, docker, websites, and AAAH…

    • you don’t really need venvs
    • you should not use more than on package manager (I recommend pip) and you should cling to it with all your might and never switch. Mixing e.g. conda, on linux system installers like apt, is the problem. Just using one is fine.
    • You don’t “need” need any other tools. They are bonuses that you should use and learn how to use, exactly when you need them and not before. (type hinting checker, linting, testing, etc…)

    Why is it like this?

    Isolation for reliability, because it costs the businesses real $$$ when stuff goes down.

    venvs exists to prevent the case that “project 1” and “project 2” use the same library “foobar”. Except, “project 1” is old, the maintainer is held up and can’t update as fast and “project 2” is a cutting edge start up that always uses the newest tech.

    When python imports a library it would use “the libary” that is installed. If project 2 uses foobar version 15.9 which changed functionality, and project 1 uses foobar uses version 1.0, you get a bug, always, in either project 1 or project 2. Venvs solve this by providing project specific sets of libraries and interpreters.

    In practice for many if not most users, this is meaningless, because if you’re making e.g. a plot with matplotlib, that won’t change. But people have “best practices” so they just do stuff even if they don’t need it.

    It is a tradeoff between being fine with breakage and fixing it when it occurs and not being fine with breakage. The two approaches won’t mix.

    very specific (often outdated) version of python,

    They are giving you the version that they know worked. Often you can just remove the specific version pinning and it will work fine, because again, it doesn’t actually change that much. But still, the project that’s online was the working state.



  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlAI's take on XML
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m not sure now that I think about it, but I find this more explicit and somehow more free than json. Which can’t be true, since you can just

    {"anything you want":{...}}
    

    But still, this:

    <my_custom_tag>
    <this> 
    <that>
    <roflmao>
    ...
    

    is all valid.

    You can more closely approximate the logical structure of whatever you’re doing without leaving the internal logic of the… syntax?

    <car>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre>      <valve>open</valve>  </tyre>
    <tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
    </car>
    

    Maybe I just like the idea of a closing tag being very specific about what it is that is being closed (?). I guess I’m really not sure, but it does feel nicer to my brain to have starting and closing tags and distinguishing between what is structure, what is data, what is inside where.

    My peeve with json is that… it doesn’t properly distinguish between strings that happen to be a number and “numbers” resulting in:

    myinput = {"1":"Hello",1:"Hello"}
    tempjson = json.dumps(myinput)
    output = json.loads(tempjson)
    print(output)
    >>>{'1': 'Hello'}
    

    in python.

    I actually don’t like the attributes in xml, I think it would be better if it was mandatory that they were also just more tagged elements inside the others, and that the “validity” of a piece of xml being a certain object would depend entirely on parsing correctly or not.

    I particularly hate the idea of attributes in svg, and even more particularly the way they defined paths.

    https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Tutorial/Paths#curve_commands

    It works, but I consider that truly ugly. And also I don’t understand because it would have been trivial to do something like this:

    <path><element>data</element><element>data</element></path>
    


  • It is very cool, specifically as a human readable mark down / data format.

    The fact that you can make anything a tag and it’s going to be valid and you can nest stuff, is amazing.

    But with a niche use case.

    Clearly the tags waste space if you’re actually saving them all the time.

    Good format to compress though…


  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldSelf-confidence
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    4 months ago
    1. if a random comment on the internet is enough to destroy

    your dream

    then it was a weak and shitty dream. Get a new one.

    1. do it anyway. Who cares. You know what’s the worst that could happen? You try, and it doesn’t work out and then you can look back at it and consider it “gave it a good shot, didn’t work out”. And then you can point to all the people who still sit on their couch and didn’t even try.

    2. do it.




  • The show runner insisted on telling “their version of the story”.

    Which… let’s put it like this:

    If you’re making a TV series about a book series written by a world famous author, and you think you can do a variation / “your take” on the story, because you think you’re just that great of a writer, artist, director, etc., then you better actually be on his level.


  • it_depends_man@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldEvery day.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    1984 literally has a manifesto describing what’s happening.

    In fact, the brainwashing of the kids in 1984 to report on their parents having / reading / discussing “controversial media” is a major element of the dystopia. Those media are not explicitly named, but I don’t think they have to be.