Interesting that you guys associate guitar solos with feeling like a knight. For me, it’s brass and choirs and such.
Something like this, for example: https://www.jamendo.com/track/1244744/swords-of-fire
The bass trombone sizzling throughout that song apparently got developed in the late 16th century, so technically not even that is anachronistic. 🙃
“City limits” sure is one of the signs of all time.
I had to start reading that three times over, because I saw they mentioned “Canadian” and just assumed the angle brackets are a joke in reference to the Canadians in South Park:
Well, no, but not every funny story ends with a near-death experience…
A bucket of bytes. 🙃
Ah, that makes more sense. I did remember it being a Dutch acquisition.
Dutch cartographers subsequently renamed Tasman’s discovery Nova Zeelandia from Latin, after the Dutch province of Zeeland. This name was later anglicised to New Zealand.
Also worth mentioning that universities generally see themselves as research facilities first and foremost. They teach students, because they want to get the next generation of researchers.
Sure, they’ll also do job training to some degree, because it’s a good argument to get more funding, but yeah, just not their primary goal.
You’re right that there is a risk, that rebasing introduces compile errors or even subtle breakages. The thing is, version control works best, if you keep the number of different versions to a minimum. That means merging back as soon as possible. And rebases simultaneously help with that, but also definitely work best when doing that.
There may be reasons why you cannot merge back quickly, typically organizational reasons why your devs can’t establish close-knit communication to avoid conflicts that way, or just not enough automation in testing. In that case, merges may be the right choice.
But I will always encourage folks to merge back as soon as possible, and if you can bring down the lifetime of feature branches (or ideally eliminate them entirely), then rebases are unlikely to introduces unintended changes and speed you up quite a bit.
I don’t work with merges, so maybe I’m way off base, but I thought they meant, they’re working on another branch or fork, then merging the base branch into theirs every so often to get the newest changes, and then that creates multiple merge commits, which they can’t squash at the end…?
I’m not sure, about that last part, but the rest, I’ve definitely seen with contributors that didn’t know to work with rebases (and unfortunately we’re on GitHub, which only half-assedly supports working with rebases by default).
You might prefer working with rebases + fast-forward-only merges, if you want merge commits to be squashed…
(As in, there won’t be any merge commits. Your PR will look as if you forked, then coded real fast, and then opened the PR before anyone else pushed anything.)
Yeah. Perhaps also somewhat of a subverted expectations thing. The dog is portrayed as not even understanding pointing, but as soon as food is involved, it understands the transaction 1 cane = 1 bone very quickly.
For what it’s worth, when we say we do TDD in my team, we write a singular test case that fails, then we implement the production code until the test case works. Then maybe do a bit of refactoring to make it all work nicely together, and only then you start with the next test case.
Writing swathes of unit tests upfront sounds absolutely mad to me, for the reason you state. But also because you do need an API to test against. You can’t write a unit test in complete isolation, pretty much by definition. You can often do so for integration tests, but you definitely don’t want to put all test cases into integration tests, as that increases complexity massively…
One reason why the LLM playing field is kind of levelled and “being first” isn’t all too meaningful, is that the research was already out there for quite some time before the hype started.
The hype got kicked off, when these large corporations figured out that pouring lots of money into this approach does something. Well, and when there were lots of cheap GPUs on the market from cryptocurrencies imploding.
But as soon as the hype was there, getting investors to give you lots of money and getting GPUs, that’s something virtually any company could do.
Having said all that, the other points still stand and they probably could’ve held their position without even being the best platform. Nevermind especially that Microsoft is most certainly getting lots and lots of investment money for LLMs, too.