avidamoeba

avidamoeba, 30 days ago

Any word on extension data sync between Android and desktop?

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Chronic underfunding.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

And this is the most positive light they could put it under.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Just Bezos whining that he isn’t getting them subsidies.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Scrub your disk storage arrays afterwards.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Linux kids do not accept cookies.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

That’s cultural appropriation.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Good LiPo bags work for small batteries. The batteries in most ebikes would burn through those. You can find video tests that show this. For ebike-sized batteries you need an ammo can. Even then if you want to ensure your home doesn’t get poisoned with fumes, it should be in a ventilated area, garage or outside.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Indeed. With that said there are some cultural cases too. I know of several families who did well financially but left years ago because Canada was getting too woke for them. Some went back to Eastern Europe where racism is alright, and others went to Florida. Still these kind of cases are probably the minority. 😄

Personally I do have the grass-is-greener periods now and then but I’m sticking with Canada due to what I think is likely one of the safest places to be in 2050. I’m trying not to think about how drought, heat and extreme weather will affect many other parts of the world. I think we still have a chance to keep this place decent socioeconomically and politically.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

I’m counting on us being close to mostly sane states. When shit begins hitting the fan I think they’ll gain significant control over the US simply because they’ll be much less fucked economically than the South. So I imagine that even if there is some sovereignty dispute or a “takeover” it would be closer to moving to NY or California than moving to Florida or Texas. Of course these are super wild guesses. If the US goes full dictatorship it will be a Southern dictator who could usurp national power for decades… So go Stormy go!

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Is this going to be the mule produced by breeding OpenAI with the Bing team?

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 1 month ago)

Me too, I subbed for monthly.

The one thing I can see FUTO can do is provide capital up front for developers to work which could be recouped over time as more users begin to use and pay for the software. That makes sense and in a competent, not neoliberal economy, the government might have a fund doing something like that. What I’m a bit worried about is that this might not be all Eron’s up to. But again, we’ll take his money when he gives it, so long as the work is open source. And we’ll see where we end up in a few years. 😅

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

Early returns are very similar to gotos. One level of nesting to take care of validation is trivial in comparison. You’re replacing logical clarity for minimal visual clarity. This is true regardless of the size of the function which shows that the size of the function isn’t the determinant. You’re not alone in your opinion, clearly, and I’m not going to convince you it’s a bad practice but I’ll just say what I think about it. 😅 This practice doesn’t make it my team’s codebase.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

I’m sure you are capable of rewriting that in 3 lines and a single nested scope followed by a single return. In fact in languages that use exceptions you have to use at least one subscope.

Notice that in my example I didn’t even broach the example with error conditions, cause it’s trivial to write cleanly either way. Instead I talked about returns inside business logic. You can’t unfuck that. 🐞

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

I never said longer functions are not less clear. I said my argument is valid irrespective of the length of the function which shows that the problems I claim multiple returns bring are independent of function length. 😊

Any validation you can write with a few early returns you can write with an equivalent conditional/s followed by a single nested block under it, followed by a single return. The reader is free to leave if the validation fails nearly the same, they have to glance that the scope ends at the end of the function. Looks at conditional - that’s validation, looks at the nested block - everything here runs only after validation, looks after the block - a return. As I mentioned in another comment, validation is a trivial case to do either way. Returns inside business logic past validation is where the problematic bugs of this class show up which requires more thorough reading to avoid.

If you gave me a PR with early returns only during validation, I probably won’t ask you to rewrite it. If I see them further down, it’s not going in.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

Again, if you can write it with conditionals and returns, you can write it with equivalent number of conditionals and a single nested scope. No further scopes are needed. The conditional will even look nearly identically.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

I don’t think it’s worse, I think it’s equivalent. Also I don’t like the risk of resource leaks which is inherent to multi-returns beyond input validation. And that’s true beyond C because memory isn’t the only resource that can be leaked.

It’s not about how readable the branches are, it’s about having to read all of them to ensure you understand the control flow so that you don’t leak. Length of functions is a red herring. You want me to read the contents of short blocks to ensure the control flow is correct. I don’t want to read the contents of those blocks, other than the conditional and loop statements. Reading short blocks is better than reading long blocks. Reading just the control flow lines is better than reading short blocks.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

I meant assigning a return value then returning it is the sam as rnultiple returns. Anyway.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

That was the joke. 😂 I bet Windows is worse.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

Not sure why you had to do the inverted predicate check again in your first example. You already have the information encoded in the value of retval. It can be written like this:

<span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">int</span><span style="color:#323232;"> result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">= </span><span style="color:#0086b3;">0</span><span style="color:#323232;">;
</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">if </span><span style="color:#323232;">(</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">!</span><span style="color:#323232;">p1) result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">= -</span><span style="color:#323232;">ERROR1;
</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">if </span><span style="color:#323232;">(p2) result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">= -</span><span style="color:#323232;">ERROR2;
</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">if </span><span style="color:#323232;">(</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">!</span><span style="color:#323232;">p3 </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">&&</span><span style="color:#323232;"> p4) result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">= -</span><span style="color:#323232;">ERROR3;
</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">if </span><span style="color:#323232;">(result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">!= </span><span style="color:#0086b3;">0</span><span style="color:#323232;">) {
</span><span style="color:#323232;">    result </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">= </span><span style="color:#0086b3;">42</span><span style="color:#323232;">;
</span><span style="color:#323232;">}
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">return</span><span style="color:#323232;"> result;
</span>

With a return value you have to add 4 extra lines. This overhead remains constant as you add more checks and more business logic.

Yes all the other suggestions are better than early returns in business logic and would help with leaks. Would be nice if we had RAII outside of C++. I think Rust has it? Haven’t done Rust yet.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

goto cleanup is not the same as return. I didn’t badmouth goto cleanup.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

Yes clearly someone has to read the blocks at least once to ensure they are correct.

In subsequent reads, when I’m interested in the second block out of two, say during a defect analysis, I don’t have to read the first one to be sure I’m going to reach the second. I can straight head for the second one and any subsequent stuff I care about. Multiple returns force me to read both blocks. I don’t know what else to tell you. To me this is obvious and I think it’s probably even provable. I don’t know about you but I have to read a lot of existing code and every bit helps. We have pretty strict code style guides for that reason.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago (edited 28 days ago)

Clearly I’m not referring to an if/else by saying two blocks. Even in my original example I show the exact issue. You don’t understand it. I can’t explain it better.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Have you stopped to consider why you can’t explain it better? Perhaps the reason is because you’re wrong.

Yes I have. You’ve already assumed I’m not too bright more than once and worked from there. There’s no point in investing more work on my end. If what I said worked, good. If not, that’s fine too.

avidamoeba, 1 month ago

Some BSOs shittiness can’t be overcome by any number of watts.

A nice bike with a small front hub (1.8kg), torque sensor and a small battery (2kg) can feel amazing. It adds very little weight so the handling doesn’t change much but you get superpower that feels like it’s connected to your legs.