did you read their statement? they do.

ai detectors are not good. may as well ask your magic 8 ball

if it’s not clear if it’s ai, it’s not the code this policy was targeting. this is so they don’t have to waste time justifying removing the true ai slop.

if the code looks bad enough to be indistinguishable from ai slop, I don’t think it matters that it was handwritten or not.

you shouldn’t be able to tell if someone used ai to write something. if you can then it is bad code. they’re not talking about getting completion on a fn, they’re talking about letting an agent go and write chunks of the project.

when futo dissolves as an organization, or someone forks their software and maintains it better than they do, that fork still has to have the button to pay futo and not the new maintainer.

there are restrictions on what you can do with the source. that is not open. the source is available and they’ll accept your donation of code, but you are donating to a company’s product, not a community project.

you can also buy a nice USB/Bluetooth dac instead of the inline ones that tend to be more fragile. better quality than an internal one and the flexibility of Bluetooth if you want it. generally a little bulky but if you already have wired headphones I don’t think it’s significant

just to be clear since you said both again in different sentences, GUID and UUID are two names for the same thing.

I think that spec predates uuid4, it only mentions the time based/node based variants. 122 bits of auth token should be plenty, right?

the sheer unlikeliness of guessing that large a number, the original post is fake or something else is going on.

I’ve worked at several places that didn’t have formatters when I started. they did by the time I left. you can incrementally adopt them and if it’s automated most people at worst don’t care. advocate for things you want

reassignment and hoisting are the significant ones. behavior around this does just seem more intuitive than otherwise when it comes up, so I think telling especially new devs to use const arrow fn everywhere but classes is a reasonable rule

hate to break it to you but it behaves like a variable either way. function just behaves closer to a var variable. const fns are less like variables since no assignment. intellisense/devtools all show them just fine. it really is just a minor aesthetic difference on the definition

knowing the programming language you’re working in at a basic level is gatekeeping I’m ok with

I’m pretty sure it can, it’s just been moved to Google maps instead

semicolons? quotes? use a formatter and don’t think about it. I think js world has basically done this already.

const is simpler. why would I declare an array as let if I’m not reassigning? someone can look at it and know they don’t have to think about reassignment of the reference, just normal mutation. ts has the further readonly to describe the other type of mutation, don’t abuse let to mean that.

const arrow over named function? gets rid of all the legacy behaviors and apis. no arguments, consistent this, and no hoisting or accidental reassignment. the 2 places you should ever use named fn are generator or if you actually need this

they’re different files generally, the only client that will automatically request them is a debugger.

you turn them off because you don’t want to expose your full source code. if you would be ok making your webpage git repo public then making sourcemaps available is fine.

most things should have an alternate implementation, just in the unit tests. imo that’s the main justification for most of SOLID.

but also I’ve noticed that being explicit about your interfaces does produce better thought out code. if you program to an interface and limit your assumptions about implementation, you’ll end up with easier to reason about code.

the other chunk is consistency is the most important thing in a large codebase. some of these rules are followed too closely in areas, but if I’m working my way through an unfamiliar area of the code, I can assume that it is structured based on the corporate conventions.

I’m not really an oop guy, but in an oop language I write pretty standard SOLID style code. in rust a lot of idiomatic code does follow SOLID, but the patterns are different. writing traits for everything instead of interfaces isn’t any different but is pretty common

all of their examples are pre ai anyway. it’s almost impossible to change a core data model thing without ai too.

all the legacy codebases I’ve worked in have very much been shaped by the original abstractions they decided on. as much as I wanted to change them, there wasn’t really a way to do so because of the scale and backwards compatibility requirements

some things are easier to change than others. it’s easy to slop on new features, rewrite them etc. changing core models after you’ve built a ton on them isn’t easy, even with ai. the odds it comes up with the perfect data model aren’t great, but for isolated features that doesn’t matter since it’s easy to throw them away and rewrite

I do think they should have taken an approach similar to prettier and gofmt. very minimal settings and opinionated so all js/go codebases are effectively the same formatting

the trend of serverless means that people are writing a ton more programs that are smallish single endpoint things. not that a ton of people are using java there, but that was a major motivation for c#

steam is one of the few commonly used 32 bit apps left on linux.

I imagine most of it is bc most other things are oss and have been updated/rebuilt already. having to run a 10 year old binary happens way less on linux than it does windows.

a handful of distros have tried to remove 32 but support they’ve gotten backlash bc they’d lose steam support. linux the kernel won’t drop it any time soon, but there’s a good chance that if steam drops 32 bit, so will fedora etc

yeah, ofc it should only be a curated set of errors where the consumer can do something about it. unknown errors should just be opaque 500s

I love clj. in general it takes more of a pragmatic approach to functional programming than others. you get most of the purity for way less effort. same with specs over proper static types. it just ends up being a very enjoyable and productive language