Once an authenticated session has been established, the session ID (or token) is temporarily equivalent to the strongest authentication method used by the application, such as username and password, passphrases, one-time passwords (OTP),

Will gradual typing be supported long term or is it a fad? Will this be an abandoned investment?

The fact that many here are maintainers of Ruby implementations also has a biased effect on new features, as they might represent a burden on them. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I love the diversity of points of view that this brings! OTOH, it's fair that people that do take time to discuss things here have a bigger influence on the direction that Ruby follows.

The point of GPL licenses is to protect the user of the software, not the developer. If you want "protection" as a developer, use MIT (disclaimer of warranty). GPL "infects" other parts of a system to combat a work-around which was used to violate the software freedom of the user, by firewalling sections of GPL'ed code from the rest of the system. If you don't care about your users' software freedom in the first place, then (L)GPL is the wrong choice.

You can also schedule a block to run immediately and periodically with Timers::Group#now_and_every

The purported reason seems to be the claim that some people find "master" offensive. (FWIW I'd give that explanation more credence if the people giving it seem to be offended themselves rather than be offended on behalf of someone else. But whatever, it's their repo.)

[With Zeplin] we started to engage both UX and engineering teams in the same conversations and suddenly that opened our eyes to what was going on, and overall streamlined our build process.

I don't know how much impact the "Design management" widget vs. "Design" object decision will have, except for the extremely small number of teams that work exactly like we do.

The third is the brain of the observer. This is also a strong element in film criticism where the camera is the third eye, the eye of the artificial narrator. The most intelligent film about the third eye spying on the action is `Snake Eyes,' where we last saw Gugino. (You may want to check my comments on that film to see what I mean.)

I disagree. What is expressed is an attempt to solve X by making something that should maybe be agnostic of time asynchronous. The problem is related to design: time taints code. You have a choice: either you make the surface area of async code grow and grow or you treat it as impure code and you lift pure synchronous logic in an async context. Without more information on the surrounding algorithm, we don't know if the design decision to make SymbolTable async was the best decision and we can't propose an alternative. This question was handled superficially and carelessly by the community.

The problem with this pile of questions is that, instead of helping the OP get out of the X Y problem, people stay focussed on Y, mark the question as a duplicate of Y in a matter of minutes and X is never properly addressed.

It would have been fantastic to eschew this ridiculousness, because we all make fun of branded vulnerabilities too, but this was not the right time to make that stand.

Non-aims (but may happen anyway):

I think we are a victim of behavioural norms and so many of the apps that I use have this pattern. That's not to say it's the right behaviour, but it may be hard to break the pattern for users.

XMI describes solutions to the above issues by specifying EBNF production rules to create XML documents and Schemas that share objects consistently.

Have you ever: Been disappointed, surprised or hurt by a library etc. that had a bug that could have been fixed with inheritance and few lines of code, but due to private / final methods and classes were forced to wait for an official patch that might never come? I have. Wanted to use a library for a slightly different use case than was imagined by the authors but were unable to do so because of private / final methods and classes? I have.

Been disappointed, surprised or hurt by a library etc. that was overly permissive in it's extensibility? I have not.

First, dictionaries are not arbiters of highly literate writing; they merely document usage. For example, irregardless has an entry in many dictionaries, even though any self-respecting writer will avoid using it—except, perhaps, in dialogue to signal that a speaker uses nonstandard language, because that is exactly how some dictionaries characterize the word. Yes, it has a place in dictionaries; regardless of that fact, its superfluous prefix renders it an improper term.

to break up methods into logical paragraphs internally.

There's a fundamental error in your question: commits are not diffs; commits are snapshots. This might seem like a distinction without a difference—and for some commits, it is. But for merge commits, it's not.

That tends to be the biggest cop out excuse for libraries. Just do a major version release. The fact this library lies about the encodingis extremely problematic and causes numerous bugs. Any program currently using this library is already incorrect because of this behavior. Actually exposing the problem makes it easier for people to fix.

While this offers flexibility to address many operator use cases, it makes simple use cases, like the developer use case, more complicated to express than they need to be.

I have yet to see a Snapd or Flatpak build of Audacity that I'm happy with. Those builds are beyond our control as they are made by 3rd parties. I do find it mildly annoying that Flatpak direct users that have problems with their builds to us.

Benoit Daloze of TruffleRuby points out that this is all much easier to read if you define your Ruby internals in Ruby, like they do. He's not wrong.

Testing frameworks often introduce their own abstractions for e.g. evaluation order, data validation, reporting, scope, code reuse, state, and lifecycle. In my experience, these abstractions are always needlessly different from (and inferior to) related abstractions provided by the language itself.

Changing the second line to: foo.txt text !diff would restore the default unset-ness for diff, while: foo.txt text diff will force diff to be set (both will presumably result in a diff, since Git has presumably not previously been detecting foo.txt as binary).

a little flaw (Google translation can not find the translation of the word "瑕疵", so can only use the word "flaw" instead)

so this means that there are no documentation telling you that this is the way you have to do it anywhere so naturally a lot of devs do not know about this, unless they ask about it by luck or of curiousity.

Definable grammars for pattern matching and generalized string processing

First and foremost, we need to acknowledge that even though the funding goal has been met–it does not meet the realistic costs of the project. Bluntly speaking, we did not have the confidence to showcase the real goal of ~1.5 million euros (which would be around 10k backers) in a crowdfunding world where “Funded in XY minutes!” is a regular highlight.

Machines understand languages, that are formal and rigid, with unique and unambiguous instructions that are interpreted in precisely one way. Those formal, abstract languages, and programming languages in general, are hard to understand for humans like ourselves. Primarily, they are tailored towards the requirements of the machine. The user is therefore forced to adapt to the complexity of the formal language.

it quickly becomes a mess of non related functions that anyone but the owner feels brave enough to import

The request might or might not eventually be acted upon, as it might be disallowed when processing actually takes place.

One of the reasons I initially pushed back on the creation of a JSON Schema for V3 is because I feared that people would try to use it as a document validator. However, I was convinced by other TSC members that there were valid uses of a schema beyond validation.

without a schema, you do not have a spec, you have an aspiration.

When we do release a final version of JSON Schema, please do not use JSON Schema to guarantee an OpenAPI document is valid. It cannot do that. There are numerous constraints in the written specification that cannot be expressed in JSON Schema.

JSONPath contains verbiage that allows for an empty array to be returned in the case that nothing was found, but the primary return in these cases is false.

We do not want to change or remove additionalProperties. Providing a clear solution for the above use case will dramatically reduce or eliminate the misunderstandings around additionalProperties.

But do ESG ratings really deliver on the promise? Are highly-ranked ESG businesses really more caring of the environment, more selective of the societies in which they operate, and more focused on countries with good corporate governance? In short, is ESG really good? The answer is no.

You can use Danger to codify your team's norms, leaving humans to think about harder problems.

It can be exhausting to backchannel and “find buy-in” for every little thing.

Don't disregard it because it's cute.

MY_PATH=$(cd "$MY_PATH" && pwd) # absolutized and normalized

to deepen and mature your coding practice

Unless new evidence comes to bear that refutes the basic tenets of this analysis

These callbacks are focused on the transactions, instead of specific model actions.

so the effort to make it work for every audio player on all user environments is futile.

Its core theme - segregation. It's done in such an ingenious and innocent way - colour.

I believe this is partly due to a militant position on free software. Some advocates believe so strongly that users should be able to recompile their software that they force them to do so. They break libraries seemingly on purpose just to say, “Recompile! Oh you can’t? That’ll teach you to use binary software!” Of course users don’t want to recompile their software, but what users actually want is usually lost on GNOME developers.

In any significant project I worked in the last 15 years, logging text messages resulted in a large amount of strings which was hard to make sense of, thus mostly ignored.

Note that this is a breaking API change in the libraries (more information in the README.md). It does not affect the backwards compatibility of the protocol itself.

I did a spike to come up with a PoC for introducing this into the codebase of a product that I'm working on (matteeyah/respondo#225) by monkey-patching ActiveRecord with delegated types. It's amazing how can a small code change in ActiveRecord facilitate a big change in the domain model.

You may want to jump straight to the Examples section if formal stuff annoys you.

Possibly there are authorizations that will permit access to the resource, possibly there are not, but let's give it a try and see what happens.

In the spirit of mutual collaboration between the client and the API, the response must include a hint on how to obtain such authorization.

If the client request does not include any access token, demonstrating that it wasn't aware that the API is protected, the API's response should not include any other information.

It's all too complex for our little brains to handle. And like any situation of excess complexity, we collapse dimensions until we have a structure we can comprehend. The problem, in this case, is that our simplifications create tunnels large enough for the trucks of hacker to drive through—with ease.

They wanna be to Linux what the Play Store is to Android, what the App Store is to iOS.But we don't do that around here. We use Flatpak round 'ere.

I arrived at this question searching for the answer as well

highlighted like this,

Disclaimer I really have no desire to maintain this project, as it's not mine to begin with. I was looking for something like Gitso but it didn't quite have what I wanted. After making my changes I thought I might as well put this up on GitHub for others who wanted something similar. So if you have issues, you're better off forking the project and fixing them yourself.

Just my n=1 opinion only.

If there is one thing that normally characterizes the entire Linux ecosystem, it is that there are many solutions to one problem.

tcpwrappers or, as you’re probably more familiar, the hosts.allow and hosts.deny files

Or use a '?' in place of a space as long as there are no other matching filenames than the one with spaces (since '?' matches any character): rsync -av host:a?long?filename /tmp/

Maybe there’s a technical term that I’m not aware of for this type of centered line-splitting heading.

Most issues have been manually labelled as stale rather than automated and closure will be manual too, so we have time to think.

while we figure out how to best include HMR support in the compiler itself (which is tricky to do without unfairly favoring any particular dev tooling)

Gems use a period and packages use a dot

We will see that this is not a fatality, because TypeScript is more powerful than you thought and some developers of the community are very crafty.

* Now it's correct within the laws of the type system, but makes zero practical sense, * because there exists no runtime representation of the type `Date & string`. * * The type system doesn't care whether a type can be represented in runtime though.

In the end this plugin is a piece of software that I wrote and I'm just doing what I think is reasonable to make our community more inclusive.

We should think about the number of simultaneous connections (peak and average) and the message rate/payload size. I think, the threshold to start thinking about AnyCable (instead of just Action Cable) is somewhere between 500 and 1000 connections on average or 5k-10k during peak hours.

So ActionCable needs Redis! Is this the first time Rails is aligning with a vendor product? Why not abstract it like AR/AJ?

(In case you’re wondering, there’s nothing special about the name CSRF-TOKEN.)

One of the consequences (although arguably not the primary motivation) of DRY is that you tend to end up with chunks of complex code expressed once, with simpler code referencing it throughout the codebase. I can't speak for anyone else, but I consider it a win if I can reduce repetition and tuck it away in some framework or initialisation code. Having a single accessor definition for a commonly used accessor makes me happy - and the new Object class code can be tested to hell and back. The upshot is more beautiful, readable code.

If an access modifier is not specified it is implicitly public as that matches the convenient nature of JavaScript 🌹.

Programmers should be encouraged to understand what is correct, why it is correct, and then propagate.

Critical to the acceptance of the position of the script subtag was the inclusion of information in the registry to make clear the need to avoid script subtags except where they add useful distinguishing information. Thus, the registry entry for the language subtag "en" (English) has a field called "Suppress-Script" indicating that the script subtag "Latn" should be avoided with that language, since virtually all English documents use the Latin script.

Another problem was the ambiguity of RFC 3066 regarding the generative syntax. The idea of "language-dash-region" language tags was easy enough to grasp; most users didn't read RFC 3066 directly or consider the unstated-but-realized implication that other subtags might sometimes occur in the second position.

over (order by effdt desc) prev

For a «zoom out» view of my current data, here is a table-free working test :

tweet at them. This has multiple effects: If they don't respond, it's bad PR

The best advice I can give you is: Seek a smaller provider which often are less formal and more approachable. When you found one where you have a good support, request your friends and family to move to this. You are doing something for them, then it can only happen on your terms.

So, +1 for play ball. Level 1 is supposed to filter out all simple issues (and once upon a time, you'll have forgotten something, happens to all of us), and they are not supposed to be creative. They get a script that has been refined over and over. Learn the scripts, prepare the answers, and you'll get to Level 2 more quickly than with any other method.

I cherry-picked the first commit into #872, we can add .erb support later if we find we need it.

I think so...I actually can't remember. I've used this script quite a bit.

Are you also tired and fed up with the bulkiness of jQuery, but also don't want to have to type document.querySelector("div").appendChild(document.createTextNode("hello")); just to add some text to an element?

However, the novelty wears off quickly and the whole thing soon becomes a slog — the career mode could be cut in half and the experience would be better for it.

My name is Floyd Lu, I have been designing and publishing games since 2015 under B&B Games studio. In 2020 B&B Games studio dissolved. I took over a part of the business including this account. I am unable to change the name and URL of my Kickstarter account. I delivered and personally worked on each project that I did and I can't transfer all the followers, therefore, I am still launching new projects under this account.

when HTML5 started, the feedback from the HTML5 guys was pretty clear: HTML5 is there to improve web apps (standards-based flash! yay!), and not to improve HTML as a hypermedia format. http://dret.typepad.com/dretblog/2008/05/xhtml-fragment.html was a very early attempt to raise the issue and was shot down promptly. with HTML5 now branching into so many micro-specs (https://github.com/dret/HTML5-overview), maybe there’s a good chance to simply create a “FragIDs in HTML5” spec and see if there’s any community uptake. it would be great to see this getting started, and maybe IETF with its more open process would be a better place than W3C.

The simple problem that I see with fragment identifiers is that their existence and functionality relies completely on the developer rather than the browser. Yes, the browser needs to read and interpret the identifier and identify the matching fragment. But if the developer doesn’t include any id attributes in the HTML of the page, then there will be no identifiable fragments. Do you see why this is a problem? Whether the developer has coded identifiers into the HTML has nothing to do with whether or not the page actually has fragments. Virtually every web page has fragments. In fact, sectioning content as defined in the HTML5 spec implies as much. Every element on the page that can contain content can theoretically be categorized as a “fragment”.

Making effective use of this mechanism requires either control of the targeted document or generous creators of targeted documents who have liberally applied id attributes throughout a document.

confirmation or refutation would be appreciated

That's something that has been bugging me too. I mean, it's fine if not everything is supported, but if everyone could agree on what is or should be supported then that would make a huge difference. But until then, it's going to be a struggle.

Honestly, even without flexbox support, most of the layout problems would be solved with simple-basic CSS3 support that is standard in all clients.

Approaching email development this way transitions more of the quality assurance (QA) process to the browser instead of the email client. It gives email designers more power, control, and confidence in developing an email that will render gracefully across all email clients.

They don't look like advertisements. The second the recipient interprets your email as an ad, promotion, or sales pitch—and it does take just a second—its chances of being read or acted upon plummet towards zero. A plain email leads people to start reading it before jumping to conclusions.

NEGATIVESThe interface between the game and the Steam Client denies you the ability to take screenshots. I also could not capture play footage.

There's nothing to stop you from doing initializer code in a file that lives in app/models. for example class MyClass def self.run_me_when_the_class_is_loaded end end MyClass.run_me_when_the_class_is_loaded MyClass.run_me... will run when the class is loaded .... which is what we want, right? Not sure if its the Rails way.... but its extremely straightforward, and does not depend on the shifting winds of Rails.

Game Saves After completion of each level

Been seeing this comment copy/pasted everywhere it's pathetic what people will do for thumbs up/awards on reviews, be original and make your own review. If you guys need proof go and look at NVL reviews, I saw it on another game a few weeks ago too.

Like a lot of reviews I write, I hope to come back to add on to this and embellish.

Right now it's a matter of getting brass tacks up front and hopefully helping Feel-A-Maze get noticed.

and even though there are plenty of additional characters to unlock, they’re ultimately only cosmetic, providing no real incentive to unlock them all

What you want is not to detect if stdin is a pipe, but if stdin/stdout is a terminal.

stdin can be a pipe or redirected from a file. Better to check if it is interactive than to check if it is not.

Humor is based on a sense of the unexpected, inexplicable, ridiculous and ironic. Dry humor can enhance these qualities to make things more humorous. For example, humor that is delivered as if it were not a joke may feel more surprising and odd.

By the way, the README file of the expect says there is a libexpect library that can be used to write programs on C/C++ which allows to avoid the use of TCL itself. But I'm afraid, this subject is beyond this article. Besides authors of expect themselves seem to prefer expect-scripts to the library.

In this framework, a stream is a chain of coroutines that pass messages between a program and a device driver (or between a pair of programs)