He had an interview with Google and they asked him to invert a binary tree, which is essentially taking a tree of data and swapping the positions of all sibling nodes.
While most people agreed it was a pretty pointless question to ask at an interview, mxcl had a full “don’t you know who I am” shit fit on social media.
If anyone hasn’t made the connection, mxcl is the infamous Google interview binary tree guy
It wasn’t about video length, it was about the Twitter leadership at that time being categorically incapable of monetizing any of their products.
Combine that with the orders-of-magnitude higher cost of running Vine compared to the bird, and it was always either going to be sold off or shut down.
It’s easy to forget that this was back in the time when these companies thought they were changing the planet for the better and drinking their own Kool aid by the gallon.
Yes it’s called ‘You left your carbon footprints on my heart’
nothing purrsonal kit
Plato’s Rust cave base
It depends on your intent. If you’re doing it to keep history clean and linear in the long term, it’s a huge waste of time as it gets splatted into a single squashed merge commit. It also makes it difficult for reviewers to rereview your changes as GitHub/Lab can’t calculate the diff because you keep moving the goalposts with force pushes.
If you’re doing it for cleanliness on your local branch then I guess that’s fine, but I find it anti-social in a multi participant repo.
Agreed. I’ve been trying to explain to someone recently why rebasing and force pushing their feature branch has no benefit when we use a squash commit strategy for merging to main.
Again, tools are not blame, but when combined with a lack of understanding and accumulated “git dogma”, it can be quite disheartening.
Same. I mostly use sourcetree to do quick self-reviews and to discard lines or hunks before a commit.
But I’ve also grown very weary of having to dig people out of git messes they’ve made with sourcetree and the likes.
Visual clients aren’t to blame for that, but they contribute. So many times I’ve asked “and what git commands did that run?” only to receive a dumb stare as a reply.
I think it’s exactly that. They are targeted at bootstrapping projects and prototyping and are, frankly, very good at that job.
Not sure on your use case, but I’ve been using Hetzner for a while and it does what it says on the tin.
That sounds hard and discord already has my retinal scans
I just wanna chat over the internet using some sort of relay. If only there were a solution.
Yes you’re correct, this was the point I was making.
To elaborate: could be 100s of times in a codebase, even 1000s, being executed in tests on local machines and build servers 100s of times a day, etc. etc.
rand will be called every time true is used, which could be hundreds of times for all we know
You win
It creates an ssh tunnel and then sends the file over http, so … literally no advantage to using this over ssh/scp.
Worse in every way, actually.
Bingo. Capitalism has thus far rejected the blockchain, which is generally evidence that it doesn’t solve an important problem either efficiently, safely or cheaply.
It’s more about scale. Small open source projects might get one PR a month. Your average tech company is dealing with dozens of PR every single day. Review fatigue is real in these environments