It's an external contract first ORM. It brings strict typing but doesn't go into object persistence management.
It's similar to what OpenAPI/Swagger does for REST.
Being contract first means that both SQL and corresponding application data bindings get generated from the same universal spec.
Cons :
- It can make using platform-specific features harder than in plain SQL.
- It makes database app code and SQL statements dependent on the whims of evolving generators libraries. Which is not a problem 'per se' but imposes an oversight cost, especially if you customize said generators or develop your own.
But it brings many architectural advantages. Compared to typical ORM
- Runtime initialization time is very quick if not instant.
- Bindings can be precompiled in separate lib, only rebuilt when schema changes, making faster builds.
- Schema management, meaning versioning and migration strategy planning can be centralized. That to me is a big thing for long lived business projects with multiple deployments in varying environments.
- From the code it makes a database closer to a standard service API. There might be a parallel to make with using stored procedures as database interface.
Yeah, from the post it might even be more limited than Django (python) ever was. For example it allows the user to define its own fields, which was used over a decade ago in libraries to extend Django and provide json support long before it was officially supported.
On the other hand, with Elm there was no correlation between adoption and funding for development. With Acadia, he's trying a different funding model, so that might mean better support for both Acadia and Elm.
The Elm project forked into a bunch of different Elms because Evan basically abandoned / killed it. Then he got more interested with this project. What’s to say that won’t happen again?
I think it's fair to say there are other ways to interpret what happened with Elm. What if Evan stopped working on it because he needed to make a living and working on Elm wasn't going to achieve that? In that case, if working on Acadia will earn him a a living, it seems reasonable to believe he will keep working on it.
> So even if “open core” is a strictly better model, we lack the intuition and experience to feel confident starting there. By thinking of Elm as the “open core” at first, we give ourselves time to learn and flexibility to expand the core later.
That is fair but I think that there’s not a clear thing from Evan we can point to which explains it contributes to the uncertainty in this new project. Makes me feel we should be wary of a repeat. If anything it seems what he learned from his experience with Elm is that the project should not have been open, and his main problem seemed to be community relations. Evan’s reputation precedes him so I’m sure Acadia will be a brilliant technical artifact, but I wouldn’t get burned twice trying to be a member of that community or contributing to it technically.
No, I don't know Evan and have never personally interacted with him. I'm wary of BDFLs because you can invest in a tool and then that time and energy is wasted if the wind changes.
None of the forks really have the same design goals as Elm though, so if you're compiling Elm code into JS you're probably using the Elm 0.19.2 compiler, not a fork.
- There's an outside chance you're doing Zokka to allow for custom package repos (I think that's the only difference).
- You may be using the Lamdera compiler to use Set and Dict natively with your custom types.
If you're doing something other than compile Elm to JS for UIs, you may in fact be using one of the actual forks.
I would make the larger point that I do not like my software to depend on any software with a bus factor of one that I can't control. Elm had this problem and Acadia has it too.
Unless they make a point to always travel separately, this seems more like a variable bus factor between 1 and 2, just as the Presidency of the United States has a much lower bus factor during the State of the Union address.
I don't think it's useful to account for time spent outside of work by the same hourly income as a way to measure how much something costs. By that logic, spending an hour listening would also "cost" $300.
In college I was a TA a course that (among other things) was the first place students would usually encounter C and the CLI. To standardize how things were compiled and run, we would test everything from the assignments on the school's Linux server that everyone had ssh access to. In order to teach the students how to connect to and use it, we'd have a seminar going over the basics of the Unix shell, sshing, text editing, etc. Because every year there would inevitably be some students who got confused about the idea that Word wasn't a text editor, I started demoing during the seminar opening Word, saving a .docx file (the default by the time I was doing this), and then changing the extension to .zip and double clicking it to show that it was full of XML files under the hood.
I'm not sure whether it was fully clear how that worked to all of them, but it did at least seem to cut down on the number of students in office hours who were trying to write their C code in Word, maybe just because they remembered "oh that's the TA who was really adamant that I don't use Word for this".
Realistically, most people don't have the expertise of setting up HTTPS enabled web hosting on nginx (maybe Caddy will be easier.) There is just so much prerequisite knowledge for a non technical person to know. What they do instead is either
- Pay for a shared hosting plan on one of the big players like Dreamhost, Bluehost, Hostinger.
- Install wordpress in one click
- Do everything in Wordpress.
- Pray that no one ever hacks their Wordpress installation
Or
- Pay for an agency
- Have an IT professional — like you and me — make the website, and put a link in the website footer saying "website designed by XYZ Inc."
From my personal experience I'd add a lot Director/Sr Director in relatively technical companies who manage scores of web application developers. So when you say most, it could literally be almost everyone.
The reality is much much easier. You just google "I want a website" or "give me a .com" and click links until you get some free website builder or a webhosting company who will take your credit card and give you very easy to follow directions to choose a domain name and then takes you right into their online builder where everything is super user friendly and not much different than leaving a post on a social media platform. Most people would absolutely be able to get a website. It might be the best way to do it, but it would get done.
I expected you will go on with a joke how they will get scammed out of their money.
But then you went on and it made me think: people in question also trust these big name platforms. If they have just enough grit to try something on their own, they have, usually, enough of healthy view on themselves to know that they aren't sure how can they make this safely.
For a normal person, the only real words in this sentence are "get", "with", and "image", but the last one does not mean what they would think it means.
Even WIX needs some level of tech savviness, usually beyond 90% small business owners.
And Instagram? Well, one of the main points of having a restaurant is to tell your friends about it, so the Instagram profile is more important than actually having a real restaurant.
Make it 100%. I consider myself relatively "geeky", but I couldn't explain neither what a VPS or an nginx image is.
"Normies" are people who are not sure whether the photos they took today with their phone are "on the phone" or "in the cloud" or maybe on the laptop also? Or what?
Go from there to "nginx", I'll wait and don't hold my breath.
FEIE is only one of the options for avoiding federal income tax. The other is the Foreign Tax Credit, which has no such limit: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1116.pdf. If the place an American lives and works has a higher income tax rate than the US one, in practice he will not face any tax liability, regardless of income level.
Its a test. Like all tests, its more or less synthetic and focused on specific expected behavior. I am pretty far from llms now but this seems like a very good test to see how geniune this behavior actually is (or repeat it 10x with some scramble for going deeper).
This thread is about the find-and-replace, not the evaluation. Gambling on whether the first AI replaces the right spells just so the second one can try finding them is unnecessary when find-and-replace is faster, easier and works 100%.
... I'm not sure if you're trolling or if you missed the point again. The point is to test the contextual ability and correctness of the LLMs ability's to perform actions that would be hopefully guaranteed to not be in the training data.
It has nothing to do about the performance of the string replacement.
The initial "Find" is to see how well it performs actually find all the "spells" in this case, then to replace them. They using a separate context maybe, evaluate if the results are the same or are they skewed in favour of training data.
It’s a Carnival cruise. If you like going on cruises you’ll probably like it. I don’t like cruising - and we went with our four year old, and there is literally nothing for kids to do on board, (there’s a “kids club” but it was closed for the duration) and they aren’t allowed into the dining room, so we ended up living off the crappy buffet and the very limited room service menu.
Our stateroom also hadn’t been cleaned when we boarded, and they had problems with the black water system so several decks just stank of shit. Our balcony had a persistent leak above it, so we couldn’t use that either.
The tickets themselves weren’t that much, but then it’s about €1,000 for internet access, and they nickel and dime you on absolutely everything, while not allowing you to have the things you already paid for - our bill on departure was about €4,000.
Oh, and at disembarkation in Southampton they destroyed two of our suitcases, and told us to go cry harder - and then it’s a three hour wait for a taxi.
The reason there will never be enough lanes is not population growth. It's that we generally don't provide people with alternatives to driving, and adding more lanes just makes even more people have to drive, since things get even farther apart.
Can't answer that authoritatively since I don't know if there's something iOS-specific, but Firefox is the only browser on Android that lets you have uBlock Origin. And I know that Firefox on iOS doesn't.
Thank you. To me after reading the parent comment the numbers option was so evidently better that I didn't even consider that someone like you could exist. My conception of humanity has been slightly enlarged.
If I may ask: Do you also find numbers more difficult to parse when doing math pure math operations? Is this:
Two hundred thirty five plus one thousand eight hundred twenty two
Also easier for you to parse than this?
235 + 1822
Or do you have two "parsing modes" ("text" and "math"), and going from one to the other is the difficult part?
Chicago Manual of Style (though it says 1 to 100, er, I mean one to one-hundred).
I try to use a CMOS subset for my professional/technical writing, mostly for consistency, but, partly so that I don't need to argue with people with subjective opinions about how I'm writing it wrong.
| Not an Object-Relational Mapping (ORM).