The git checkout [filename] behaviour always confused me..
Yes, it's documented, but git seems to really try and make it difficult to lose any work.. but has a command that makes it simple to irreversibly lose your upstaged changes, without so much as a warning?
At least "git revert" sounds like it might undo changes.. In what way does "checkout" imply both "checking out" branches, and reseting a file to it's previously commited state?
...it's not actually in D Minor, but it's certainly Ubuntu (ubuntu-9.04-desktop-i386.iso.torrent, converted to a proper, listenable MIDI file)
Only done the encoding just now.. Basically the code loops over each byte in the file, ord()'s it, creates a note with that value and advances to the next beat.. Decoding should be simple enough, but the simple MIDI library I was using only creates MIDI files.
One slight problem is the file is about 5-6 hours long, so I don't think we'll be sharing torrents via background music on Youtube videos quite yet.. A more time-efficient way to pack the bytes into notes is definitely possible (currently it only plays one note per time-slot), but that would have taken far longer than I wanted to spend on this...
> When officials asked for the Welsh translation of a road sign, they thought the reply was what they needed. Unfortunately, the e-mail response to Swansea council said in Welsh: "I am not in the office at the moment. Send any work to be translated".
That said, using Google Translate to make an initial translation should be fine, as long as you get someone who actually speaks the language to check it over before release.. For smaller projects, it's going to be easier to get someone check over a file, than getting them to manually translate hundreds of phrases
When invites are available, perhaps something similar to the GMail Invite Spooler (http://isnoop.net/gmail/ ) could be created?
It would certainly beat the inevitable mass-posting of email addresses in comment forms (and worse, there's no way to be sure when someone has received an invite)
Not the best tutorial ever, but I found it helpful.. It describes a fairly simple, but non-trivial task (creating an RSS feed from your email inbox, generating the RSS feed, and directly interacting with the POP3 protocol over SSL)
Also, most of the code will require slight modification to work with the most recent version of Erlang. This seems like a bad thing, but it forces you to actually understand the code and determine what broke, rather than just copy-and-pasting everything.. For example, the regexp module had changed name, so I prodded around the erlang library code to see where it went, and if the arguments had changed - in doing so I realised how simple (most of) the code was, something I wouldn't have done if the tutorial was "better"..
This is more practical (and cuter) than using brand-logos.. Pictures of kittens and other animals are easy to find, whereas getting a wide enough range of companies willing to let you use their logos will be far more difficult.. It would be like having a captcha where there are only 5 possible strings to enter..
The "new web standard" is as obscure as "sw", and has various flaws.. Perhaps the biggest flaw is that the notation does not work for all-upper-case sarcasm, such as "A web standard for sarcasm? That's REALLY great idea.."
Yes, it's documented, but git seems to really try and make it difficult to lose any work.. but has a command that makes it simple to irreversibly lose your upstaged changes, without so much as a warning?
At least "git revert" sounds like it might undo changes.. In what way does "checkout" imply both "checking out" branches, and reseting a file to it's previously commited state?