I'm a ADS200 fan, too. Bought one recently after way too many years of using a 30W Weller. Having a big choice of tips is nice. As a bonus, it's made in the US. I've been able to tackle projects that I'd never have even thought of trying with the old soldering iron.
Yeah, in the states we say 4x5, but in either case it’s the most common large format film size. You buy them in boxes and use them one sheet at a time.
My folks and I moved to a town outside Naples in 2000 and had a 128kbs symmetric ISDN. I remember it being fantastic. A huge upgrade from our 56k in the states at time of nascent Napster and online gaming.
The Olympus PEN cameras (and subsequent small cameras by olympus) have a in lens shutter that is simply two blades. The blades have a triangle cut out of each side and form a diamond shaped aperture. In this shutter the shutter blades form the aperture. This design is from at least 1959 with the release of the PEN.
We, as a field, should be very careful about forgiving our tools of the sin of complex and tedious design because those flaws can possibly be remediate with LLMs.
The complexity of boilerplate does not only exist for the author but every future author.
It is not my experience that LLMs and other complex automations are nearly as good as refactoring and changes as they are at generating boilerplate in the first place. In the end this code lives on as a human concern despite the automation.
I agree. I also don't think there is a single perfect programming language yet.
I do think however that programming languages and libraries are the assembly language for AIs to interface with legacy systems targeting human usage.
So it's important for these to be easily understandable.
Go fills that sweetspot better imo. Until something else appears perhaps.
But you're absolutely right that we should make sure to still improve these languages and it is right to worry that LLM don't incentivize new languages (smaller code corpus, less data?). As for Go, it is improving steadily so I'm still confident in that regard.
Hashing also allows you to be more confident in the tests for that code. Tests cant catch when additional side effects are added. If the hash changes, you can trigger behavior like restarting the QA on it.
Being a webapp and adding GPU rendering are not orthogonal. Figma for instance famously renders it's UI in WebGL.
While I mostly agree that creators of today's web forget that there are a number of simple techniques to render fast pages, there are also a bunch of places where the HTML+CSS+JS web technologies serve us poorly.
* Content Editable is a terrible editing canvas
* Dom and CSS are pretty terrible core animation primitives
* DOM and CSS make for pretty poor interactive graphics capabilities
And in these cases WebGL offers some interesting alternatives to explore.
I remember when I first tried Flutter+Dart and was really put-off by how it rendered to <canvas>, then later versions did use the DOM but looked like the worst case of divitis I’ve ever seen, it even made React.js’s output look handwritten.
But why do people do this? I note that a big problem with the web, as-is today, is how anemic and inflexible HTML’s standard <input> elements are, which forces devs to build their own widgets (often poorly), maybe use a framework like Angular, and then eventually go all-in on web abstractions like Flutter/Blazor/etc. If HTML were better then many (but far from all) of these cases could be avoided - for instance, I don’t understand why HTML still doesn’t have absolutely basic widgets like a combobox, a single-line textbox that wraps, a date-range input, hierarchical drop-downs (optgroup is single-level), defined styling and non-text content of <select>, and so on… (though we did recently get color and range/sliders - though there’s still cross-browser quirks which hamper adoption).
I hated the days of ActiveX like everyone, but when you’re building an internal-only (I.e. IE-only) webpage it was neat that we could pull-in any of the standard Windows controls - and plenty others - into a page and it would just-work. And you got accessibility for free too, which is more than what you get with <canvas>-based frameworks still - or a multi-megabyte JS/WASM bundle download either (or an npm-based build system that breaks every time you update your dependencies…) ]. Okay yes I’m jaded.
Content Editable seems to be quite good these days, if you don't use it as is, but are willing to layer a framework on top of it. I tried Lexical, but am now going to roll my own, but still entirely based on HTML/CSS and ContentEditable. No WebGL required, although I might very well use it for a particular editing component.
reply