Paused my reading of The Mandibles for Xmas day: It's not exactly holiday reading. It's one thing to know nothing stops this train. It's another thing to read through a detailed description of what the slow inevitable crash looks like: It's like the right brain equivalent of When Money Dies.

Seems similar! Mine is for my specific setup: I have different machines on home vs work, so I wanted it to Just Work. And it's one file: #! /bin/sh -e REMOTES="workserver:22 homeserver:22 bouncehost:2222" # Figure out likely remotes by looking for ssh ControlPath vars, as # per this cantrip in ssh_config: # # Reuse ssh tunnels if possible. # Host * # ControlMaster auto # ControlPath ~/.cache/ssh-%r@%h:%p # ControlPersist 10m find_remote() { for r in $REMOTES; do if [ -S ~/.cache/ssh-`whoami`@$r ]; then echo $r return fi done # Nothing cached, try ping. for r in $REMOTES; do host=$(echo $r | cut -d: -f1) if ping -c 1 $host > /dev/null 2>&1; then echo $r return fi done echo "No reachable remote" >&2 exit 1 } # Make sure we're in a git dir! [ -d .git ] || (echo "Not a git dir!"; exit 1) PWD=$(pwd -P) REMOTE=$(find_remote) echo "rcargo: remote $REMOTE" HOST=$(echo $REMOTE | cut -d: -f1) PORT=$(echo $REMOTE | cut -d: -f2) # Make sure directory exists ssh "$HOST" -p $PORT "mkdir -p '$PWD'" # Sync source (exclude junk) rsync -az --delete \ -e "ssh -p $PORT" \ --exclude .git \ --exclude target \ "$PWD/" "$HOST:$PWD/" ssh $HOST -p $PORT ". ~/.profile && cd '$PWD' && cargo $*" rsync -az --delete \ -e "ssh -p $PORT" \ "$HOST:$PWD/target/" "$PWD/target/"

WMD is also interesting for *when it was written*: the US had just gone off the gold standard so there was interest in such a cautionary tale.

Hmm, I did a histogram mode, but it sucked if one value dominated. Percentiles a good idea though!

I love this pattern: excellent advice. I asked ChatGPT how to do this in Rust, and it suggested a template using a phantom type was idiomatic Rust: pub struct ReadOnly; pub struct Writable; pub struct Store { file: File, _mode: PhantomData, } Then implement write() only in the writable specialization. I've deferred this change for now, but congratulations: you are responsible for my first refactoring (once the implementation is complete!) 🧡

Leaning into the type system is one of the distinctive traits of my C code, too (and something which I really miss in Python, with its tacked-on type annotations). But Rust certainly lends itself well to this style!

Since I'm taking a few weeks vacation, I've decided to seriously try to learn rust. My method in this case is to ask ChatGPT to guide me (but not write for me!) a library ("crate") that I've always wanted to write and never got around to. Of course, I get a lot of feedback on appropriate rust styling, but some of it veers into things I feel are deeper constraints. In this case, I had an open function, which took a struct containing some flags, such as "writeable", "create if didn't exist". It didn't like the fact that I asserted if you set create and didn't set writeable. Here is my response: --- Re: assert!(). I dislike APIs which allow misuse. Callers of a library should not rely on such checks in the library, in fact the concept of adding an InvalidOptions error type is offensive. A recoverable error is strictly a worse api than an unignorable error. But a compile time error is better. We should use an enum READONLY, WRITE_MUST_EXIST, WRITE_MAY_CREATE. --- Of course, it's a waste of time for me to lecture it on style, but I can't help myself!!

Happy VPN-day Australia, to those kids who celebrate!

Keep being genuine. You might not win, but you'll have a much better time! ❤️

Good coffee can be expensive!

"and see" - > "in C". Voice dictation good, not prefect, and I missed this on re-reading!

Yes, it's a technical distinction, not an ethical one.

You're perfectly good.