The subject this post names, from the same vocabulary
the directory files beliefs under, and the words it uses that this site has seen
least often elsewhere. Posts are matched on those words alone —
nothing here is a summary of this one.
First, Refactoring, Domain-Driven Design, and the Pragmatic Programmer are all classics for a reason. Amazing books, and mandatory reads. Working Effectively with Legacy Code deserves all its praise, and of course everyone (yes, really) should check out the Mythical Man-Month.
First, Refactoring, Domain-Driven Design, and the Pragmatic Programmer are all classics for a reason. Amazing books, and mandatory reads. Working Effectively with Legacy Code deserves all its praise, and of course everyone (yes, really) should check out the Mythical Man-Month.
I'm watching people write these huge markdown files to give the agent context. How about you write documentation to give me context so I can have fully working examples.
Now the thing is you can of course write examples in your documentation and Rust makes all examples into tests. This means that if you change the underlying code now your test fails. And so this means that you can't even you can't forget to update your examples in your documentation.
And what this is is that in the guide level explanation, you explain your feature as if you were writing a guide as if the feature already existed. And in the reference level explanation, you explain your feature again as if it already existed, but as if it would be in the language reference instead of a tutorial.
I think this is kind of leads to another way that Rust really helps with reliability, which is that if you're refactoring, I think Rust is really good at telling you all the places you need to update. I've done this sometimes where I would refactor something. I change the code. I change the return type or whatever it is, and then I just fix the compiler errors and until the compiler stops shouting. And then once I've done that, I've updated every place I need to update.
unless the code is completely out of your control, the need for mocking often indicates a design problem-consider refactoring to make the code easier to test directly.
It used to be that you have documentation for other people who are going to use your library, but like you shouldn't do that anymore. Like you should have instead of HTML documents for humans, you have markdown documents for agents.
So I think the industry just has to reconfigure in so many ways that's like the customer is not the human anymore. It's like agents who are acting on behalf of humans and this refactoring will be will probably be substantial in a certain sense.
That's why I warn in my security documentation, don't use cheap models. Don't use Haiku or a local model. Even though I, I very much love the idea that this thing could completely run local. If you use a, a very weak local model, they are very gullible. It's very easy to, to prompt inject them.
I don’t think this is very productive (expert users of a piece of software are notoriously bad at being able to tell if an explanation will be clear to non-experts), so I needed to find a way to identify problems with the man pages that was a little more evidence-based.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.