So… a prompt? I’m not on my laptop but I hooked it to cmp.nvim, gave it a short situational prompt, +- 10 lines, and started typing. Not anywhere near usable but with a little effort you can get something ok for repetitive tasks. Maybe something like spotting one specific code smell pattern. The advantage is the ridiculous T/s you get
This looks like an LLM's hallucinations. I don't see any evidence supporting the conclusions made, and some of the conclusions are overblown, like that bit about DKIM keymat leaks being the "most dangerous". The whole thing is written in this breathless, overwrought style that seems to be favored by bots fed a strict diet of ad copy and marketing white papers—"not X. Y!" (That's a thin gruel and probably ought to be treated by our future AI overlords as child abuse.)
The word "masterclass" in the title is another clue in that direction. In the past 20 years i have only ever heard it used (frequently/habitually) by LLMs and many recent (LLM-era) articles.
Edit: or maybe i live an ultra-secluded life and don't see people using that word all the time. Gemini, in any cases, loves using that word and humans (in my experience) rarely use it.
While this explicitly calls out "postinstall", I'm pretty sure it affects other such lifecycle scripts like preinstall in dependencies.
The --ignore-scripts option will ignore lifecycle scripts in the project itself, not just dependencies. And it will ignore scripts that you have previously allowed (using the "allowBuilds" feature).
> PyPI does not allow for a filename to be reused, even once a project has been deleted and recreated...
> This ensures that a given distribution for a given release for a given project will always resolve to the same file, and cannot be surreptitiously changed one day by the projects maintainer or a malicious party (it can only be removed).
All engineering professions are like that. NCEES has been licensing Professional Engineers for over a hundred years. The only thing stopping CS/SE is an unwillingness to submit to anything resembling oversight.
If someone can't explain something in their own words, then they don't _really_ understand it. The process of taking time to think through a topic and check one's understanding, even if only for oneself and the rubber duck, will reveal mistakes or points of confusion.
Which gets to the core of the issue nicely, I want to go on to HN and talk to people who know things or have thought about things to the degree that they don't need a cheat sheet off to the side to discuss them.
(I wish Firefox on iOS had a "open clean link" option, but I'd wish Mozilla would fix other more important stuff first, like letting me search/open bookmarks from a private tab.)
It is indeed a good way to add regression testing to code with no tests. But it's no substitute for TDD. It can't tell you why something is the way it is, nor can it distinguish between intentional and incidental (although maybe some would argue you shouldn't, given Hyrum's law and all). But it will at least guide you as you try to figure that out and stop you breaking stuff constantly.
The problem is some stuff is a real pain to test with static assertions. Such as I was saying about compilers. It would be a real pain to maintain an expected AST in a unit test, then you'd have to go rework it all if you change the shape and or add/remove nodes etc.
You can mix the approaches, have some static assertions(as sanity checks) but make most snapshot tests. Like I said I wouldn't use snapshot testing for a fibonacci method, but there are problems out there that are a real pain to test via static assertions.
Can you share a working example?
reply