

Time for the yearly barrage of “Setup CI”…“Fix CI” commits.
That is my experience with basically every CI service out there.
Time for the yearly barrage of “Setup CI”…“Fix CI” commits.
That is my experience with basically every CI service out there.
It wants you to put dummy details as fast as you can.
It is a game, but it might also be a card grabber.
I did not make this, and you’re supposed to put dummy details there. Don’t put actual credit card information.
No… too hard.
npm ruin dev
running shittier could be a nice prank… depending on how often it gets typed.
I didn’t know the answer either, but usually you can compose solution from solutions of smaller problems.
solution(0): There are no disks. Nothing to do. solution(n): Let’s see if I can use solution(n-1) here. I’ll use solution(n-1) to move all but last disk A->B, just need to rename the pins. Then move the largest disk A->C. Then use solution(n-1) to move disks B->C by renaming the pins. There we go, we have a stack based solution running in exponential time.
It’s one of the easiest problem in algorithm design, but running the solution by hand would give you a PTSD.
Replacing “Programmers:” with “Program:” is more accurate.
Tower of Hanoi is actually easy to write program for. Executing it on the other hand…
I was thinking along the lines of
Plenty of libraries can build the XML using structs/classes. e.g. with serde:
//Data type for row
#[derive(serde::Serialize)]
pub struct Foo {
pub status: String,
pub name: String,
}
//Example row
let ent = Foo {
status: "paid".into(),
name: "bob".into(),
}
//Example execution
sqlx::query(&serde_xml_rs::to_string(&InsertStmt{
table: "foo".into(),
value: &ent,
})?).execute(&conn)?;
Or with jackson-dataformat-xml:
//Data type for row
public class Foo {
public string status;
public string name;
}
//Example row
Foo ent = new Foo();
foo.status = "paid";
foo.value = "bob";
//Example execution
XmlMapper xmlMapper = new XmlMapper();
String xml = xmlMapper.writeValueAsString(new InsertStmt("foo", ent));
try (Statement stmt = conn.createStatement()) {
stmt.executeUpdate(xml)
}
I don’t do JS (yet) but maybe JSX could also do similar things with XML queries.
No more matching $1, $2, … (or ?
for mysql) with individual columns, I could dump entire structs/objects into a query and it would work.
1 a : to propel oneself in water by natural means (such as movements of the limbs, fins, or tail) b : to play in the water (as at a beach or swimming pool) 2 : to move with a motion like that of swimming : glide a cloud swam slowly across the moon 3 a : to float on a liquid : not sink b : to surmount difficulties : not go under sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish— Daniel Webster 4 : to become immersed in or flooded with or as if with a liquid potatoes swimming in gravy 5 : to have a floating or reeling appearance or sensation
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swim
Apparently, swimming inherently requires a liquid.
Better than parameterized queries. Yes, we have stuff like query("INSERT INTO table(status, name) VALUES ($1, $2);").bind(ent.status).bind(ent.name).execute...
, but that’s kind of awful isn’t it?
With XML queries, we could use any of the XML libraries we have to create and manipulate XML queries without risking ‘XML injection’. e.g we could convert ordinary structs/classes into column values automatically without having to use any ORM.
I actually like this. This would allow reuse of all the infrastructure we have around XML. No more SQL injection and dealing with query parameters? Sign me up!
We can say default is and
and add an Or
node for or
. Similar to SoP notation, you only write +
.
You have rust.
You get a horse and arrive at the castle within seconds but the horse is too old and doesn’t work with the castle.
You remove the horse, destructure the castle and rescue the princess within seconds, but now you have no horse.
While you’re finding a compatible horse and thinking whether you should write your own horse, Bowser recaptures the princess and moves her to another castle.
That error doesn’t occur if you only ever copy the code as-is taps head
Well, we could allow root login via passwordless telnet so that they can be extra sure that we aren’t hiding anything.
Together we can make this happen!
We test our code locally, but we cannot test the workflow. By definition, testing the workflow has to be done on a CI-like system.
There is nektos/act for running github actions locally, it works for simple cases. There still are many differences between act and github actions.
It might be possible for a CI to define workflow steps using Containerfile/Dockerfile. Such workflows would be reproducible locally.