Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | _pigk's commentslogin

Window Tidy had it as early as 2011.

http://lightpillar.com/window-tidy.html


Isn't the patent from 2008?


I don't know about the Firefox version you're using, but Vimium on Chrome works with `onclick` buttons.


> I have to turn off gatekeeper to run unsigned apps.

Right-click on the unsigned app and select "Open". You only need to do this the first time you run the app.


If you're a developer or tester, this means every single time. Because every start is the first time for that build...

Regarding the gdb signing, it's painful. Even more so is the privilege escalation--it's impossible to debug over ssh with gdb or lldb since the GUI prompt is on a different machine. Not having the prompt in the terminal where the debugger is being run is asinine. I had to switch to debugging on FreeBSD to avoid the pain of all this; it's madness.


> As far as I can tell, there's no non-keyboard way to do it. I can't click a button and go up to the parent folder, all I can do is go back, which is confusing if I forget what the previous folder was.

Right-click on the toolbar and select "Customize Toolbar...", then drag the "Path" button into the toolbar.


> Traditional languages don't let you do [...] Because the parse would expect something to come after that last comma.

Which languages are you referring to? Almost every language I'm aware of allows trailing commas.

C, C++, Java, Python, C#, Javascript (somewhat), Ruby, Objective-C, Perl, PHP, Elixir, Rust, and Go all allow trailing commas.


What if you want to change the first item of a list? If you're going for smallest diff (which I'm not even convinced is a worthwhile consideration in language design), then allover's example is clearly superior to Elm's current convention.


The comma first is not with language design, it's a convention from FP langs (at least Haskell).

>What if you want to change the first item of a list?

    Html.program
            { view = view
            , update = update
            }
to

    Html.program
            { view = newView
            , update = update
            }
Leading comma vs allow a non-terminating comma both leads to the same diff of just the one line.

I mean, there are quite a bunch of languages that don't support non-terminating commas, which is really a bit of parsing that hides intent.

Other than that, bashing a language for having the convention (that is not forced by the language but by... convention) is quite ridiculous. The HTML comment is a valid point to raise, but there is quite a good reason for having it be native Elm, which brings a ton more benefits than having JSX'esgue syntax.


I meant what if you wanted to add a new item to the front of a list or change the order of items in the list.

    [ 1
    , 2
    , 3
    ]
to

    [ 0
    , 1
    , 2
    , 3
    ]
diff

    - [ 1
    + [ 0
    + , 1
      , 2
      , 3
      ]
> Other than that, bashing a language for having the convention (that is not forced by the language but by... convention) is quite ridiculous.

It is forced slightly by the language as trailing commas are currently invalid syntax (though this is on the roadmap to be fixed). It's also more than just a convention, as it is explicitly recommended in the official Elm docs.


Nobody has mentioned it, but in this sort of language, you're chaining expressions onto the right-hand side.

Putting commas on the left-hand side means they're out of your way once and for all.

The versioning diff argument is much less interesting. Most people don't care about that.


It's a shame its maintainers are so hostile towards customization.

https://github.com/avh4/elm-format/issues/210


I consider it a blessing. It means we never need to argue about these things. Go's go-fmt has the same philosphy.


That philosophy works better when the style you enforce is, if not happily accepted, at least not moderately controversial. Otherwise many developers will choose simply not to use x-format—or worse, be turned off from the language.


In such layout-block languages (without curly braces and semicolons for denoting blocks and "statements") it shouldn't be a big deal one way or the other anyway..


Well, just look at the thread-derailing peanut gallery explosion in this very comment thread to see it's not such a bad idea to limit customization.

People can live with different tab lengths. I'm not so sure every project needs to be bike-shedding about it, though.


Elm definitely tries painfully hard to be different, which is only exacerbated by its one-true-way attitude.

Regarding HTML, you may want to look at elmx [0]. It accomplishes exactly what you described.

[0] https://github.com/pzavolinsky/elmx


>"Regarding HTML, you may want to look at elmx [0]."

In a similar vein...

https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Rubymani...

https://atom.io/packages/html-to-elm


There are a few window managers for macOS that do what you want. I recommend kwm.

https://github.com/koekeishiya/kwm


Anonymized data is more comfortable than identified data.


Anonymized how? Even if you don't log in, Google can probably figure out with 99.99% accuracy who you really are.


Out of habit, I tend to always use a not-logged in state for everything, and if I need a particular service (including Google), I do so in an Incognito window.

However, I don't use a VPN or spoof my User Agent. Google 100% knows who I am without using any fancy tricks. I've wondered -- wouldn't I be better off logging in everywhere, with my Google privacy settings flipped to maximum? While it's certainly possible for them to map my fingerprint back to my account(s) and opt-out preferences, I think that's a bit much to expect for them. I might be shooting myself in the foot by always being logged out!


There is no such thing as "anonymized data". There's only "insufficient data to cross-correlate the identities back".


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: