Ich hatte mal ein paar Monate, wo ich echt wenig geputzt habe, bis dann eben irgendwie 'nen Tag vor dem Zahnarzt-Termin.

Zahnarzt war so begeistert von meinen Zähnen, dass er dann tatsächlich gesagt hat “Was auch immer sie tun, um ihre Zähne zu putzen, machen Sie das weiter.”.

Äh… 😅

Yep, some code examples from the official documentation. This:

printPersons(
    roster,
    (Person p) -> p.getGender() == Person.Sex.MALE
        && p.getAge() >= 18
        && p.getAge() <= 25
);

…is syntactic sugar for this:

interface CheckPerson {
    boolean test(Person p);
}

printPersons(
    roster,
    new CheckPerson() {
        public boolean test(Person p) {
            return p.getGender() == Person.Sex.MALE
                && p.getAge() >= 18
                && p.getAge() <= 25;
        }
    }
);

…which is syntactic sugar for this:

interface CheckPerson {
    boolean test(Person p);
}

class CheckPersonEligibleForSelectiveService implements CheckPerson {
    public boolean test(Person p) {
        return p.gender == Person.Sex.MALE &&
            p.getAge() >= 18 &&
            p.getAge() <= 25;
    }
}

printPersons(roster, new CheckPersonEligibleForSelectiveService());

The printPersons function looks like this:

public static void printPersons(List<Person> roster, CheckPerson tester) {
    for (Person p : roster) {
        if (tester.test(p)) {
            p.printPerson();
        }
    }
}

Basically, if you accept a parameter that implements an interface with only one method (CheckPerson), then your caller can provide you an object like that by using the lambda syntax from the first example.

They had to retrofit lambdas into the language, and they sure chose the one hammer that the language has.

Source: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/lambdaexpressions.html

Since you’re blocking Mozilla domains, my first thought was that it might have to do with the automatic malware checks for downloaded files. But the knowledge base article says it only checks executables, and it doesn’t sound like it tries to contact a Mozilla server either.
But yeah, maybe you want to try turning that off in the settings for debugging either way.

The other suspicion is immediately Snap, primarily because I’ve seen quite some brokenness from Snap Firefox already.
You can try downloading the non-Snap version from the webpage directly: https://www.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/all/desktop-release/linux64/
That’ll give you a .tar.bz2, which you just unpack and run the firefox binary inside.

If it works there and you want to permanently switch, you probably want to use Mozilla’s APT repo: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/install-firefox-linux#w_install-firefox-deb-package-for-debian-based-distributions-recommended

Yeah, I’m just saying that the benefit of using such a regex isn’t massive (unless you’re building a service which can’t send a mail).

a@b is a syntactically correct e-mail address. Most combinations of letters, an @-symbol and more letters will be syntactically correct, which is what most typos will look like. The regex will only catch fringe cases, such as a user accidentally hitting the spacebar.

And then, personally, I don’t feel like it’s worth pulling in one of those massive regexes (+ possibly a regex library) for most use-cases.

Yeah, I love to rag on languages with weak typing, because of the potential for a bug, but seeing it play out in reality, directly with user input, that’s certainly something else.

Well, and remember: If in doubt, send them an e-mail. You probably want to do that anyways to ensure they have access to that mailbox.

You can try to use a regex as a basic sanity check, so they’ve not accidentally typed a completely different info into there, but the e-mail standard allows so many wild mail addresses, that your basic sanity check might as well be whether they’ve typed an @ into there.

I always hated the implementation for .toString() of Duration. It gives you a string like that: PT8H6M12.345S (not a hash)

Apparently, it’s an ISO 8601 thing, but what the hell am I supposed to do with that?
It’s not useful for outputting to end users (which is fair enough), but I don’t even want to write that into a log message.
I got so used to this just being garbage that I would automatically call .toMillis() and write “ms” after it.

Well, and not to gush about Rust too much, but I recently learned that its debug string representation is actually really good. As in, it’s better than my Java workaround, because it’ll even do things like printing 1000ms as 1s.
And that’s just like, oh right, libraries can actually provide a better implementation than what I’ll slap down offhandedly.

It makes it look like they’re just adding random noise to avoid colliding with existing syntax. Maybe they can try a UUID next time…

Yeah, I came to Rust from Scala and Kotlin, where equality is default-implemented (for case class and data class respectively, which is basically all we ever used), so this meme surprised me a bit.

I do actually like that you can decide a type cannot be compared, because sometimes it really just doesn’t make sense. How would you compare two HTTP clients, for example? But yeah, it certainly is a choice one can disagree with.

I find these videos give a very visual explanation and help to put you into the right mindset: http://intorust.com/
(You can skip the first two videos.)

Sort of when it clicked for me, was when I realized that your code needs to be a tree of function calls.
I mean, that’s what all code is anyways, with a main-function at the top calling other functions which call other functions. But OOP adds a layer to that, i.e. objects, and encourages to do all function calls between objects. You don’t want to do that in Rust. You kind of have to write simpler code for it to fall into place.

To make it a bit more concrete:
You will have functions which hold ownership over some data, typically because they instantiated a struct. These sit at the root of a sub-tree, where you pass access to this data down into further functions by borrowing it to them.

You don’t typically want to pass ownership all over the place, nor do you typically want to borrow (or pass references) to functions which are not part of this sub-tree.
Of course, there’s situations where this isn’t easily possible, e.g. when having two independent threads talking to each other, and then you do need Rc or Arc, but yeah, the vast majority of programming problems can be solved with trees of function calls.

The first iteration of the Rust compiler was written in OCaml…

What I find most terrifying about this, is that this isn’t the first Trump term. There’s no guessing what his politics are like. This woman must’ve been presented a completely wild reality by social media algorithms for them to think Kamala was the worse choice.

To be fair, Trump has claimed for probably roundabout everything that he’s going to champion it. If you’re not skeptical and you just hear what you want to hear, then you would probably believe that he’s going to champion your thing.

It’s like back in the 80s, when games had amazing hand-drawn covers and then the graphics was just text or simple shapes, but now with gameplay.

It’s a survey for what the Mozilla Foundation should be focussing on. Firefox development happens at the Mozilla Corporation (which is a subsidiary of the Foundation, but operates pretty independently).

Probably around 14 or something. For whatever reason, people will often name DD as a large bra size around here. It also doesn’t exist in our bra size system. Some girl pointed out that non-sense at school.

Sorry, I posted the comment, then realized that problem. 😅

Hmm, yeah, I’d use a constructor method:

impl Event {
    pub fn new(base_url: String, rel_permalink: String, title: String) -> Self {
        let permalink = format!("{}{}", self.base_url, self.rel_permalink);

        Self {
                base_url,
                rel_permalink,
                title,
                permalink,
         };
    }

    // ...
}

Then you’d instantiate it like so:

let title = node.value().name().to_string();
let event = Event::new(base_url, rel_permalink.to_string(), title);

Es geht ja aber auch darum, dass das teilweise rechtsextreme Propaganda ist. Dadurch kommen Frauen zu Schaden.

Ich meine etwas anderes, habe aber kein besseres Wort.
Auch Topf und Deckel kann man in einvernehmlichem Respekt und mit gegenseitiger Wertschätzung spielen. Das was ich meine, enthält das nicht. Es geht viel mehr in Richtung einer toxischen Beziehung.

Natürlich gibt es auch Menschen, die wie magisch von toxischen Beziehung angezogen werden, aber das öffentlich gutzuheißen ist schon nochmal was anderes.