I got this sense as well, particularly from the section about assertions. Most of the use cases they describe (e.g checking function arguments and return values) are much better handled by an expressive type system than ad-hoc checks.

If you can, yes.

But that last 10% of checking may be really hard to encode in types. It may be especially hard to do so in the language that you want to use for other reasons.

Does it matter? I’d rather use a 90% accurate tool than an 80% accurate one that I can subject to retribution.

On the other hand, I’ve found the integration in Confluence quite helpful, particularly for making sense of acronyms.

> TiVo has stopped selling Edge DVR hardware products,” the company said in an AI-based message.

What does this actually mean? An AI-authored press release? A customer support bot message?

It means “please we need some of that sweet AI VC money”

The "AI-based message" part was added by mediaplaynews, not TiVo. I, too, wonder what exactly mediaplaynews means by that.

It’s even in the standard library now: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/cell/struct.OnceCell.html

You can use pgrep to avoid this.

For the `-j` issue specifically, exporting `MAKEFLAGS=-j8` should work.

Thanks, I'll let Claude know.

> There is a well settled practice in computing that you just don't plagiarize code. Even a small snippet.

I think way many developers use StackOverflow suggests otherwise.

In the first place, in order to post to StackOverflow, you are required to have the copyright over the code, and be able to grant them a perpetual license.

They redistribute the material under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

This allows visitors to use the material, with attribution. One can, of course, use the ideas in a SO answer to develop one's own solution.

> you are required to have the copyright over the code, and be able to grant them a perpetual license.

Which Stack Overflow cannot verify. It might be pulled from a code base, or generated by AI (I would bet a lot is now).

Show me the professional code base with the attribution to stack overflow and I'll eat my hat.

Obviously I cannot show the code base, but when I pick a pre-existing solution from Stackoverflow or elsewhere—though it is quite rare—I do add a comment linking to the source: after all, in case of SA the discussion there might be interesting for the future maintainers of the function.

I just checked, though, and the code base I'm now working with has eight stackoverflow links. Not all are even written by me, according to quick check with git blame and git log -S..

I always do to, for exactly the same reason.

“Man” is probably being interpreted as the Isle of Man.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_Man

Looks like only the code is Apache, not the weights:

> the code in this repo is Apache 2 now added, the model weights are the same as the Llama license as they are a derivative work.

https://github.com/canopyai/Orpheus-TTS/issues/33#issuecomme...