They're not saying that they should be using big specialized pieces, they're saying that they should be using bigger boring standard pieces.

You don't use it, but you're offering unsolicited advice about it, and that advice is very generic.

It's not even an argument that you're wrong, just that it's not contributing much and people think that other replies should come first.

Never mind that the previous poster’s insight about caches is correct.

Zig has had caching bugs/issues/limitations that could be worked around by clearing the cache. (Has had, and more that likely still has, and will have.)

It's discussed in the post.

They got rid of the biannual clock change, which is obviously what they're talking about.

"Daylight Saving Time" refers to adjusting the time in a way that noon does not try to track solar noon for a timezone in order to shift daylight later in the clock-day.

Tracking solar time would mean it's equivalently light out at 5AM and at 7PM. Nearly noone is awake at 5AM. Nearly everyone is awake at 7PM. You can wave your arms around and say "well then why don't people wake up earlier", but they have jobs and stuff. The "scientific evidence" for standard time is flimsy.

People did wake up at way earlier. Working hours have shifted past by a few hours during the last century, so it seems like people actually prefer that.

If we were trying to adjust the time to track the solar time, wouldn't we need to adjust the clocks every day as days get shorter/longer? I keep seeing this in every post discussing Daylight Savings. What's the obsession with tracking solar noon?

> If we were trying to adjust the time to track the solar time, wouldn't we need to adjust the clocks every day as days get shorter/longer?

No (not within a min or two). When days get shorter, it's not like they just lose daylight in the evening.

> If we were trying to adjust the time to track the solar time,

No, but

> wouldn't we need to adjust the clocks every day as days get shorter/longer

This is how hours used to work at least in Roman times, but I think also into the Medieval Ages.

> I remember an article that even google's lab could not make final verdict if they work or not. Forgot the computer name

I know exactly what you're talking about, and you're wildly off the mark on the significance of that.

“Unexpectedly” is doing a lot of work in that sentence

That's an argument for “let the service inform the parent and let the parent decide”, not against it.

Try not to take criticisms of tools personally. Phillips head screws are shit for a great many applications, while simultaneously being involved in billions of dollars of economic activity, and being a driver that everyone has available.

And the correct response to this knowledge is to not try to optimize for the user that will screw anything up.

This only depends on how much money they have. If dumb users pay the most, then businesses will optimize for them.