There are usually no lyrics, there's an absolute ton out there, and something about the music gets my brain flowing better than other instrumental music.
They're all slightly different in terms how the construction of a computer is pitched, none of them are perfect, they all have quirks and flaws, but they're all fun.
Some like Human Resource Machine take the approachof
I wish Turing Complete wasn't quite so buggy or awkward, for a while it was by far the most promising of the bunch, but it's never quite polished and it's ended up in a bit of frustrating state.
Notable mention also to The Signal State, Shenzhen I/O, and TIS100 which are higher level than this, but scratch a similar itch.
there's ones like TIS100 which I keep meaning to revisit, but I find it very difficult to get back into these games without starting from scratch, and resetting my TIS100 progress is too intimidating.
They no doubt predate .editorconfig, but the problem as described is now better solved by .editorconfig, which can be used to configure directory and file specific configuration and works cross-editor too.
why is az devops on the floor? i am having to choose between the clients existing az dops and our internal gitlab for where to host a pipeline, and i don't know what would be good at all
It works fine,it just feels like it has been under a kind of maintenance mode for a while.
There's clearly one small team that works on it. There are pros and cons to that.
It hasn't even got an obnoxious Copilot button yet for example, but on the other hand it was only relatively recently you could properly edit comments in markdown.
If the client has existing AzDo Pipelines then I'd suggest keeping them there.
I worked somewhere that actually had a great way to deal with this. It only works in small teams though.
We had a "support rota", i.e. one day a week you'd be essentially excused from doing product delivery.
Instead, you were the dev to deal with big triage, any code reviews, questions about the product, etc.
Any spare time was spent looking for bugs in the backlog to further investigate / squash.
Then when you were done with your support day you were back to sprint work.
This meant there was no ambiguity of who to ask for code review, and limited / eliminated siloing of skills since everyone had to be able to review anyone else's work.
That obviously doesn't scale to large teams, but it worked wonders for a small team.
I used it with Sonnet 4.0 a lot, and there was vastly more back-and-forth and correction of "dumb" things, such as forgetting to add "using" statements in C# files.
I don't know if it's model, or harness improvements, or inbuilt-memory or all of the above, but it often has a step where it'll check itself that is done now before trying to build and getting an inevitable failure.
Those small things add up to a much smoother and richer experience today compared to 6 months ago.
It's possible that it already is, given there are already signs of the US administration leaning on AI. Perhaps they're leaning a bit too heavily and getting the kind of confirmation / feedback they crave?
If they then feedback to the AI the outcomes of current actions, who knows where that'll lead next?
I've seen some code reviews go like,
"Why did you write this async void"
"Claude said so".
Is that so far from:
"Why did you use nukes?"
"ChatGPT said so".
It's entirely possible that humanity simply follows AI to their doom.
There are usually no lyrics, there's an absolute ton out there, and something about the music gets my brain flowing better than other instrumental music.
reply