I don’t trust her; she’s still a terrible Christian nationalist. I do agree on some of her more reasonable takes lately, but she still has an angle to stay in power.
Like keep saying things to challenge the bastards, but I’ll never support her.
People don’t rush to their polling places for “we’ll undo some of the damage” as a message. They need well spoken people to sell a lasting solution.
Fox news was playing up illegal immigration (remember the caravan?), and people are susceptible to propaganda.
Same, I think deals on the lifetime pass still show up periodically, but I got it when it was about $40 too. It’s good software I use daily, so I’m happy with it.
Looks like on the last deal it was $120
Currently it is $250, which is too rich for my blood. Then again I just paid $70 for Doom the dark ages
I’m chronically online, very progressive, and pretty in the weeds with politics. The only reason I know Ken Martin’s name is the story about him vs David Hogg.
Hogg’s message of removing ineffective democrats and fighting for progressive causes seems good to me.
What is Ken’s value proposition? I tried googling to see his platform or what he’s accomplished, and all I can find are articles about Hogg or him getting elected.
Is he the one sending Bernie/AOC out to fix relationships with red voters?
I canceled my no-ad $19/mo plan today. It was my last paid streaming service. Sucks I just don’t have TV anymore, but it feels like the only thing I can do about this situation. I guess I’ll set up a $19/mo donation to the ACLU instead.
Can’t speak my mind without fear on social media, can’t watch legacy TV, won’t shop at a growing number of companies. The only possible end in sight is midterm elections, but the left is taking a beating right now and has no strategy to fight back. The DNC refuses to support good candidates and falls back to ineffective elders.
Shits bad right now.
Her current talking point was that hate speech is not free speech, and the government will come after you.
She later clarified that isn’t what she meant, but her initial implication was that big brother will get you for voicing your opinion.
Originally she said:
“There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place — especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — in our society,” Bondi told Katie Miller, the former DOGE aide, on her podcast that was released Monday. “We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”
“I’m going to unalive myself unless I have seggs soon” is giving delulu energy.
If a new project doesn’t come out called rockets impose I’ll be disappointed .
Ah oops. I got bored before the paywall lol. Probably need someone to dump the contents that is a paid subscriber.
deleted by creator
We’re all going to be soo rich once the billionaires get theirs.
The rhythm of TDD is to first write a failing test. That starts driving the design of your production code. To do that you need to invoke a function/method with arguments that responds with an expected answer.
At that point you’ve started naming things, designing the interface of the unit being tested, and you’ve provided at least one example.
Let’s say you need a method like isEven(int number): Boolean. I’d start with asserting 2 is even in my first test case.
To pass that, I can jump to number % 2 == 0. Or, I can just return true. Either way gets me to a passing test, but I prefer the latter because it enables me to write another failing test.
Now I am forced to write a test for odd input, so I assert 3 is not even. This test fails, because it currently just returns true. Now I must implement a solution that handles even and odd inputs correctly; I know modulus is the answer, so I use it now. Now both tests pass.
Then I think about other interesting cases: 0, negative ints, integer max/min, etc. I write tests for each of them, the modulus operator holds up. Great. Any refactoring to do? Nope. It’s a one-liner.
The whole process for this function would only add a few minutes of development, since the implementation is trivial. The test runtime should take milliseconds or less, and now there is documentation for the next developer that comes along. They can see what I considered (and what I didn’t), and how to use it.
Tests should make changing your system easier and safer, if they don’t it is typically a sign things are being tested at the wrong level. That’s outside the scope of this lemmy interaction.
The monkey at the keyboard thinking is what software development is. When faced with a failing test, you make it pass as simply as possible, and then you summon all your computer science / programming experience to refactor the code into something more elegant and maintainable.
In this case that is using math to check if the input is divisible by two without a remainder. If you don’t know how that works, you’re going to have a bad time, like the picture in this post.
TDD doesn’t promise to drive the final implementation at the unit level, but it does document how the class under test behaves and how to use it.
Read the article about property based testing. It is the middle ground between what you are describing and practicality.
I often pair with myself, which sounds silly but you can write failing tests by yourself, it just isn’t as fun.
In a world where this needs to be solved with TDD there are a few approaches.
If you were pair programming, your pair could always create a new failing test with the current implementation.
Realistically I would want tests for the interesting cases like zero, positive even, negative even, and the odds.
Another approach would be property based testing. One could create sequence generators that randomly generate even or odd numbers and tests the function with those known sequences. I don’t typically use this approach, but it would be a good fit here.
Really in pair programming, your pair would get sick of your crap if you were writing code like this, remind you of all the work you need to get done this week, and you’d end up using modulus and move on quickly.
TDD has cycles of red, green, refactor. This has neither been refactored nor tested. You can tell by the duplication and the fact that it can’t pass all test cases.
If this looks like TDD to you, I’m sorry that is your experience. Good results with TDD are not guaranteed, you still have to be a strong developer and think through the solution.
Maybe, probably. They are going to gamble that they can stay the same because people are/will be so mad about… well everything.
They can prop up a white male moderate with an ounce of charisma, someone that is around 45. People will be refreshed that this candidate speaks in complete sentences and the capacity for empathy – like a real person.
That’s what they want, business as usual sold as a revolutionary idea. Will people buy it? Who knows… groups of people are pretty dumb.
Hold in what way?