esa

When you see that sign you must. When you see this sign you can:

Often it is preferable anyway, but there’s a difference between informational signs (blue rectangle) and mandating signs (blue circle). Here in Norway we generally don’t have mandatory bike & ped paths, just the voluntary ones.

These combinations are generally not a good fit for urban areas, there we should have bikeways with sidewalks:

(Generally new infrastructure in urban areas is being constructed as bikeways with sidewalks, and old shared bike/ped-ways are being upgraded to bikeways with sidewalks.)

Also plenty of countries aren’t all that hung up on marriage. It is possible to have kids and government recognition without a marriage certificate.

Yeah, and Android has had some 16 years of “optimize later”. I have some very very limited experience with writing mobile apps and while I found it to be a PITA, there is clearly a lot of thought given to how to not eat all the battery and die in the ecosystem there. I would expect that kind of work to also be done at the JVM level.

If Windows Mobile had succeeded, C# likely would’ve been lower as well, just because there’d be more incentive to make a battery charge last longer.

Is there a lot of computation-intensive code being written in pure Python? My impression was that the numpy/pandas/polars etc kind of stuff was powered by languages like fortran, rust and c++.

And it powers a lot of phones. People generally don’t like it when their phone needs to charge all the freaking time.

And battery costs, including charging time, for a lot of devices. Users generally aren’t happy with devices that run out of juice all the time.

As if anyone cared if they had to wait a total of 3 seconds in a workday.

That depends on when it appears. Some tasks kind of have to feel instantaneous, and there might be a pretty slim margin between okay and frustrating.

But yeah, that’s the kind of savings that mostly matter on the scale of regional or national grid planning.

Most engineers already write bloated, abstracted, glacial code that burns CPU cycles like a California wildfire. Clean code? Ha! You’re writing for other programmers’ academic circlejerk, not the hardware.

It’s interesting that everybody else preaches ‘Write for the human first, for the machine second’.

Yeah, the author seems to lean too hard into the “programming is electronics” model, where the opposing end is “programming is math and formal logic”; most of us take some mixed view. And most of us have higher correctness requirements than what a reasonable effort in memory unsafe languages like C and C++ gives us, so we trade away some machine efficiency. In the authors parlance, most of us aren’t interested in the demoscene circlejerk; we need to make tradeoffs between maintainability and everything else. Write-once code isn’t good enough.

There have been attempts at establishing a third pole of “promptgramming is natural language” or whatever ever since COBOL promised programming in plain English, but the ambiguity of natural language when used to encode a business logic machine means that a “sufficiently advanced compiler” will have to be extremely advanced, on the order of including the manager and the entire engineering methodology.

Yeah, road wear scales with mass⁴ afaik, so if the average bike with biker weighed 100kg (it doesn’t) and the average car weighed 1000kg (it doesn’t) you’d need 10000 bikes to make as much impact as that one car. Since cyclists are generally lighter and cars heavier, the ratio is much higher.

I would also imagine that the lower speeds and acceleration a cycle is involved in contributes—the tyre just isn’t subjected to as much force.

I’ve been using neovim for years (and the vim family for decades), and I guess with LSP it’s pretty much an IDE these days.