I take it as people just joking. Personally I’m in doubt if the tweet is serious and the new book is true, or is it just a joke about refactoring/re-writing code.

After all, that’s why git is there, to help me remember the shit I put all over the place. (Ok, it might have some other uses.)

The other day I was having a bad day and had a call from an unknown number, so I decided to pick up but let them talk first. They just hang up and have not called again.

I don’t think it was a good idea to pick up in the first place, but it was curious in the end.

But you’ll at least let us take a smaller or bigger peek right? Don’t worry we have a screen recorder ready, you don’t have to do anything.

C pew pew

Outlook (new new new final)

Yet?

If you have to cast your joke it isn’t funny?

cat

Ahhhhh, fuck. I’m quite noob with linux. I got into some rabbit hole trying to read the docs. I found 2 man pages, one is cat(1) and the other cat(1p). Apparently the 1p is for POSIX.

If someone could help me understand… As far as I could understand I would normally be concerned with (1), but what would I need to be doing to be affected by (1p)?

How you see your projects trying to accept that you might need to compromise.

I hate background thinking. I mean, I want that background thinking to be more foreground thinking. Feels like the brain playing games on knowing the answer but not wanting to give it right away.

The worst part is that I kind of like a lot of the alternatives.

Fearing a bit to say it but Haskell. I know that it is a different concept, but it’s not just that for me. The way the elements are separated, sometimes spaces sometimes symbols, makes it hard for me to understand how things are grouped, and what gets plugged into what.

The kind bullshit that makes me extract a value from a cache I just calculated just to make sure it is working.

And why did you feel the need to bring up those suppressed memories?