[–] 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The question has been answered. But since you seem to be new to containers, I'll just give you a recommendation. Just use podman. It can do pretty much everything that docker is used for, but it's rootless by default.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    Just like everyone else, I'll also recommend forgejo. But be prepared to handle bot traffic if you self-host it. My instance was hit almost constantly until I added strict rate limits, and made most of the stuff private. For a portfolio, I think Codeberg (or GitHub, that's where everyone looks for stuff) is better that self-hosting. But it can be good to keep a private instance for mirrors.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    I'm sorry, but since we're being pedantic, this is not a proof. It's full of assumptions, some of which are wrong.

    5% is clearly better than 100%

    Never denied it. 0% is even better. What matters is where it's used. If it's used for FFI, that's understandable. Any other use should be scrutinized more. And that's the issue. The claim of Zig's creator is that the devs of Bun are not reliable. And to me at least, his arguments make sense.

    it’s usual for Rust projects to use at least some unsafe

    Doesn't seem like it. This article claims that only about 20% of Rust crates use unsafe at all. Even among those, the vast majority use it for FFI, which is kinda unavoidable.

    but somehow 5% isn’t

    Again, no one claimed that. But we need more than "better than 100%" when it's a JS runtime. And the "better"ness isn't necessarily linear. So, even though it might be technically "better", it might not be by much. At that point, what even is the point of the rewrite?

    Again, I'm not claiming that it's actually badly written. I'm only claiming that your arguments are not adequate, and that Bun is not a reliable company, so take whatever they claim with a grain of salt.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    It depends on where exactly that 5% lies. If it's in the core API that's used by the rest of the architecture, it essentially makes the whole codebase unsafe when used irresponsibly.

    I don't know if that's the case here, just pointing out that the 5% doesn't mean much.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    As far as I understand, it doesn't keep copies of the different edits. The original file is saved, and the edits are serialized and stored in some form. Only one more copy is generated for the final version for preview and such. When editing again, you can add to or subtract from previous edits, and again a maximum of two files will be present. (But there would be no thumbnail, preview etc. for the original. So it isn't exactly double the storage usage.)

    This is my vague recollection from what I've read in the discussions, so take it with a grain of salt. But this is close to what's happening when you're editing.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    neovim

    It just feels right. It took me some time to get used to the vim motions. But man, does it make moving around any project so fast and natural. I went in for the customizability. And that's obviously there. But the sheer speed it gives me is uncanny. My past self with VS Code could never.

    I'd also suggest taking some time to write your own config from scratch once you get the hang of it; it'll be worth it.

  • source
  •  

    I simply want to emulate the effect of -p by default i.e. open all files in tabs when multiple files are supplied. I wrote the following autocommand to make it work.

    -- Open files in tabs by default
    vim.api.nvim_create_autocmd("VimEnter", {
        callback = function()
            if not vim.opt.diff:get() and #vim.fn.argv() > 1 then
                vim.cmd("tab sball")
                vim.cmd("tabfirst")
            end
        end,
    })
    

    But it seems to bork the colorscheme for all but the first tab. It's weird since Running the same commands manually after neovim is loaded works perfectly. I may have something to do with the order in which things are run. Is it possible to run this command as late as possible?

    I'm open to alternative approaches that gets the job done.

    view more: ‹ prev next ›