sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 6 points 6 months ago

Doesn't feel like that to me. I'll need to see evidence that that is the main reason. It could be but I just don't see it.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago

Xorg is a display server for Linux ecosystem. Every ecosystem has a display server. It is what makes it possible for you to have graphical applications with movable windows that can talk to each other, or have a mouse cursor that can click on things.

Wayland is a replacement for Xorg because Xorg is old and its developers said an alternative is needed. Wayland has differences that I won't discuss here, but I'll be happy to do so if you ask.

Hyprland is a wayland compositor. A compositor is basically an implementation of wayland (there are many) and gives you a windowing system that you can run graphical applications through. It is usually a lot more minimal than having a full graphical desktop like KDE or Gnome.

Hyprland belongs to a class of comositors called "tiling", which forces windows to be in a tiling formation. In other words, windows do not overlap or stack on top of each other. Hyprland stands out in having a lot of eye candy and visual effects.

I use CLI for moving files, etc. After you use it for a while, you find out it can be more efficient, faster, and more pleasant to work with.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 months ago

I have a feeling this is a joke. Either way I'm not following sorry 😭

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 17 points 6 months ago

A symlink works more closely to the first way you described it. The software opening a symlink has to actually follow it. It's possible for a software to not follow the symlink (either intentionally or not).

So your sync software has to actually be able to follow symlinks. I'm not familiar with how gdrive and similar solutions work, but I know this is possible with something like rsync

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

I didn't look much into void, but when I did, gentoo's repository is much larger and there are many packages that I'd call obscure that happen to be in the main repos.

The situations I've had to reach to guru are rare. I bet that gentoo has more obscure stuff in its main repo, though I don't have the numbers to prove it.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Any examples other than ocaml? From my understanding, ocaml's type strength may only be found in a couple other languages. Haskell, scala, and maybe Rust. Any others?

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

GURU is source only

Is void different? Does it have a user repository that provides binaries directly?

My familiarity is with AUR, which does not provide the binaries directly. I suppose you can write a PKGBUILD that only installs a binary, but you could do the same with ebuild.

On binary support, I imagine you're right. Binary support in gentoo is new. I imagine it will only get better.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Comparing cost to AWS Aurora is unfair. Give us the self host price, and compare to that.

Also, they should have tried Scylla or Cassandra. It's very scalable and handles a lot of writes.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

You already said it, but even if you want mostly binaries, gentoo is becoming a distribution that can do that. So I don't think this is something that sets them apart.

Plus, gentoo handles compilations so well, it is almost as simple as binary package managers.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 19 points 6 months ago

Why b-1 instead of just b votes? "because the vote could've otherwise went to B" well it could've also went to T, but I don't see you accounting for it as t-1.

This math has a double standard.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago

The author would likely really enjoy gentoo. Imo it has all those benefits and a little more, plus its more popular.

[-] cyclohexane@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago

I won't remember everything, but one very important things comes to mind:

in Typescript, it is very difficult to assert on a type (let me know if you're not familiar with what I mean by this and I can explain further). In OCaml, this is trivial using pattern matching.

Why would you need that? The idea of a type system is it doesn't let you apply a function on a structure without the structure being of the right type. But the lack of type assertion in TS makes people follow hacky workarounds, which defeat the purpose of type system.

There are a couple of other things, like immutable types by default, automatic tail call optimization, functors enabling higher kinded types, etc.

Also in ocaml, you don't have to annotate any types on any variable or parameter, and you'll still get full type protection.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

cyclohexane

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF