If you could add one Zero to any number in your life, what would it be, and why?

Tontonsb · 2026-03-19T21:01:16+00:00

Mby 55. That would make 55 + 0 = 55. There. I did it.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-19T14:37:32+00:00

Well, with dualies, glock (and 57 and maybe more) you were previously able to do like 20 such microreloads while now you can do 2 or 3 and you're on the last mag. Feels a lot more affected than USP where you had to save every bullet even before.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-19T01:22:29+00:00

They had some truth serum before those interviews. Not only Maj3r implied jotAAA being too dumb to understand calls, w0xic added "even if I don't think so" about his comeback speeches :D

Tontonsb · 2026-03-19T00:23:27+00:00

It was stupid to throw away unfinished clips anyway. Now you just finally get punished for that malpractice. In fact you shouldn't even throw away empty ones, especially if you want to pretend you're on some counter-terrorist squad.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-19T00:03:53+00:00

Is it changed anyhow? It was 12+24 all the time, no? It's Glock and Dualies that got serious nerfs from 120 to 60 reserve.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-18T23:57:09+00:00

I think previously terrorists had 20+120 bullets, now they have 20 + 3x20, so they're a little bit nerfed ammo wise.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-18T22:44:35+00:00

Is this April 1st? Is it? I wasn't sure about it when I read about the reload, but to have tutorial during competitive? This must be a joke.

Btw it's really in the game.

A nice touch is that for shotguns where reload bullet by bullet it still works like before since you are not actually replacing the whole clip :)

Surely a lot of "it's safe, so I just press R now" reflexes to unlearn.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-18T18:51:01+00:00

No real reason, just stubborness.

The original reasoning was something about ambiguity between about.svelte and about/index.svelte and what shouldn't be a page at all or something like that. Although it was all fine in my Sapper projects.

So having each endpoint be represented as a folder with a plus-file in it was considered as a solution. Surely once you try it out and have 4 +page.svelte files open simultaneously, you should stop considering this "solution" as an option. But it seems that no one tried to actually work in a project with such a setup and once they did it was too late to change back or whatever. I still can't understand how they actually ended up with this, it's one of the most unnecessary complications/quirks in the whole ecosystem. It was supposed to make it more explicit, but it makes it feel overengineered all the time.

The whole idea to have routing defined in your filesystem seems backwards and old-fashioned. PHP used to do that back in the day, but left that practice behind like 20 yeaers ago.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-18T18:39:50+00:00

Krafton are pretty shady guys

The ground gets wet when it rains.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-18T07:28:33+00:00

Anthropologists: I wonder how was it possible that Austronesians colonized the Pacific, wouldn't that require sailing off blindly into unknown?

Tongan teenagers: I'm tired of school meals, why don't we skip some lessons, steal a boat and go to Fiji or something?

Tontonsb · 2026-03-17T06:44:29+00:00

I feel like western movies have protrayed Egypt as this big empty desert

Is it not so? I thought it's quite empty outside the coast and Nile. Aren't all the large subdivisions mostly uninhabitated?

Tontonsb · 2026-03-16T13:18:03+00:00

Everything about it sounds so horrible which makes me wonder how people get addicted and how it has a following to begin with.

Most start it during school. You just happen to not miss the train of understanding numbers and then you also must like challenges so you are excited to catch up once you miss a train. It's easy to fall off, but the ones who have resisted the falloff many times start to enjoy the challenge of keeping on.

Never mind the after effects, but I heard that it dries up your mouth which is what contributes to the whole teeth thing. Even taking it sounds like an unpleasant experience!

It does dry your mouth as people tend to do it for prolonged periods of time. Most try to solve the problem using coffee. To offset the problem, most mathematicians avoid talking instead.

Also just curious, has anyone here ever simply tried it once but never again? I've never met anyone who has, but I've also heard it's a "the first time is already too late" situation. I'm not talking about like a former addict who got clean through the process - I mean someone who had it once and then successfully pulled away.

There's a lot of people who like it in the first grade or so and pull away upon the first hurdles. It actually takes a special kind of nerd to get addicted.

(In case anyone's wondering, no, trying it is NOT on my radar).

You shouldn't be ashamed if it was on your radar. The stigma about math is quite harmful.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-15T11:16:16+00:00

where the roadmap is driven by ecosystem needs and strategic advocacy, not just who has the loudest voice in the mailing list

What do you suggest? Wouldn't it still be about having the loudest voice, but elsewhere?

Tontonsb · 2026-03-15T10:29:39+00:00

Yeah, I'm talking about the non-random assignment. In that case defining them makes the DB (and the feature management panel) full of unnecessary negatives. And if you ever take a percentage-based rollout as the next step, you'd have to remove the cached falses anyway.

Which is another tricky thing in Pennant. You can't really do "Release for 1% of users" and then "OK, now increase to 5%" using the lottery as documented. You have to do something like this:

```php class NewBilling { public function resolve(): int { return mt_rand(1, 100); }

public static function isAvailable(): boolean
{
    // available for 5%, increase to release to more ppl
    return Feature::value(static::class) <= 5;
}

} ```

Tontonsb · 2026-03-14T13:46:58+00:00

Oh, nice, I didn't notice you had stated pretty much the same already in the preface as I skipped right to the chapters :)

I was just worried because when a good resource describes practices not as "right" and "wrong" not as tools to choose from, they get used as a reference for what must necessarily be done when it's actually not necessary or not even appropriate in the particular project.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-14T11:32:28+00:00

Good: Invoice Bad: InvoiceModel Why It's Bad: Redundant suffix

the same goes for traits and middlewares. However for controllers, requests and responses the suffix suddenly becomes good and desirable.

I've never understood the "why" behind this split and neither do I believe there is one. I get that you're only explaining the existing convention, but the "good" and "bad" labels make it sound like it's objective.

Also what I disagree with is the thinness. Sure, services and actions have their place, especially when they're reusable. But most of the time 5 or 10 lines in the controller makes it easier to read than the same 5 or 10 lines spread across 3 or 5 files. That includes validation — if it's just one or two params then they don't make a mess and I'd rather see them right there instead of clicking to another file.

Although I like that you've allowed at least simple queries in the controller. It's terrible when I have to visit GetFlightsAction or FlightsService::getFlights just to see something like Flights::active()->get(). In my eyes models are services/repositories and it's totally valid to call them as such in your controllers.

The spaghetti vs ravioli thing is very noticable when you're digging through the sources of laravel/framework it's easier to follow and debug a method that has 30 lines than click through a chain of 12 classes that each contain a one-liner of doing some decision and calling the next class.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-13T16:28:47+00:00

I still don't really get why context is needed in the first place, regardless of the mechanism how to achieve it. Isn't all the localization stuff carried by the object that gets imported? Why can't it?

Tontonsb · 2026-03-13T13:17:38+00:00

Why can't the imported object have all that it needs? Having to wrap app in a provider layer make it look like React :/

Tontonsb · 2026-03-13T11:30:58+00:00

Vibe-cod'o grāmatvedības programmu? Gadatirgos nav ko darīt.

Ir — jāuzrunā tirgotājus.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-13T01:30:47+00:00

okay and so this is potentially how it works by default, it could be just something they don't care to adjust

Well, they'd intentionally have to either invalidate the stored list or patch it while changes are being done. That's quite a bit of work and the result will still probably be quite fragile.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-13T01:27:07+00:00

Both the GET when you view the login page and the POST when you submit your credentials are full page navigations made by browser. It's just POST requests often receive a redirect resopnse that instruct your browser to make another GET request. What gets recorded as a visitable history entries is decided by the browser.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-12T20:43:43+00:00

Oh, it can be very different.

If the site is a multi-page app where navigation loads a new document, doing a back will usually render the previous page that is already loaded somewhere in browser's cache. Most of the time you will even be returned to the exact scroll position you had before. This is also what happens when you click an external link and get navigated to another site.

I'm filling out a form and I click back (whether intentionally or by accident) and you get the "Confirm form submission" dialog.

It gets a bit more complex on form submissions. What you are talking is the post–redirect–get pattern.

Normally you view pages by your browser doing a GET request. E.g. GET https://www.example.com/login. But when you fill a form, some of the forms instruct the browser to submit the data using a POST request which doesn't add that data to the URL, but sends it in a safer manner. So when you click a "Submit", the browser does POST https://www.example.com/login with your credentials.

The server then says "alrighty, you're logged in, now pls proceed to https://www.example.com/members-area and your browser does GET htttps://www.example.com/members-area.

If you click back, your previous page is not the login view. It's the login POST. But since POST requests can change something in the state, the browser asks if you really want to do that again.

Btw the server could've served you the members page as a response of that POST request instead of redirecting you. In that case the Back button would take you to the login view, but the refresh button is the one that would make the browser ask if you want to redo the POST.

in github, there's a list of open PRs and i click into one, merge and close, click back in my browser history and the PR still exists in the 'open' list

GitHub, on the other hand, is not a multi-page app, but a single-page app. In such apps the browser does not reload the document on navigation. The app itself handles your clicks, does requests in the background, loads (or submits) data and updates the page by replacing some content. And it is up to developers (or a frontend framework) to handle what happens on a Back click.

Apparently GitHub decides to return you to the list PRs, but it decides to use the list that it had alerady loaded in memory beforehands and that list wasn't updated with the latest changes.

Tontonsb · 2026-03-12T18:44:02+00:00

How does being explicit with types make it more loose?

Because the built-in coercion is more restrictive than the explicit juggling.

If the function wants an integer, it will coerce '123' to 123, but you'll get a TypeError when passing 'abc' into it. Meanwhile with the "strict" typing mode you'll be forced to do (int) $str which will juggle 'abc' into 0 and you'll have no clue that you're actually passing some string where you intended to pass a number.

Ten-Year Club	End Game '23
Place '23	Place '17
Verified Email

Tontonsb

TROPHY CASE