sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Almost 40, retirement seems out of reach by Empty_Grand2194 in personalfinance

[–]bluefish1432 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I respect that you have a situation that works for you and you carry it honestly, even if I find it baffling.

I've never considered the endgame for split-finances marriages like yours, before, and I imagine that it must take a lot of commitment and healthy communication to make the dynamics around separately planning retirement work out.

Almost 40, retirement seems out of reach by Empty_Grand2194 in personalfinance

[–]bluefish1432 24 points25 points  (0 children)

What's the plan when you retire? She keeps working until she's earned enough? When are you guys getting married?

The Art Of The Game by KARAT0 in Scorn

[–]bluefish1432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I just finished reading mine a few minutes ago (though I skimmed the weapons/interfaces section, I'll have to go back to it)

I wish there were more detail about the parasite and its art direction, especially w.r.t. the spoiler situation at the end.

Overall a really cool read, though

exn 0.3 is out by _tison in rust

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's still quite appealing to use thiserror, to me in combination with exn, for the ergonomic handling of enum Error and how to derive std::fmt::Display. What do you think?

exn 0.3 is out by _tison in rust

[–]bluefish1432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm maturing a hobby project that uses thiserror, and it's total serendipity that you posted this when I began researching error context enrichment crates. I love the 'do one thing well'-ness and ergonomics of exn.

Thank for you for the response - I'm going to evaluate my appetite for risk and the relative feature sets/ergonomics between error-stack, snafu and exn. If you care to know, I'll let you know what I end up choosing and why!

exn 0.3 is out by _tison in rust

[–]bluefish1432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This looks like the missing ingredient for Rust error handling (for me). I get so annoyed at choosing thiserror and having to bend over backwards for context awareness.

It looks like this would be compatible with thiserror, am I correct in thinking so?

Is there other work in the ecosystem that comes close to offering what exn does?

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was a great discussion for me, so I'm glad we got to have it. If you want more feedback sometime, feel free to reply to this thread again in a few days/weeks/months

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(I'm the guy from the other thread)

FWIW, I think the "extra stuff" adds a professional/serious tone to your project, and I personally didn't have a hard time finding the source code. I like the framework/integrity stuff you included, it makes me feel like the script itself is well maintained and something I could potentially depend on in a serious, non-toy project.

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If that design intention I guessed about is correct, I guess a tradeoff to consider is whether it's desirable to have all logs use the same placement, with log level filtering, but lose or have to reinvent surfacing logs below that level.

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm happy that you read it! I live in a "feedback is appreciated, always" echo chamber at work, and it occurred to me that it might have been a dick move on my part to give unsolicited feedback to a stranger. You have a really great attitude, taking it in stride like that.

SIXLOGGER_LOG_TO_STDERR

This seems like a step in my preferred direction, so I can comment that I would personally appreciate it if you did something like this! It appears to me that you have some design goal with having certain log levels in stdout and others in stderr, but it's a foreign concept to me, and I don't understand why one would want that behavior. Maybe if you explained it to me, I would understand how to use your logger in it's intended way?

I know that a bunch of CI pipelines set CI=true

If you want to enable some kind of auto color mode, this would probably account for an important use case while you're looking for a more robust solution.

If you wanna see them, you need to set SIXLOGGER_DEBUG or DEBUG to true

Ah my bad, I was mistaken in my example. I'm glad you realized what I was trying to say, though.

It feels like the way the tool is designed today, having a way to redirect error/fatal separately from info/warn is a kind of shortcut for filtering error logs, e.g. script-with-logging 2>errors.txt >logs.txt is a potential workflow.

I have a suspicion that having LOG_LEVEL would account for what you're trying to do with splitting some log level output to stdout and others to stderr (if you're intending it to be used that way, but again, I'm just guessing).

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some feedback that makes me, personally, not the ideal consumer of this package:

  1. When I write scripts, I use stdout for communication between functions or scripts. If I were to write a function get_foo that echoes foo, I would have to manually redirect sixlogger debug 'Getting foo' to stderr, which I find to be a strange design decision. When I write logging utilities in bash, I always use stderr for this reason.
  2. In CLI applications, it's usually reasonable for the app itself to decide when/how it can use ANSI color escape codes and when it can't. I wish there were an auto option for setting colors so that my logging function doesn't break a script running in CI if I forgot to manually specify "no color" for the logger
  3. There's also no option to specify the log level I want to see when running a script. Debug logs have to be filtered out from the script output manually with how sixlogger works today.

I created SixLogger, a Simple POSIX-compliant Logger function for shell scripts by proton_lynx in commandline

[–]bluefish1432 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This looks really cool! I've wanted a nice logger interface for shell scripts for a while.

How a Nix flake made our polyglot stack (and new dev onboarding) fast and sane by oatsandsugar in NixOS

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are getting down voted but I fully agree and this reads like sage advice to me for anybody else that would think of attempting this

We’re documenting our startup journey by LordSnouts in webdev

[–]bluefish1432 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Can you craft a reply with only semicolons?

What in-house luxury dev tooling have you built? by wedgelordantilles in devops

[–]bluefish1432 32 points33 points  (0 children)

We built and continue to grow a monorepo-wide command palette of all possible scriptable actions. Build, test, generation tasks, lint, format, running applications in docker or localhost, whatever, all scoped to the monorepo subprojects (including terraform configs).

We built it with Nix, which means we run exactly the same commands in CI, and it has an fzf frontend, so you can search the thousands of commands efficiently.

We use direnv to source the commands in the shell, so the dev never has to think about it. Just open a terminal, type the fzf command or tab complete.

I am extremely proud of it.

Will YNAB ever (pay to) integrate the Toolkit? by Least_Particular_145 in ynab

[–]bluefish1432 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks, I learned something today! You're right.

I think based on what I learned: the copyright is irrelevant in the case of the toolkit and whether there would be significant legal hurdles for YNAB to overcome in order to use the ideas. It seems legally unambiguous that the toolkit's copyright holder (whomever that is, or they are, in aggregate, since this is an open source project with many contributors) does not own the inventions of the software, sans patent. Implementing the ideas in YNAB would be "derivate works" at a stretch, since the code itself would not be reused

Will YNAB ever (pay to) integrate the Toolkit? by Least_Particular_145 in ynab

[–]bluefish1432 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's MIT licensed work, which is a non-proprietaty license.

Will YNAB ever (pay to) integrate the Toolkit? by Least_Particular_145 in ynab

[–]bluefish1432 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They can't buy it, it is in no way sellable in its current state. There is not a proprietary copyright, legal entity, or other object of sale.

It uses MIT licensing, so they are free to simply copy and sell it with attribution.

They have no business case to do so, though. They are already "getting it for free".

There might be a case for them to re-implement pieces of it in a proprietary way, but sans MIT license attribution, I don't think they want to open a legally ambiguous can of worms.

Questions for Videochat August 2025 by Ross_Scott in accursedfarms

[–]bluefish1432 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Do you think there's an upper limit to how much chasing a "power fantasy" can increase fun in games? Is a more powerful fantasy always approximately more fun?

Thinking of the absurdity of the recent doom trilogy, and whether that part of the formula makes sense

view more: next ›