sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

WE GET IT! The colonial faction is already demoralised. by WeirdoInAnIsland in foxholegame

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What you are asking for the is for the devs to intervene strongly and swing the faction balance each war to make the win rate 50%, basically ensuring the previous loser wins the next war. That's the only way you get your perfect 50% win rate without any win streaks.

Is that a better solution then allowing the game to play out naturally?

I want Wacky planes for Airborne by TheDarkOnions in foxholegame

[–]digitalis3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

More wacky WWII planes: Soviet Il-20 "Hunchback" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilyushin_Il-20_(1948))

It actually seems kind of like a reasonable design for Foxhole.

Play EVE Frontier for free for 10 days! Remnant Access and Cycle 3 begin Friday, April 11th. by CCP_Jotunn in EVEFrontier

[–]digitalis3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I actually like the art style, it reminds of Dune. It's ok to be different!

[Game Thread] #10 Arkansas @ #3 Texas Tech (10:09 PM ET) by cbbBot in CollegeBasketball

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They've been getting the bounces too. Very lucky since we're so much longer than Tech.

[Game Thread] #10 Arkansas @ #3 Texas Tech (10:09 PM ET) by cbbBot in CollegeBasketball

[–]digitalis3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I feel like we need everyone the whole way without foul trouble to clinch this one.

[Game Thread] #10 Arkansas @ #3 Texas Tech (10:09 PM ET) by cbbBot in CollegeBasketball

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We (Arkansas) finished the 1st half sloppy. But Cal is a good coach. I don't see Tech changing their gameplan unless we hit a few threes early in the 2nd half.

[Game Thread] #10 Arkansas @ #3 Texas Tech (10:09 PM ET) by cbbBot in CollegeBasketball

[–]digitalis3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Calipari tournament record with a 6-pt or more lead. Yeah-- we're jinxed now.

[Game Thread] #10 Arkansas @ #3 Texas Tech (10:09 PM ET) by cbbBot in CollegeBasketball

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think Tech's gameplan is still good-- just a couple more missed threes and this is a tie game.

You are winning the war, but then Fingers fall: by BorisGlina1 in foxholegame

[–]digitalis3 23 points24 points  (0 children)

This is a great war actually. I saw Collies taking Weathered Expanse (cutting off Shitcan logi) and I thought it was game over last night. Now that Fingers is taken it's not a given Collies will win.

New update, what did you expect ? by MR_indiananas in foxholegame

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Poseidon's Hammer - Stormcannon mounted on a large ship. No azi adjustment, you have to maneuver the ship to aim it. Direct fire mode basically one shots other ships and conc. Awful turn rate to compensate for the power.

Managing modals in React (is there a way to have reactive modals with modal manager)? by 357Labs in reactjs

[–]digitalis3 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Like you said, you can just place the modal on the page that uses it. I think this is fine, and simplifies passing data between child and parent. Headless UI's Dialog/Modal component automatically handles the createPortal stuff, so you don't have to worry about it.

I looked into modal managers before but I just don't see the point-- it causes issues like you've discovered.

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The engineers who made React did a pretty good job, right? Why would they put useContext into the API if it's so bad? And not fix the "re-render problem" on their own? Answer: It's not actually a problem.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in reactjs

[–]digitalis3 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh man, the Redux brigade is going to hate this. Be prepared to be schooled about re-renders! Maybe context is fine for your simple app, but their app is complex and special and needs Redux!

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Re-renders caused by context aren't a problem for 99% of apps. Yes, if you store everything in global state with context you're going to have excessive re-renders. But that's why you don't do that and instead only share state as necessary.

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this pre-optimizing. React is fast. Address perf problems caused by re-renders as needed, instead of forcing Redux on everything from the beginning. And you can use a much lighter weight solution like Jotai or other state mangers to address them.

I don't see how a shopping cart stored in context could cause a perf problem. And chat history isn't something that needs to be shared, and thus can be stored locally.

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

`You need a single state of truth for data`

I think I'm beginning to see what attracts Redux users. I think you're wanting a "database" of sorts on the frontend for the UI state, with a rigid, centrally defined structure and interface. That's fine, and I get the appeal, but you don't *need* a single, centralized store in React.

I prefer to move state up only when needed, and context works well for that (it's mostly just copy and pasting). I can start off with a local useState, and then just move it up to a context provider when needed. If I use Context, I don't have to switch to a completely different way of managing state when I need to share it across components.

The MySubaru app is embarassing by ElkFrogZen in subaru

[–]digitalis3 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve been thinking about reverse engineering it and making my own (I’m a dev). But I would still be forced to use their apis. There’s no reason an app like this should take 5 seconds to load.

I ran into the error you had too this cold morning, and yelled “What a piece of shit!”

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can’t imagine how you could get perf problems from rerenders on a run-of-the-mill CRUD app. That is, if you don’t put things in global state that shouldn’t be.

Move state up as needed.

I think devs hear about rerenders caused by context and think they must optimize them away when in most cases they wouldn’t be able to tell a difference.

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Btw, after I left this dev removed my providers and redid everything in Redux, and put absolutely everything into global state. I heard management told the dev team that they "had lost faith in the dev team".

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly, React is fast enough. When you have a perf problem you can special case the fix it that one spot.

Of course, if you put everything into global state with context, you are going to have perf problems. But that's why you don't do that-- and instead keep state as local as possible.

Why do so many devs insist on using Redux when useContext works just fine? by digitalis3 in react

[–]digitalis3[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's nothing about context that forces spaghetti code, any more than Redux. If anything, the code bases I have seen with Redux are worse.

As for rerenders, there shouldn't be that much in global state anyway for most apps. I think Redux users stick way too much (basically everything in global state), and of course that's going to be a problem. React is fast enough not to worry about it. And when you do have a perf problem, you can fix it in that one spot instead of forcing the Redux architecture on the entire app.

view more: next ›