![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8d1d3e42-ea60-490a-a485-c62b13c101dd.jpeg)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/170721ad-9010-470f-a4a4-ead95f51f13b.png)
It’s the API’s job to validate it either way. As it does that job, it may as well parse the string as an integer.
No gods, no masters.
It’s the API’s job to validate it either way. As it does that job, it may as well parse the string as an integer.
That’s true, the Amazonians do need air raid sirens due to the chemical air attacks from entrepreneurial colonialists.
polyculture intensifies
The sound would make for a great emergency alarm system in case of natural disasters or air raids.
I invite all cheese lovers to try Adipocere.
Squashing
The
s
“squash” command is where we see the true utility of rebase. Squash allows you to specify which commits you want to merge into the previous commits. This is what enables a “clean history.” During rebase playback, Git will execute the specified rebase command for each commit. In the case of squash commits, Git will open your configured text editor and prompt to combine the specified commit messages. This entire process can be visualized as follows:
Note that the commits modified with a rebase command have a different ID than either of the original commits. Commits marked with pick will have a new ID if the previous commits have been rewritten.
https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/rewriting-history
You can also amend for a softer approach, which works better if you don’t push to remote after every commit.
The
git commit --amend
command is a convenient way to modify the most recent commit. It lets you combine staged changes with the previous commit instead of creating an entirely new commit. It can also be used to simply edit the previous commit message without changing its snapshot. But, amending does not just alter the most recent commit, it replaces it entirely, meaning the amended commit will be a new entity with its own ref. To Git, it will look like a brand new commit, which is visualized with an asterisk (*) in the diagram below.
You can keep amending commits and creating more chunky and meaningful ones in an incremental way. Think of it as converting baby steps into an adult step.
This is the kind of stuff the timber mafia needs to know so that they can efficiently pack trees and send them to IKEA.
Remember kids: publishing negative results is hard.
Isn’t this about the racism?
see: mpox
Blood loss from a deep cut of the palm amounts to about half of a soda can.
Who would use that kind of type coercion? Who? I want to see his face.
It’s like being drafted to a war while you only receive vague orders and you slowly realize what the phrase “war is a racket” means. You suffer and learn things that you didn’t plan on learning.
sortition all the way
It’s worse if you realize how many people have this sociopathic attitude as if they’re trying to literally speciate themselves and push their “inferiors” to extinction. Which is what this is, it’s a biological arms race, the same kind of shit non-European indigenous people had to deal with due to European settler-colonial activity.
Editors can act as filters, which is required when dealing with an excess of information streaming in. Just like you follow celebrities on social media or you follow pseudo-forums like this one, you get a service of information filtration which increases the concentration of useful knowledge.
In the early days of modern science, the rate of publications was small, make it easier to “digest” entire fields even if there’s self-publishing. The number of published papers grows exponentially, as does the number of journals. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333487946_Over-optimization_of_academic_publishing_metrics_Observing_Goodhart’s_Law_in_action/figures
Just like with these forums, the need for moderators (editors, reviewers) grows with the number of users who add content.
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-between-put-and-patch-request/