Looking at your instance handle, I hope/assume that your comment is supposed to be in lighthearted jest. However that would only be an assumption on my part and in general it’s not ok to say someone’s job/work tool is for [remarks directed at sex, gender, ethnicity, orientation, disabilities, etc…] per CoC 3.5.

Please take into consideration that members on this instance may be of different backgrounds than what you’re used to and interpets what you say differently. Further breaches of our Code of Conduct may lead to temporary or permament ban.

deleted by creator

Please refrain from harassing our users, keep whatever argument you have contained to the thread it started. Following and harassing users across communities/instances is not tolerated.

You will only be given a temporary ban of one week from our instance, but if it continues after that it will changed to a permanent ban.

While we have opened up community creation for users, please refrain from misusing the feature.

Also, as specified in our code of conduct, try to avoid personal attacks. @Lmaydev@programming.dev

Please refrain from using slurs and disparage people for no good reason on our instance.

The person has previously been warned to stopped posting links to the site. They’ve now been given a temp ban, if that doesn’t deter them, they’ll be given a permanent ban and we might ban the site from our instance.

Please refrain from using personal insults in this community. You’re free to express your opinion, but personal insults does nothing but make the community more toxic. c/programming is a gathering ground for both inexperienced and experienced programmers, so this level of lashing out is uncalled for.

Appreciate the offer, but we want to try to avoid another situation with reports not being seen by mods for weeks.

Added as moderator

Added as a moderator, we will likely add at least one more if there are more volunteers showing up.

programming.dev will migrate over to (lemmy compatible) Sublinks once it’s ready, which will feature a different set of mod features. For that reason we will need new moderators to have an active programming.dev account. If you’re willing keep an active user account on our instance let me know. We would prefer people we know will actively use their mod account to make sure reports are handled in a timely manner.

If you believe it’s an bug with our instance, try making a post over at !meta@programming.dev . Posting here is unlikely to grab the attention of an admin unless the post gets reported (which it did). Before that though, look up if isn’t just the more likely scenario of a general lemmy bug/quirk caused by mismatched lemmy versions, etc…

You can, but you may need to edit some registers to avoid windows reseting them.

match isn’t a protected keyword like if is.

match = 0
match match:
    case 0:
        print(0)
    case _:
        print(1)

Is legal and will give print out 0.

That’s interesting, thanks for the reply

Might as well start with a solid foundation from the start though. The extra work is minimal so there isn’t much of a time cost to it. I wouldn’t call it overengineering, it’s just a different way to write code, and the way many naturally default to without really thinking about it.

Those doesn’t break backwards compatibility though. Naturally you can’t use match with a python 3.7 interpreter, but what scripts written for python 3.7 wouldn’t work with a 3.11 interpreter?

I haven’t encountered that issue before, so I’m curious what those problems OP have encountered looks like.

That honestly makes me curious, what issues have you encountered when upgrading your python(3) version?

I get the point the author is coming from. When I was teaching first year engineering students programming, the one on the left is how everyone would write, it’s simply how human intuitively think about a process.

However, the one on the right feels more robust to me. For non trivial processes with multiple branches, it can ugly real quick if you haven’t isolated functionalities into smaller functions. The issue is never when you are first writing the function, but when you’re debugging or coming back to make changes.

What if you’re told the new Italian chef wants to have 15 different toppings, not just 2. He also got 3 new steps that must be done to prepare the dough before you can bake the pizza, and the heat of the oven will now depend on the different dough used. My first instinct if my code was the one on the left, would be to refactor it to make room for the new functionality. With the one on the right, the framework is already set and you can easily add new functions for preparing the dough and make a few changes to addToppings() and bake()

If I feel too lazy to write “proper” code and just make one big function for a process, I often end up regretting it and refactoring it into smaller, more manageable functions once I get back to the project the next day. It’s simply easier to wrap your head around

bakePizza() 
box()```
than reading the entire function and look for comments to mark each important step. The pizza got burned? Better take a look at `bakePizza()` then.

All it took for me to switch to GitLab was a larger free lfs quota which I wanted for a project. The superior webpage UI made me migrate every old project to it too.