This isn’t an argument against the standard way of doing things, it is an argument to follow the xdg standard, and use xdg environment variables, rather than creating a new unconfigurable directory in $HOME.
I recently wanted to try out (aider)[https://aider.chat], and ran into a problem that I continually run into: how do I install one-off, experimental software into my environment, without being a nix master, or spending an extreme amount of time on every new package.
In this case, it is a new python package available in pip. It isn't available in nixpkgs, and isn't nixified. pip2nix doesn't work on arm64 Macs (bug here)[https://github.com/nix-community/pip2nix/issues/88], so I can't use that to try and create a flake that works with this package. It isn't using poetry, so poetry2nix is out.
How are you dealing with this problem? Are you all experts in nix, and writing flakes for every piece of software that you want to play around with? Do you have a "dirty" part of your environment that you install this kind of stuff into? (I looked into using pipx to install this, however that (also has a bug)[https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/171429] in nixpkgs.)
Thoughts?
Hanging out in bed browsing Thangs on mobile.
I can get STLs, my slicer settings are pretty set and forget, I should be able to just upload an STL or a few, say “fill the plate” and go, without pulling out mg laptop.
It might be pretty lazy, but it isn’t crazy.
Acetone is fine.
This is actually one of my pet peeves. Acetone is far from the “universal plastic solvent” that it has as a reputation…
Ultem, aka pei actually does great with acetone: https://www.astisensor.com/ultem.pdf.
I use acetone pretty regularly on my sheets and I haven’t noticed any bad effects. Usually it is best to use soap and water, acetone and isopropyl alcohol. If things won’t stick, do all three (in that order).
Yea, it is losing the forest for the trees. Next should be taught as part of iterators and for loops. It makes sense there. It doesn’t really stand on its own much.
To be honest, I’m not sure why it is a built in function… I feel like saying that python calls the ‘next’ function of your class when iterating is enough. But maybe I’m missing something.
All ‘next’ does is call ‘next’, which is part of the spec for ‘iterator’s.
Iterables return iterators when ‘iter’ is called on them. So they don’t need to support ‘next’ natively, their corresponding iterator does that.
The value of cargo and go tools doesn’t come from the all-in-one nature of them, it comes from the official nature of them.
If something doesn’t work with cargo, it is a bug. Period. There isn’t any “it works with pip” back and forth arguing over whose fault it actually is (package? Or poetry/pipenv/pip-tools/conda/etc? This happened with pytorch a while ago, and I’m not sure if poetry and pytorch get along even now)
There also isn’t any debate over project files or configuration stuff — Pyproject.toml vs setup.cfg vs random dot files in the project directory — if you are a currently developed project you support whatever cargo supports and you move to support the latest format rather than dragging your feet for years (pyproject.toml has been the “next thing” for python since 2016! And is only finally getting widespread support now… 7 years later).
A Voron 0.1 with a 0.2 gantry and a Voron 2.4 with a 2.4r2 gantry (currently being upgraded to canbus and stealthburner).
They are different though, and the article doesn’t go into why they are different, which I think is a major omission (though a common one in articles about this subject).
The difference is that lambda functions are late binding, while partial functions are bound when they are created. This can lead to all sorts of hard to find bugs when using lambdas that are avoided by using partials.