I like Common Lisp naming its super call 'call-next-method'. The problem with https://t.co/SFdvndHQEI() is that .foo is redundant.
miniblog.
Related Posts
I've been experimenting with different pagination UIs.
It's so common to have arrows, but I've realised they're redundant here. When you have the adjacent values as well as the final value, you don't need > and >> arrows too.
Thoughts?
I find myself using a "splatter then clean up" technique when working with code.
I add a ton of prints/logs/asserts/type annotations until I've found the issue. I then throw them all away!
It feels like redundant work, but I don't have a nicer solution.
On Unix being the default system even today, the value of understanding the incumbent, and the amount of redundant work in a boot process: https://www.sicpers.info/2015/01/and-in-the-end-there-will-be-the-command-line/

