Slotos

Laws of Ukraine explicitly state that elections cannot be held in a wartime. These provisions are older than current presidency and parliament.

Claim to illegitimacy due to refused elections is the best way to tell everyone you gobble up Russian propaganda.

Occupying a country that size doesn’t take a mere week. So no, it won’t.

I failed miserably.

Do the second iteration!

Oh yeah, please do imagine there is no such thing as a time zone.

On an ellipsoid!

You’re one link click away from understanding why your message is stupid. Question is whether it’s message alone.

Or Star Control 2 Hyperspace theme.

Ah, I didn’t get that impression myself, but looking at the article again I can see it.

The author clearly doesn’t realize that they still mock in their examples. I understand the annoyance with mocking away the complexity, however.

To address your second claim - doing IO in tests does not mean testing IO.

I test my file interactions by creating a set of temporary directories and files, invoking my code, and checking for outcomes. That way I can write my expectation before my implementation. This doesn’t test IO, merely utilizes it. The structure in temp that I create is still a mock of an expected work target.

Very similarly I recently used a web server running in another thread to define expectations of API client’s behavior when dealing with a very ban-happy API. That web server is a mock that allowed me to clearly define expectations of rate limiting, ssl enforcement (it is a responsibility of an API client to initialize network client correctly), concurrency control during OAuth refreshes etc., without mocking away complexities of a network. Even better, due to mocking like that I was able to tinker with my network library choice without changing a single test.

Mocks in the general sense that author defined them are inevitable if we write software in good faith - they express our understanding and expectation of a contract. Good mocks make as few claims as possible, however. A networking mock should sit in the network, for example, lest it makes implied claims about the network transport itself.

Individual rights get eroded if people don’t keep the good fight. The hope for a system that can prevent the amassing of power in the hands of a few through no effort by the many is entitled childishness personified.

Thorium reactors have a cleverly dumb failsafe. If reactor control fails, there’s a plug that melts and drains the contents into a container that’s not fit for runoff neutron generation.

That’s an example of a failsafe that fits its purpose. It’s still possible to fuck it up, but it would take a lot of effort to do so.

And if there’s a bug in that code, you’re fucked.

Safety features should work if everything else fails. Their failure mode can’t be “fuck it, it didn’t work”. Which is directly opposite to the failure mode of a subscription based service.