manually call the others

Yeah, most distros will set up source chains to make things nicer for users.

Yeah, I’d write this as a single update script with options to update vimplugins or update pkg or update all.

I see that you want it to be a function so you can get the chdir as a side effect, but mixing that with updating doesn’t make sense to me.

When in doubt, ~/.zshrc. It’s the right choice 99% of the time. Otherwise, there’s a chance you fuck up scripts you’ve installed which assume no shell options have been changed in non-interactive contexts.

What kind of functions do you write which you share between your scripts? Generally if I’m wanting to reuse a non-trivial function, I extend the functionality of the first script instead.

Select the color which matches the steps before filenames ((non-)login and (non-)interactive), then follow that arrow the rest of the way. There’s more colors in Bash because Bash makes a distinction between remote and local shells.

Another way to look at the same data for Zsh (note: $ZDOTDIR will be used instead of $HOME if it’s defined at any step along the way):

One confusion on the Bash side of the diagram is that you see branching paths into ~/.profile, ~/.bash_profile and ~/.bash_login. Bash will use for ~/.bash_profile, ~/.bash_login, and ~/.profile, in that order, and execute only the first one that exists and is readable.

CSS is turing conplete.

You could still NAT between v6’s though.

Like a normal horsey, but the square it leaves behind remains on fire, destroying the next piece to land on it.

Only the most recent square it was on remains on fire.

I care mostly about shell scripting, so I’m focusing on those bits. Via the HackerNews thread, mostly from a-french-anon:

• readlink and realpath
• find -print0, xargs -0 and read -d
• find -iname
• sed -E
• set -o pipefail
• $' ' strings

If you say “a 10d10”, I know what you mean, but “10d10” is definitely the sum of 10 10-sided dice.

Nope. If you open a nonexistent path and you have permissions to write to that directory, then that file is created.

If you’re looking for legitimate advice, you’re in the wrong community. Anarchychess is for chess memes.

That said, what my noob brain sees:

• it attacks white’s c pawn
• it activates black’s queen
• it prevents Qa4+, allowing black to castle

Edit: Qa4, not Qh4

Our group did a two-part Microscope-like after a “season” of 14 sessions to wrap up a ton of loose ends and set up the next season. It was super satisfying to zoom in on only what the players wanted to see and resolve.

Our first session of January is going to be another Microscope session too, we’ve got a giant pointcrawl to backtrack and see the fallout of our action or inaction.

Its incredibly common to be thrown by this. Like many memes, the original incarnations were to be taken at face value, but then a layer of irony got applied, and the ironic/self-deprecating variant became the norm.

You know, in some systems that’s a crit success!

I did about once a year until 2018 when I settled on Arch.

But now I’ve got a server on NixOS and loving it, so I might be switching my laptop soon.

xkb has been split off from Xorg, all Wayland compositors (that I know of) use it for mapping.

in the OP

My reply is to a commenter who said they prefer "${HOME}/docs" over both options in the original image ("$HOME/docs" or "$HOME"/docs). Many people prefer to always include braces around the parameter name out of consistency, instead of only when they are required.

My comment explained why my habit is to only include braces when they are necessary.

It’s interesting, the results here are way different than the Code Golf & Coding Challenges Stack Exchange. I would never expect Haskell to be that low. But after looking at code.golf, I realize it’s because I/O on CG&CC is more relaxed. Most Haskell submissions are functions which return the solution.

Sidenote: I like the CG&CC method, it’s semi-competitive, semi-cooperative.

• all languages welcome
• almost all users post “Try it Online”/“Attempt This Online” links
• most users post explanations under their submissions
• often people will post solutions beginning with “port of user1234’s excellent Foolang answer” when there’s a clever shortcut someone finds
• or people will post their own solution with “here’s a solution which doesn’t use user1234’s algorithm”
• or people will add comments to answers with minor improvements

IMO It’s geared towards what is the best part about code golf: teaching people about algorithm design and language design.

This has never stuck with me, and I hadn’t thought about why until now. I have two reasons why I will always write ${x}_$y.z instead of ${x}_${y}.z:

• Syntax highlighting and shellcheck have always caught the cases I need to add braces to prevent $x_ being expanded as ${x_}.
• I write a lot of Zsh. In Zsh, braces are optional in way more cases. "$#array[3]" actually prints the length of the third item in array, rather than (Bash:) the number of positional parameters, then the string 'array[3]'.