andioop

I actually wrote it just once. It acquired the space like this:

I concatenate a bunch of strings together, and add a comma and space between them so I could get stringOne, stringTwo, stringThree etc. I later need to decompose that. I remembered I separated stuff with a comma, but forgot about the space following the comma and that is how I ended up having to deal with " NameHere" vs "NameHere" without having actually written NameHere several times in my code. Is there a better way to go about this?

I have also just read my post again and it explicitly contradicts "I actually wrote it just once". Not sure if I did write it multiple times and merely forgot as I typed this comment and claimed to write it just once, or if I just pretended I wrote it multiple times when it was only once so I could simplify explaining my problem. For the purpose of my question though, let us pretend I did write it once. I promise I am aware that strings that are frequently used should be made constant, although I could use more specifics on what "frequently used" is (more than once?) and I'm wondering if you actually should not really use strings at all and always go for constants.

Not sure if this question is too noobish for !programming@programming.dev so I posted it here just in case.

I am oddly charmed by the drawing, did you make it yourself?

While we're here the quote is displaying

like this for me, made with >>

instead of like this, made with just one >

However, as I discovered to my cost, TiddlyWiki has never had a strong “start here,” because it is not tailored to one specific task. Obsidian, by comparison, has the advantage of a clear vision of what it does. TiddlyWiki bewilders you with options at first because it hasn’t been designed to be sold. The community focus is on adapting it to different use cases.

So I’m going to take the advice in this explainer and use TiddlyDesktop while mentioning that there are plenty of other arrangements. It is, after all, just HTML and JavaScript. Let’s get started…

You wrote this part twice in your post.

Cool tool though!

Name would not be enough to stop me from using it but TiddlyWiki absolutely sounds stupid. It's probably a play off "tiddlywinks" but that also sounds stupid. It's something I'd cringe saying. I might unabashedly type out my recommendation with the name to a friend or send a link to it, but would try to dodge saying the name in an in-person conversation.

This hurts spread. One of the primary ways I find new software is by word of mouth from friends in-person (somehow I have an easier time ignoring or brushing off suggestions that are texted to me, and I take ones made in-person more seriously. I have no idea why), and I usually end up sticking with whatever they recommended.

Also, what do you mean, OP, by "do you have perfect recall or an average human byte"? Are you thinking of information in terms of bits and that people can only keep a limited amount of things in working memory at a time?

For people reading this thread later on, this post and this post elaborate a little more on why to avoid the book "Clean Code".

The trouble with this is where do you draw the line? What you say is totally true and makes sense sometimes. The question is when is it actually that situation? I can imagine two situations:

• one where the disliked opinion is "the Nazis were right", and where the kicked person will probably argue back with

opposite of their own CoC terms such as tactful, respectful, safe and inclusive. Instead the opinions they don’t like are weaponized using the other negative terms they list such as anti-social, unhelpful, trolling, controversial etc.

as a way to try to legitimize their position, express their negative feelings at being excluded (because even if you're a bad person, being excluded feels bad), and make the ban look to others like "oh, just a power-trip by bad management" and totally unjustified. Note that they might legitimately believe it is unjustified, that they probably are not twirling a mustache thinking in strategic terms of "how can I legitimize my position" and are just expressing their hurt feelings—but those are the things that happen when you make that argument.

• one where the disliked opinion is "I don't like dogs", which absolutely does not warrant a kick except maybe in a panel of judges of a dog competition or something, where the part I quoted is a good representation of the situation—people are being intolerant when they should not be, the kicked person's grievance is legitimate, and there might be a case of just personal dislike or power-tripping affecting the decision. When they argue with

opposite of their own CoC terms such as tactful, respectful, safe and inclusive. Instead the opinions they don’t like are weaponized using the other negative terms they list such as anti-social, unhelpful, trolling, controversial etc.

it is actually probably valid.

There are some actions/opinions where the view on whether it is the former situation or the latter situation is… controversial/unclear. I always wonder what happens when it is that kind of situation and how to deal with it.

What show is this?

I enjoyed this animation of the meme in the OP.

I think that would be a great situation to be in.

You have created a cool thing a lot of people use, by being good at something. You've done something.

Also, people have no idea who you are. Nobody is digging through your trash, harassing the people you love, taking pictures of you wherever you go including on your bad hair days, etc. You're just some guy.