I'm still not sure if function coloring is also a problem in javascript. The problem became very clear in other languages like python or c#. But in javascript i've been writing code only awaiting a function when I need to and haven't ran into issues. I might write some simple experiment to check myself.
In c#/python you are forced to await the whole chain, the compiler forces you. While in javascript it allows me without a warning. That's why it seems as if things work differently in javascript, if it allows me to (not) use await freely. (I don't remember if c# was just a warning or an error).
No. It is best to verify assumptions first before presenting them as facts. It is irritating to see this everywhere as the quality of discussion keeps going down.
In order to get the result of a promise in JS you have to await it (or chain it with 'then', much like .NET's 'ContinueWith' although it is usually discouraged). Consumption of tasks in .NET follows a similar pattern.
Async implementations in .NET and Python have also vastly different performance implications (on top of pre-existing unacceptable performance of Python in general).
The analyzer gives you a warning for unawaited tasks where not awaiting task indicates a likely user error.
Which is why if you want to fire and forget a task, you write it like '_ = http.PostAsync(url, content);` - it also indicates the intention clearly.
I never quite got to fix my issues with firefox stopping playing my radio stream after changing songs. It just happens occasionally though I haven't tried recently to see if the problem is still there. At some point I thought liquidsoap cured this but it didn't. Also when I was into that, I got the feeling most of the internet didn't care about radio streams anymore since video streaming is the standard.
Implementing choice is superior. Not only can your program be capable of more actions, but the process of thinking about how to include these features leads to focusing on your codebase which leads to refactoring, better code. With time the code becomes so flexible that adding features is easy, because your foundation is superior. And in the process other core functionality gets fixed and becomes better.
I find multiple cursors very useful, a must-have. However I think there needs to be more "safety" around them. It's very easy to accidentally have multiple cursors active without you knowing, and the next thing you type changed something you didn't intend to. I would appreciate if there was some sort of lock I can apply to multiple cursors, to only use them when I need them and when I'm aware that I'm using them.
> However I think there needs to be more "safety" around them. It's very easy to accidentally have multiple cursors active without you knowing ...
Relatedly, if you've created cursors across many lines (or more lines than fit in your viewport), and for whatever reason you want to move all the cursors to the start or end of lines, you want to press Home/End not once, but twice, due to to possible word wrapping on lines outside your view. I've lost nontrivial work by making this mistake!
