I felt the same - have to relearn/lookup everything every time I went back to a project or wanted to do some operations that are simple to describe in SQL but I couldn't wrap my mind around e.g. using multi-indexed dataframes & aggregations properly. These days, I always jump to Polars instead of Pandas - much more intuitive and consistent API. Tons of props to Pandas for all that they did (and continue to do) in the data space, but their API did not evolve very well IMO.
I've also been wanting to play with Ibis[1] recently, but Polars has been sufficient for me.
I do the same, though my muscle memory is `1=1` instead of `true`.
Of course then you get editors/linters/coworkers that always point out that the 'true' is unnecessary. This also doesn't work with ORs (just swap to false), but in practice it seems it is always ANDs that is being used.
Sharding, pre-allocating leases of blocks of tickets across available resources, and eventual consistency. You don't need to keep the UX transactionally correct; you are able to say "0 tickets remaining" and then a minute or hour or day later say "100 tickets remaining". For something as popular as Taylor Swift, the fans will keep checking.
I would also say that could account for the download count differences between the projects. Django may still be used for more monolithic applications whereas Flask and FastAPI may be the choices for smaller-scoped microservices resulting in 10x downloads.
No negative connotation is intended here for "monolithic". On the contrary, if the above assumption is at all true, it highlights a overhead cost of individual microservices.
This type of stance is what de-popularized the Elm language.
Don't get me wrong - I wish the best for both languages and am thoroughly impressed by the work of their creators. I can see that it must be a hard thing to balance.
Java Mission Control [0] has a button to toggle for displaying the profile as thread roots or method roots for this purpose. I am not imaginative enough to come up with a visualization that shows both (maybe utilize background color or another indicator to show the leaf function's relative frequency in the other direction?). Either way, both directions have their use case when investigating.
As a university project I created a Morse code transmitter and receiver circuit that used the same type of LED on both sides. It worked pretty well up to a few inches apart.
I assume this is a good spot to give a shout-out for the Grimm, Grimmer, Grimmest podcast - kid-friendly story-telling podcast great for long car rides. The author likes to point out deviations between original stories and later re-tellings. I believe the first 2 seasons are free.
This is an excellent podcast for children (and adults!). It used to be season 1 was available on podcast platforms, seasons 2-4 required a subscription, which I’ve gotten both through Apple and Pinna (different years).
I would say the reverse is true though - great teachers are able to spark interest on a subject that students may otherwise not care about. But I agree that that expectation shouldn't be the baseline.
Except making a subject interesting, at least for K-12, should be a baseline, no? (With success in early years making it easier to maintain high interest in later years.)
The most important thing you can teach about anything is an interest in it - otherwise what is retention going to be?
Or to turn it around, introducing subject after subject that students find boring, confusing, stressful or frustrating is a fantastic way to ensure they avoid anything to do with the fields, knowledge and skills we deem most important for a well prepared life.
I do agree that this isn’t a baseline to apply to each teacher in isolation, without the rest of the ecosystem supporting them. Textbooks, other materials and class aids, all supporting the emotional highs of learning, not just prioritizing a material to be covered on a test, etc.
At the university level, professors should be able to expect an opt-in self-selected and self-motivated level of interest for subjects.
Especially if grade school has prepared highly curious excited to learn students. As apposed to subject avoidance or apathy.
I agree, and I may have downplayed the importance a pedagogy a bit too much. I’ve experienced first hand, and also see with my kids, the profound difference that a great teacher or coach can have on the pupils.
But a great teacher is not necessary to find a topic interesting, nor sufficient to spark interest in everyone who lacks interest.
I've also been wanting to play with Ibis[1] recently, but Polars has been sufficient for me.
[1] https://ibis-project.org/