Fraser Tweedale frasertweedale

Locate the section for your github remote in the .git/config file. It looks like this:

[remote "origin"]
	fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
	url = [email protected]:joyent/node.git

Now add the line fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/* to this section. Obviously, change the github url to match your project's URL. It ends up looking like this:

Using Atom on Fedora 20

This guide walks you through the steps of building and launching the Atom text editor on Fedora 20.

Building Atom

Install prerequisite packages

Fire up ghci. Make the text real big. Always show the types for everything as you go!

Takes ~1 hour generally.

Note: if you object to "uncertainty" (evocative of data/value flow possibilities), consider wording like "simultaneously possible values". It's a reference to how the compiler won't know whether Maybe a is a Just a or a Nothing statically. Don't blather at me about dependent types; I know.

Alternate verbiage for uncertainty: product - simultaneous altogetherness, sum - simultaneous singlehood. Also consider what the category theoretic diagrams look like. Can be instructive.

Suggestions taken under advisement.

Gerrit vs Github: for code review and codebase management

Sure, Github wins on the UI. Hands down. But, despite my initial annoyance with Gerrit when I first started using it almost a year ago, I am now a convert. Fully. Let me tell you why.

Note: This is an opinionated (on purpose) piece. I assume your preferences are like mine on certain ideas, such as:

Fast-forward submits to the target branch are better than allowing merge commits to the target branch. The reason I personally prefer this is that, even if a non-conflicting merge to the target branch is possible, the fact that the review/pull request is not up to date with the latest on the target branch means feature branch test suite runs in the CI pipeline reporting on the review/PR may not be accurate. Another minor point is that forced merge commits are annoying as fuck (opinion) and clutter up Git log histories unnecessarily and I prefer clean histories.
Atomic/related changes all in one commit is something worth striving for. Having your dev

	-- Is Set.union better than O(n+m) in some cases?

	import Criterion.Main (Benchmark, bench, bgroup, defaultMain, env, whnf)
	import Data.Set (Set, fromList, union)

	main :: IO ()
	main = defaultMain [ bgroup "union" $ map benchUnion sizes ]

	-- Grow Set size exponentially, under the hypothesis that
	-- Set.union will be O(log n) in this special case.

	{-# LANGUAGE GADTs #-}
	module Yolo where

	import System.IO.Unsafe

	class Yolo f where
	yolo :: f a -> a

	instance Yolo Maybe where
	yolo (Just x) = x

	Require Import List.
	Import ListNotations.

	Set Implicit Arguments.

	Fixpoint reverse (X: Type) (xs: list X): list X :=
	match xs with
	\| [] => []
	\| x :: xs' => reverse xs' ++ [x]
	end.

	{-# LANGUAGE NoMonomorphismRestriction #-}
	{-# LANGUAGE TemplateHaskell #-}
	{-# OPTIONS_GHC -fwarn-missing-methods #-}
	module Err where

	import Control.Lens
	import Control.Monad.Error
	import Control.Monad.Error.Lens

	-- Here is a fairly typical situation, where we have low level errors in certain

	{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}

	module SimpleThings where

	import Control.Applicative ((<$>), (<*>))
	import Control.Monad (mzero)
	import Data.Aeson
	import qualified Data.Aeson as A

	-- \| sum type containing all possible payloads

	The z in scalaz means this: it was early 2008 and I was working for a Java consultancy and so of course, I used the most appropriate tool for the job: scala. But it had terrible libraries, so I offered to fix those while also meeting my other objectives. Turns out that the Scala guys were extremely hostile to even half-decent libraries (and still are to this day). I still struggle to wrap my head around this sometimes.

	Anyway, so I thought, well fuck it, I will just keep them to myself for now. My (awesome) employer had already agreed that we'd probably open-source such a thing, but I was concerned most about my primary goal. So then it came time to "name" this library. I had named it "scalax" simply so that I did not have the inclination to think of a proper name. Then I found out that such a library was being developed and with my internal name! Whatever, I thought.

	So I looked at this scalax library, hoping that I could just abandon my efforts and jump on board with everyone else -- they too had figure