The great thing about let and const, for me, is that it gives you crucial information about variables without having to look further down.
const should be the default, and if you're going to reassign it, then use let.
In most code, you'll use const on the vast majority of variables, and it'll make let assignments stick out, which helps a lot when you're browsing the code or refactoring.
I've experimented quite a bit with how I eat, and gone through extended periods of fasting. To me, the "real" hunger, the debilitating one, only lasts so long. It feels like once your body is entirely relying on itself for food, it just goes away.
The "other" hunger seems to come with boredom or other emotional variations though.
Unfortunately I have never done those thing more than a couple weeks at a time, but I can talk about the opposite. My "natural" weight (where I end up if I only eat when I'm hungry) is too low, and even if I'm super lean at that weight I don't have enough muscle, and end up having back / knee problems.
I have to pay attention every day to eat a little bit more than I feel like. It is a big effort, and sometimes I'm just not up to it, but I'm not sure how it compares to dealing with hunger.
You'd probably be surprised how much time I've spent learning about those subjects, from many different sources.
I'm an engineer. I want to understand stuff. Obesity is a perspective that I thin can give a ton of insight about human nature, society, evolution, progress, globalization, advertisement, medias, etc.
As for the definition, feel free to pull the definition from anywhere and see if there are any contradictions when applied to obese people.
I don't think that's how hunger works. Do you think hunger is triggered by an absolute number?
Isn't hunger the sensation you feel when your body starts dipping into your fat reserves because the content of your stomach / blood is not sufficient?
That doesn't explain it though, as how much you weight and how happy you are with it should influence how you eat.
Obviously a kid and an adult, a sedentary female and an international athletes have different needs.
When you have tooth problems, you go through a lot to have it fixed. When your hair looks bad you get a haircut.
Some obese people change their lifestyle and lose that weight. So what about those who can't? Is it too hard because of whatever predisposition (or, as other comments point out, having a huge industry putting tasty things in front of them), or do they just feel better being big?
Interesting, so I guess it's an education problem?
I guess just like real-talk sex-ed went against the interest of big-church, teaching some basics when it comes to nutrition would hurt a lot of big-food...
I'm just wondering why there seems to be more empathy towards people with eating habits problems, than when it comes to other addicts.
Maybe because they cause less damage to other people?
I don't think humans are less responsible, on a society scale obviously the problem is deeper. I'm just wondering why for other problems we blame people, but not for that one.
Maybe it has to do with addictions moving away from some common substances (alcohol, tobacco) and the food industry picking up the slack? And maybe in an evolving world, the number of addicts is bound to increase, as we adapt to the rise of new forms of pressure. Like the ever increasing lemon-squeeze dept system, or in-app purchases??
That doesn't explain how someone can just let it happen to the point of suffering of it every day without taking simple measures to reverse it.
Most of the time the difference between steady gaining or losing weight is a few hundred calories a day. That's far from a lifestyle change.
When moving around becomes difficult, when dating becomes harder, when the aches and pain start... there's gotta be more to it than just a lot of sugar in your everyday stuff.
I always wonder (for other drugs too), if they're a way to slowly remove yourself from situations, or whatever it is, that make you uncomfortable. A way to permanently disqualify yourself from the race, because the idea of running (no pun intended) makes you anxious?
I wonder why, when we talk about obesity, there is this tendency to use language that removes responsibility from the person, or at least move it from their mind to their "body", as if they were different entities.
I think obese people fit the definition of addicts. Most of the time, other addictions are fought by pushing awareness on the person, forcing them to recognize they have a problem and that they need to change.
I don't hear much "you were born this way" or "that's just what your body wants" for other drugs. Is it because other drugs are always viewed negatively, whereas food is a pillar of life under normal circumstances?
Maybe it has to do with the very high prevalence of obesity, and the echo chamber being big enough that deflection and denial are harder to combat?
I think the problem with making this change to more generic networked protocols is several aspects become a lot trickier then you can't impose limitations on the filesystem.
The biggest problem, as usual, is invalidating the local cache. For Dropbox, who own and implement the authority on the shared drive state, it is a _very_ (relatively speaking) simple problem.
Other protocols like SSHFS have to deal with filesystems of all kinds. Many of those do not support anything like inotify, and polling over huge directories would be horrible experience or performance wise (long delay or slowing down the whole host machine).
For your specific example, probably because the implementation is different.
The most notable difference is that arrow functions do not set the "arguments" variable, but there are other subtleties.
I'm not sure how it is done in V8 and co, but if the code is highly optimized, you might have to rewrite big chunks of it, even for small differences, because your optimizations do not go along with a slightly different implementation, or to avoid painful regressions.
Nitpicking but in SC2, or any video games, actions aren't analog.
A unit's position is a function of 3 _probably_ 32bits numbers, giving 2^96 discrete positions.
You can get that number much higher probably, by adding other factors like current speed, orientation, etc.
You're right though that you have to tackle the problem differently, because while you'll be able to try to define a strategy in go by iterating over a bunch of discrete possibilities in the 19x19 grid, there is no way you can do that for a 2^hundreds size grid with current tech.
I guess AlphaGo is in for a few semesters on strange attractors!
const should be the default, and if you're going to reassign it, then use let.
In most code, you'll use const on the vast majority of variables, and it'll make let assignments stick out, which helps a lot when you're browsing the code or refactoring.