ah ok

i do it, didn't know that 😞

i also use ktor

what's the best way to get the delegate of a delegated property?

do I have to do it reflectively or am I missing a simpler way?

@dumptruckman https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-8384 (shipped in 1.1)

i had never had to parse english to computer code before, but seriously... fuck my native language

doing this has given me an additional appreciation for human brains...

since version 1.2.50 the http client is resturning this exception:

@coder82 uploaded a file: Untitled

this is the apache http client in ktor

solved updating ktor to 0.9.3 alpha 5

you can always buy an unlabeled keyboard and remap it to Dvorak or whatever you want in your OS

what’s an example of an ergonomically arranged keyboard?

Guys maybe go to facebook or some general IT forums for this?

for right handed people at least

apologies.

Happy Ied Mubarak 1439 H 🙏🏻

Let’s say I have 2 nullable strings:

a

and

b

. I want to check if they are both

null

or

empty

or if not, then if they are equal, i.e., if

a = "" || a?.isEmpty()

and

b = null || b.isEmpty()

or

a == b

then I want to return true. Simply doing

a == b

won’t work for

a = ""

and

b = null

case. What’s the cleanest way to express this?

I mean, I guess first thing would be to use

.isNullOrEmpty()

but why won’t

"" == null

work? they aren’t equal, and it returns false

My logic is that

""

and

null

mean the same, so I want to return true

ah, I see, you want some javascript-style comparisons

Yikes.

I guess I can do:

a == b || (a.isNullOrEmpty() && b.isNullOrEmpty())

that’s what I’d suggest, yeah

huh, kinda interesting, so I while procrastinating trying to convert the comparison into an infix extension fun, I managed to get

null eq null

compiling when I declared the function on

String?

- I was under the impression that without any hinting or anything,

null

would resolve to methods on

Nothing?

Well

null

is a value that fits the type

String?

, so it should work.

has anyone had the occasion to build a simple rewindable sequance I can crib?

is there an efficient way to split a string into parts less than a given max length?