Brian Poblete
@brianmp.dev
✝️ Jesus Freak | 👨💻 Front End Engineer @ Amazon - FinAuto | ♿️ Aspiring UX and a11y expert | 🍢 FSU Seminole
brianmp.dev
brianmp.dev
Reposted by Brian Poblete
My first advice to junior contributors is to STOP using vibe coding for PRs. OSS is always about people more than about code. We don't need more code generated by LLM, we need more people who care.
November 10, 2025 at 11:47 AM
My first advice to junior contributors is to STOP using vibe coding for PRs. OSS is always about people more than about code. We don't need more code generated by LLM, we need more people who care.
I legitimately did not know this was a thing. That's gonna be handy!
November 2, 2025 at 11:34 PM
I legitimately did not know this was a thing. That's gonna be handy!
Can the next major cloud provider outage take out all of LinkedIn please? Thanks
October 31, 2025 at 2:12 AM
Can the next major cloud provider outage take out all of LinkedIn please? Thanks
I think the tag is pretty neat! Especially if you implement nested styles similar to how Kevin does it in this video.
youtube.com/shorts/WBgI0...
youtube.com/shorts/WBgI0...
Using code elements when you should be using kbd?
YouTube video by Kevin Powell
youtube.com
October 22, 2025 at 2:20 AM
I think the tag is pretty neat! Especially if you implement nested styles similar to how Kevin does it in this video.
youtube.com/shorts/WBgI0...
youtube.com/shorts/WBgI0...
Though funnily enough, working on "boring" code just gives me more motivation to work on my personal projects! I'm getting back into coding for myself and I am rediscovering the fun of it 😄
October 11, 2025 at 12:59 AM
Though funnily enough, working on "boring" code just gives me more motivation to work on my personal projects! I'm getting back into coding for myself and I am rediscovering the fun of it 😄
NOT EXACTLY
`.with()` returns a *copy* of the array instead of modifying it in place! While I think this was the right decision to enforce immutability, I'm still slightly irked that there's still no easy way to do a simple assignment with a negative index.
`.with()` returns a *copy* of the array instead of modifying it in place! While I think this was the right decision to enforce immutability, I'm still slightly irked that there's still no easy way to do a simple assignment with a negative index.
February 26, 2025 at 3:06 PM
NOT EXACTLY
`.with()` returns a *copy* of the array instead of modifying it in place! While I think this was the right decision to enforce immutability, I'm still slightly irked that there's still no easy way to do a simple assignment with a negative index.
`.with()` returns a *copy* of the array instead of modifying it in place! While I think this was the right decision to enforce immutability, I'm still slightly irked that there's still no easy way to do a simple assignment with a negative index.
BUT
JS also has the `.with()` method that still accepts negative indices! So you can do `myarr.with(-1, 'hello')`
Problem solved! Right?... right?
🙃
JS also has the `.with()` method that still accepts negative indices! So you can do `myarr.with(-1, 'hello')`
Problem solved! Right?... right?
🙃
February 26, 2025 at 3:06 PM
BUT
JS also has the `.with()` method that still accepts negative indices! So you can do `myarr.with(-1, 'hello')`
Problem solved! Right?... right?
🙃
JS also has the `.with()` method that still accepts negative indices! So you can do `myarr.with(-1, 'hello')`
Problem solved! Right?... right?
🙃
But TIL the .at() method only returns the value. You can't change the array element that you access.
So something like
`myarr.at(-1) = 'hello'` would result in a Syntax Error
So something like
`myarr.at(-1) = 'hello'` would result in a Syntax Error
February 26, 2025 at 3:06 PM
But TIL the .at() method only returns the value. You can't change the array element that you access.
So something like
`myarr.at(-1) = 'hello'` would result in a Syntax Error
So something like
`myarr.at(-1) = 'hello'` would result in a Syntax Error
I think this is an excellent way to structure your code and I'm excited to try to adopt it for my personal projects!
February 18, 2025 at 6:10 PM
I think this is an excellent way to structure your code and I'm excited to try to adopt it for my personal projects!
Then, when you need to change or add a feature, you are sure that you are only modifying code that you need to modify. You need not be concerned about messing up another file because you modified an imported file.
This style makes it so much easier to keep a mental model of what your code does.
This style makes it so much easier to keep a mental model of what your code does.
February 18, 2025 at 6:10 PM
Then, when you need to change or add a feature, you are sure that you are only modifying code that you need to modify. You need not be concerned about messing up another file because you modified an imported file.
This style makes it so much easier to keep a mental model of what your code does.
This style makes it so much easier to keep a mental model of what your code does.
This initially looks like it adds a layer of complexity to your structure. But in reality it makes your codebase so much more refactor-friendly!
Related code is grouped together such that imports should only go one way. This way, your imports don't seem like a tangled web but more like a DAG.
Related code is grouped together such that imports should only go one way. This way, your imports don't seem like a tangled web but more like a DAG.
February 18, 2025 at 6:10 PM
This initially looks like it adds a layer of complexity to your structure. But in reality it makes your codebase so much more refactor-friendly!
Related code is grouped together such that imports should only go one way. This way, your imports don't seem like a tangled web but more like a DAG.
Related code is grouped together such that imports should only go one way. This way, your imports don't seem like a tangled web but more like a DAG.
Essentially, you add an additional layer of organization and group your code based on the feature it is used for.
So you may have a sales feature with its own code for components, api, and permissions that are not shared by other features.
So you may have a sales feature with its own code for components, api, and permissions that are not shared by other features.
February 18, 2025 at 6:10 PM
Essentially, you add an additional layer of organization and group your code based on the feature it is used for.
So you may have a sales feature with its own code for components, api, and permissions that are not shared by other features.
So you may have a sales feature with its own code for components, api, and permissions that are not shared by other features.