Here’s a real world side project example of how I handle this situation:

 public IResult<T> GetResourceValue<T>(string path)
    {
        string err = $"{typeof(T).FullName} is not available from this Resource ({nameof(FileSystemResource)})";

        switch (typeof(T))
        {
            case Type t when t == typeof(DriveInfo):
                return (IResult<T>)new Ok<DriveInfo>(BackingValue);
            case Type t when t == typeof(DirectoryInfo):
                err = $"Directory path invalid: {path}";
                var dir = new DirectoryInfo(path);

                if (dir.Exists)
                    return (IResult<T>)new Ok<DirectoryInfo>(dir);
                break;
            case Type t when t == typeof(FileInfo):
                err = $"File path invalid: {path}";
                var file = new FileInfo(path);

                if (file.Exists)
                    return (IResult<T>)new Ok<FileInfo>(file);
                break;
        }
        return new Error<T>(err);
    }

You said elsewhere that it feels like you’re doing something wrong if you have to check for every type just to use a Generic. I think you’re right in thinking along those lines. There should be a minimal number of types to check, and Ideally limited via a type constraint.

Here’s example that includes a constraint:

    public IResult<T> GetValue<T>() where T : struct =>
        typeof(T) switch
        {
            Type t when t == typeof(int) && value <= int.MaxValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<int>((int)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(uint) && value <= uint.MaxValue && value >= uint.MinValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<uint>((uint)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(byte) && value <= byte.MaxValue && value >= byte.MinValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<byte>((byte)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(sbyte) && value <= (int)sbyte.MaxValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<sbyte>((sbyte)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(short) && value <= (int)short.MaxValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<short>((short)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(ushort) && value <= ushort.MaxValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<ushort>((ushort)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(long) && value <= long.MaxValue =>
             (IResult<T>)new Ok<long>((long)value),
            Type t when t == typeof(ulong) => (IResult<T>)new Ok<int>((int)value),
            _ => new IntegerError<T>()
        };

They even know they’re being lied to, and still go along.

I use fancy zones for windows, and I have a zone that compromises one 4k screen and half of two others. That zone is for my VS window, two main code panes in the center and one off to each side.

It doesn’t remember the layout of the tool windows… I’ll have to look into the save/apply functionality you mentioned.

I prefer VS over vs-code, but in VS the window/tabs are bulky and slow compared to vs code which makes this all more annoying. First world problems though…

Edit: using VS 2022 on win 10

Not OP, but in agreement. I like to split out multiple vertical panes in VS, and I put the edges of the panes at the edge of the monitors. It’s tedious to position them manually, and different tool windows run when debugging so I have to reposition the pane boundary’s again whenever switching between run/design time. It would be nice if it detected the edge of the monitors and kept the scroll bars and break-point column on the correct sides of the split.

In 2008 Americans elected a black man president, and the Republicans lost their shit and went scorched earth.

The relatively new Nostr protocol is a very interesting decentralized option. It uses relay servers to provide a secure connection between two (or more) clients which maintain the data, nothing is “stored” on the relay.

Pack the court, be rid of the filibuster, investigate corruption…

Can we put those involved in prison?

I thought it was sarcasm

daddy Trump

How do you even stand yourself?

[their children] don’t have parents who show up and help them.

[their leadership] focuses on a political agenda more than they care about actually helping somebody’s life look better.

Every accusation is an admission…

The word they’re looking for is ‘corruption’.

The wording reminded me of Demolition Man

I want the issue of mass surveillance / data collection to be addressed, instead of this bs which is basically working around the edges the problem. Tick-tock shouldn’t be allowed to sell (/provide) user data to anyone but neither should Meta, X, reddit, etc.

No, they’re both bad.

Lol

What is the social security system was run by China?

That’s your great analogy. This is a social media company. Gtfoh

It’s a bad analogy. Mass surveillance (continuous collection of everyone’s data) has very little to do with the number we use to track social security payments.

We’re talking about individuals’ personal data stored by social media companies being accessible to others (governments, in this case). This has nothing to do with social security.

The problem is that the data is accessable, but that’s not being addressed. This is an improper fix to an actual problem, just facts.

Access to the data it’s what matters, ownership is just one method of access.

Which is the topic we should be discussing, along with WHO is on the take.