LiterallyDoge

11 ms·

1. 61.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   It seems like giving you the ability to decide people to support when you want to (if you ever do) is fair game. I don't think I see any inconsistency here.
2. 62.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   I love the command line for some things and would never trade it, but like anything, I believe it's about using the right tool for the job, and frequently, humans work well with shiny gadgets over memorizing spells.
3. 63.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   Just so I understand you right: they're advocating global functions to operate on predictably similar data structures? If that's the case, it seems like you'd want some of them to be object-oriented, and some not.
4. 64.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   I don't understand why this article is so angry? ECS is a great subset of OOP. Both are helpful tools where they make sense.
5. 65.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   Mostly because when you forget to put a ./ in a conversation with me I don't burn your house down.
6. 66.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   Anyone seen Goldeneye recently? Great movie.
7. 67.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   I think it fits with his current phase of wanting to explore his human side.
8. 68.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   Stack Overflow already exists.
9. 69.▲
   by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

   Why is this post flagged?
10. 70.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Aren't these consistent? They're both just a large corporation censoring things it doesn't like.
11. 71.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Better.
12. 72.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Did DO fix your problem? I know their packages are tiered, I would think it would still break. Do you have numbers on how bad HN Hug hit you?
13. 73.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Sign of an experienced architect. Read: "I'm old and too tired to argue, just don't break it ok."
14. 74.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    These are all marketing gimmicks demanded by PO's. UX people do the opposite.
15. 75.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    I just want a company that respects me and my data. Likewise, I want tools that behave in predictable and understandable ways. Google does not produce these kinds of products anymore. The small change in workflow with a different tool is
16. 76.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    I think every nail has its hammer and C is a good tool for certain things. Other tools are also good for certain other things.
17. 77.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Agree. It's just about respect. If you respect your users, it's clearly evident. Google doesn't.
18. 78.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    It's just about respect. If you don't give your users a heads-up when you go to collect significant information about them, and then when they try to opt out, you cripple their browser, you do not respect them. I'm done wit
19. 79.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    I think the biggest point here is one of respect to the customer. The fact that I lost all of my settings when I simply logged out my persona is clearly disrespectful of the customer. With so many good options, why use Google?
20. 80.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    This guy uses double quotes to make his example look more impressive and it tilts me.
21. 81.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Remember when we made good games that people played for the sheer enjoyment of it and didn't need marketing witchcraft to hand-hold lazy designers?
22. 82.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Or maybe we should be electing more people who understand how to read clipboards?
23. 83.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Web apps do, though.
24. 84.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    I think there are several different types of C programmers, and that terseness and functional design are very different.
25. 85.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    This is a good point, but if you take NPM / Yarn / Bower (RIP) with a grain of salt and secure your codebase against failures, they work nicely as a toolchain.
26. 86.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    This is the only part that I thought could be significantly improved for the use case they have here. But to each his own.
27. 87.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    When I last looked into it, tables caused issues for screenreaders and the like.
28. 88.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Obligatory: "The purpose of free speech is to protect unpopular speech. If the speech were popular, it would already be free without any guarantee."
29. 89.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    Thanks good points I'll keep at the research.
30. 90.▲
    by LiterallyDoge 8y ago

    I haven't seen anything about this in my research other than the obligatory "globals r bad nub do not use dis evr 1337" Not to say that's wrong, just that I'm lacking on concrete rationale. If you get a few minutes