Mawr

62 ms·

961.
by Mawr 5y ago
There's being uncharitable and then there's this. Your entire point rests on a baseless assumption. There's absolutely nothing in the parent's post that indicates that the programs he would create could have the potentia
962.
by Mawr 5y ago
> It is disgraceful none do. Sublime Text does. When you start it, all unsaved modifications and files from your last session will conveniently be there, just as you left them. Over years of usage, I've never had Sublime lose any da
963.
by Mawr 5y ago
The proposed fix is wrong. > This is a lesson on why not to use static backup filenames. Yes, that would address this bug, and this bug only. What if there's another bug? Or the file system is full? Or `ed` gets kill -9'd? Or t
964.
by Mawr 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19956614
965.
by Mawr 5y ago
> So is not handling Java exceptions is deliberate That's the thing, there's no visible difference between a deliberately ignored exception and a purposefully ignored one. The code looks exactly the same: foo() Did I p
966.
by Mawr 5y ago
Two points of feedback: - No salary ranges, it's difficult to take job postings without them seriously - No mention of what programming languages you use in the software engineer position ([1]) Otherwise, the postings are great - well
967.
by Mawr 5y ago
> Indeed, even that very email she was sent contained a reminder not to tell it to someone on the phone. Yes, as regular unformatted text and tucked away at the end of the very last paragraph that starts with standard boilerplate: "
968.
by Mawr 5y ago
Some clues are available in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8 (Tech Talk: Linus Torvalds on git). There's nothing conclusive about the length of the pondering, but he does say the writing itself t
969.
by Mawr 5y ago
> but I have to think if I was a scam prevention expert that I wouldn't tarnish my own name by putting a story with this much raw honesty out there. I wouldn't consider sweeping one's mistakes under the rug a virtue. Quite
970.
by Mawr 5y ago
A similar case that happened to Jim Browning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIWV5fSaUB8 (My channel was deleted... HOW?).
971.
by Mawr 5y ago
> You have a discipline issue with Java, it is not an issue in the language itself, it's with you and your team. Only if you consider the "language" to be only the language itself, i.e. syntax + semantics. When people refe
972.
by Mawr 5y ago
> An uncaught managed exception will not compile, and an uncaught unmanaged exception might terminate your program. While it's nice that uncaught exceptions stop the program from continuing with invalid state, it'd be strictly
973.
by Mawr 5y ago
experience != skill Experience is merely the prerequisite for skill, it doesn't cause it.
974.
by Mawr 5y ago
Very clean, tasteful formatting. Easy to read. There's even correct splitting of long argument lists over multiple lines: [1], [2]. You don't see that very often, most programmers have awful taste about this. I have some qualms wi
975.
by Mawr 5y ago
Yeah, I think we'd be just fine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nim_Chimpsky > Nim's longest "sentence" was the 16-word-long "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange g
976.
by Mawr 5y ago
We're supposed to believe that a company of the size of Amazon did this just to save $3000? This doesn't pass the sniff test. The most likely scenario is that the person did something egregious, got rightfully fired for it, and it
977.
by Mawr 5y ago
You can, and in fact, that's how idiomatic Go's handled this up until now. But it only works in that specific case, and even then there's a small issue with readability - if you're not already familiar with this pattern,
978.
by Mawr 5y ago
I agree that the latter version is too verbose, but if the alternative is this: err := h(cond(x) ? f(x) : g(x)) ... then I'd much rather stick with the verbosity. There's way too much going on in a single line here. I'
979.
by Mawr 5y ago
It is just an assumption on my part, I figure that the cost of pointer chasing is generally going to outweigh any disadvantages. It can also help enable optimizations, for example slices and maps that do not contain pointers do not get sca
980.
by Mawr 5y ago
type Optional[T any] struct { value *T } Don't use a pointer - it's bad for performance. func MakeOptional[T any](value *T) Optional[T] { Use `New` instead - it's the idiomatic name for a constructor in G
981.
by Mawr 5y ago
Go is follows Python's original principles more closely than modern Python does. Take a look at the Zen of Python [1]. Go fits it far better than Python, sadly. [1]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020&#x
982.
by Mawr 5y ago
> Looks like it's possible to disallow comparing structs with "==" at compile time. But of course, then such structs cannot be used as map keys: https://go.dev/play/p/JXzqHPInJ-G .
983.
by Mawr 5y ago
> Poor/inconsistent null handling That's one of my gripes with the language too. Due to the lack of generics, Go programmers just use pointers to indicate nullability - not exactly the right approach. Thankfully, it's st
984.
by Mawr 5y ago
> What features are both present in all of JavaScript/Go/Python and absent from Java/Kotlin that have any relevance to the Gang of Four patterns? For example: 1. Being able to define a top-level function 2. Being able to r
985.
by Mawr 5y ago
I feel like you're just describing the JS ecosystem and for some reason included Go in the same group, even though Go's far more similar to Java than to JS. > [...] move quickly/rapidly adopt new language and runtime featu
986.
by Mawr 5y ago
Yeah, you're right. I didn't think to check previous versions. It seems to me like a flaw in the language that "==" can compare unexported struct fields. Looks like it's possible to disallow comparing structs with &
987.
by Mawr 5y ago
> go 1.9 adding monotonic clock readings in a breaking way, i.e. this program changed output from 1.8 to 1.9: https://go.dev/play/p/Mi6cGCPd0rS That's not a breaking change, if you were comparing Times wit
988.
by Mawr 5y ago
> There's no reason to have to write overly abstract code in Java. Whether that's true is beyond the point, which is that the majority of Java code out there is in fact overabstracted. That should serve as a hint that there may
989.
by Mawr 5y ago
> Java has AOT compilers since 2000, they just weren't free beer. Commercial offerings are quite obviously not comparable to free ones. Seems like Java can't really do AOT, even in 2022: https://news.ycombinator.co
990.
by Mawr 5y ago
You fail to address the core point of the parent: a no-GC language like Rust does not compete in the same space as Go. You either need the low overhead of no-GC or you don't. If you don't, choosing Rust is a mistake. --- As for yo

More ›