cbeust

4 ms·

1.
by cbeust 17y ago
dlsspy: It depends. I make complex merges/branches on a regular basis and I find myself using `commit -a` pretty often, but I am also diligently branching out whenever I start working on something different, so I'm often confident that all
2.
by cbeust 17y ago
I wrote the Translate application for Android and I've had numerous people telling me in comments that thanks to my app, they were able to hook up with foreign girls and get laid. My thought when I got the first comment of this kind was "jw
3.
by cbeust 17y ago
Definitely: radio is the killer app that will save Nokia.
4.
by cbeust 17y ago
Actually, the book "Design and Evolution of C++" shows Stroustrup saying "no" to quite a few features (e.g. named parameters). It would probably be more proper to say that Stroustrup didn't say "no" to enough people.
5.
by cbeust 17y ago
You need to make languages fast on both dimensions, static and dynamic. A dynamically typed language can only be optimized in one dimension, which is why they usually trail behind statically typed languages in performances (since those are
6.
by cbeust 17y ago
I sympathize with the author's dislike for C++ and while you can't argue that dynamic languages "could" at some point in the future be faster than C++, it's very unlikely to happen since one of the requirements for this kind of speed is for
7.
by cbeust 17y ago
As was pointed above, I'm not opposed to fluent interfaces and we use quite a few at my work (Google). I was just observing that you can't argue against mutators and then encourage people to use fluent interfaces since they are basically th
8.
by cbeust 18y ago
> Because of this, I'm tending to believe that > adding more strong-typing to languages is a > losing battle, I see this at the opposite. Just because an object says that it responds to a method doesn't guarantee that invoking