erokar

23 ms·

181.
by erokar 8y ago
Indeed. Norwegian is doing this because the optics now force them to do so, not self-assessment of the risk. They, and the Norwegian Civil Aviation Authority, failed in that regard.
182.
by erokar 8y ago
Google the Swiss cheese theory of safety. Very seldom an accident is caused by only one thing going wrong, and very seldom is it caused by only crew error or only technical failure.
183.
by erokar 8y ago
Quite the opposite. In lie of facts one should err on the side of caution. So far the similarities to the previous accident are striking. The whole fleet should be grounded immediately.
184.
by erokar 8y ago
In reality we all work too much. 8 hours a day is extreme, we should strive for 2-4 hours.
185.
by erokar 8y ago
Greeks work long hours, but productivity is low.
186.
by erokar 8y ago
How fitting that I'm reading this while at work.
187.
by erokar 8y ago
https://dockyard.com/blog/2018/12/12/phoenix-liveview-intera...
188.
by erokar 8y ago
Are you aware of "the functional approach to dreams": https://www.amazon.com/Dreaming-Waking-Functional-Approach-D... Seems a bit similar and might be worth checking out. (One of the authors, Corriere, later lost
189.
by erokar 8y ago
I've concluded I am not human.
190.
by erokar 8y ago
Old and not a particularly interesting rebuttal. Searle later stressed how the Chinese room argument demonstrates how programs, in and of themselves, cannot generate consciousness. This important aspect is not addressed in the rebuttal. For
191.
by erokar 8y ago
I see. Information about how a dictatorship suppresses its citizens bothers you.
192.
Rationale for choosing Elixir as back end(docs.moodle.org)
4 points by erokar 8y ago|0 comments
193.
by erokar 8y ago
Completely agree with the other commenter recommending Rails. It seems perfect for what you describe. I know of no other stack that comes close to it in productivity, and I've tried a few. With Turbolinks and Webpacker you get an SPA f
194.
by erokar 8y ago
The article concludes: "If concurrency is central to your application, Go is the language to use." If we as a profession are to "get past the tribalism and boosterism and have rational technical discussions", surely othe
195.
by erokar 8y ago
I agree Go is more popular than Elixir — but is it actually a popular language? At least I wouldn't consider it mainstream in the sense Java, C# and Python are.
196.
by erokar 8y ago
According to the author Go make concurrent programming "the best experience, by far, compared to other popular programming languages today." I beg to differ. I fail to see why I should choose Go over Elixir/Erlang for concurr
197.
by erokar 8y ago
In Norway mother and father each have 15 weeks paid leave from work after childbirth, e.i. 30 weeks total. If the father chooses not not use his paid leave it cannot normally be transferred to the mother.
198.
by erokar 8y ago
I agree. Something seemingly comparable like Python/Django for instance cannot compare with Rails with regards to productivity. There was (and still is) Meteor.js though, but adpotion stagnated for several reasons.
199.
by erokar 8y ago
I am simply referring to the result data from the study. I fail to see how that is disingenuous. You say Scala and Haskell killed it in the study, and you are right, they were the third and second best language respectively with regards to
200.
by erokar 8y ago
It's not the time it takes to write the code I'm concerned about. With more LOC per feature there is more code to maintain, there are probably more bugs, and there is more code one has to comprehend to understand what the system d
201.
by erokar 8y ago
Java is very verbouse, that's why I picked on it. You would simply have to write a lot more LOC, which would take more time, be more code to maintain, and so on. It's not a matter of static vs. dynamic, Haskell for instance is pro
202.
by erokar 8y ago
Maybe, but what dependently typed language has the stability, documentation, framework and overall development ergonomics that would let you create something like Github with the resources and the time they did?
203.
by erokar 8y ago
If they'd used Java they would still be working on the prototype.
204.
by erokar 8y ago
And yet, when Ruby is compared with other languages with regards to bugs in an actual study [1] it does better than many statically typed languages (e.g. Java, C#, Go, Typescript). Add to that that a Ruby code base will be significantly sma
205.
by erokar 8y ago
> ASP.NET MVC as uncool as that might be. IMO this is as close to the benefits of Rails you can get in a statically typed language. I agree .NET MVC is as close as you get to something like Rails with regards to productivity in a statica
206.
by erokar 8y ago
Good points. I'm not against using TS, I just think the it should be aknwoledged that it does have costs. The nice thing about TS is that once included you can use it as much or as little as you like (for function signatures only, for
207.
by erokar 8y ago
These are good points. A agree that PropTypes are neither as expressive/spesific nor as strict as using e.g. an interface with TS. I still think they are often good enough. You are also correct to point out PropTypes offer no way of ad
208.
by erokar 8y ago
I'm not aware of that. In any case they still work fine in React v16.
209.
by erokar 8y ago
^ I knew this would get downvoted, but it would be nice to see some arguments as to why people think the benefits of TS outweigh the costs.
210.
by erokar 8y ago
The point of TS was always to be a superset of JS, so in that sense I doubt they want to get rid of something that exists in plain JS.

More ›