nawgz

31 ms·

391.
by nawgz 4y ago
Twitter is a terrible piece of garbage website, isn't that why everyone uses it as the ultimate example of the web sucking? Twitter wants you to download their app and sign up so they intentionally neutered their web experience. It wou
392.
by nawgz 4y ago
Sure, but this is a far cry from a bespoke Go creation - these are production grade libraries with serious dev hours backing them that are generating JS for you.
393.
by nawgz 4y ago
> I didn't post any links and I seriously lost the thread of the conversation here Indeed, my mistake; I assumed such a response to a comment challenging "the idea that Go is the correct language to write web apps with JS in&qu
394.
by nawgz 4y ago
> This thread is about how to render composable HTML components I quite literally joined the fray in response to a question that asked: "how do you add JavaScript to your web bundle?" To me, it would be appropriate to say: &qu
395.
by nawgz 4y ago
> in case you needed confirmation, here it is I appreciate the post, as of course it is an act of community goodwill; but this isn't really confirmation. I could simply write this same text with any company I wished to label as unsa
396.
by nawgz 4y ago
That’s just blatantly false. Every time a plane takes damage they have to do a full analysis of similar damage and flightworthiness. The people on call to do this aren’t cheap and great caution is taken in the procedures of moving planes to
397.
by nawgz 4y ago
Perhaps "canonical" would be a better word, and as your links suggested, the canonical way to work on JavaScript-language capabilities is to use a JavaScript interpreter you can run outside the browser. Not sure Go has one of thos
398.
by nawgz 4y ago
> I didn't say Node.js devs are idiots No, you said: "You don’t need Node.js to write JavaScript." Then, as evidence, you said your simple CRUD app doesn't need JS, linked me to some NodeJS projects, and told me that
399.
by nawgz 4y ago
> You don’t need Node.js to write JavaScript Yes, but you generally do need NodeJS to access NPM packages, which will provide a ton of JavaScript functionality for free. To the user who posed this question, I'm sure what they meant
400.
by nawgz 4y ago
I stack my screens vertically; therefore, menu bars on top of the bottom screen are indeed quite finite in size.
401.
by nawgz 4y ago
Oh yeah, I am a regular consumer, but the nature of hangovers seems entirely divorced to the frequency of drinking to me.
402.
by nawgz 4y ago
Sounds to me more like you don't eat and hydrate enough when you drink. If I simply have alcohol for a night and nothing else, of course I'm hungover; but if I stay hydrated and eat AND drink, I can get pretty intoxicated without
403.
by nawgz 4y ago
Nothing is explicitly wrong, but the spacing on lists and headers can look kind of silly. For instance, consider in Google Docs - the headers stack nicely, look clean, and lists have perfect indentation / spacing Those changes pretty m
404.
by nawgz 4y ago
I imagine being an airline employee pays better relative to the local jobs when you come from a non-US country. Air travel is generally geared towards a richer clientele, and the absolute costs don't really drop even when the countries
405.
by nawgz 4y ago
Interesting idea. To me, exoplanet surveys are one of the most exciting forms of science. I can think of no other thing that would bring us closer to understanding whether or not life does exist in our universe beyond us. I've long hel
406.
by nawgz 4y ago
> It doesn't contribute to behavior at all I agree that TypeScript, in and of itself, doesn't change the way the code executes. This is self-evident. But the idea that that makes it simply "fancy documentation" is hil
407.
by nawgz 4y ago
> That boundary is why I have a hard time taking TypeScript seriously. A type system that doesn't participate in code generation is what How is being able to check code correctness at compile-time even close to "just linting an
408.
by nawgz 4y ago
> But hooks need to be named "useX" No they don't, that's a suggested convention > have restrictions on where to be called (that a program detects) Yes, it is strange that they opted for this implicit approach, but
409.
by nawgz 4y ago
> hooks aren't JS This is so silly. Hooks are literally hooks into a scheduling algorithm you are at the mercy of. That scheduling algorithm is pure JS. Of course you don't have classical control flow in someone else's sch
410.
by nawgz 4y ago
You are making the risk assessment the expected value of legal action is higher than the expected value of market returns or other applications of that same fund. I'm not sure where you gained such confidence.
411.
by nawgz 4y ago
Not a lot of details here. It seems a bit sloppy to me that routine engine testing ("six engines were lit up for the test") would cause a wildfire, and while 68 acres is a bit below the average wildfire size it's still not of
412.
by nawgz 4y ago
I am a React guy, but I can only see React or Angular meeting your needs - Both are well-established, with lots of guides. Angular is much more "batteries included" and opinionated though - Both have good TS support, although Reac
413.
by nawgz 4y ago
> Ah absolutionists. Either we can all drink bleach I'm confused if this even reaches the bar for a strawman... Today, I am legally allowed to drink bleach. It's not breaking the law, just my body. I cannot, however, take psilo
414.
by nawgz 4y ago
> Everyone calls web3 a grift because the stack is too young I don't think that's true. I think people call it a grift because "identity" and "ownership" are not topics that require whatever "Web3"
415.
by nawgz 4y ago
Finally
416.
by nawgz 4y ago
> 97 cents on the dollar You really think you could get such a rate? I was thinking the opposite - the firm would take 97 cents on the dollar. Debt collection is surely not a business built on such thin margins
417.
by nawgz 4y ago
Strawman He argues tooling is a necessary but not sufficient* condition to performant web apps that solve meaningful user-facing problems You argue he claimed correlation is causation *Edit: had necessary and sufficient backwards
418.
by nawgz 4y ago
But products cost money to run and maintain - isn't it perfectly plausible they were able to identify 20% of the people worked on a set of products that were in totality not profitable or even costing money? Given the nature of branchi
419.
by nawgz 4y ago
> Yanking 20% staff is not going to turn SNAP profitable I'm not sure I follow your logic. SNAP claims they'll save $500M per year by laying off 20%, which I'm sure you can see the reasoning behind given the only number yo
420.
by nawgz 4y ago
A poor facsimile runs faster due to being greatly simplified? Colour me pineapples

More ›