pwdisswordfish6

10 ms·

31.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
They didn't break compatibility. NodeJS never attempted to be compatible with the Web. The design work that TC-39 and the browser makers did is also much better than what the NodeJS community puts out. And it's a design that wa
32.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> Right, but that is basically saying we should all go back to something similar to before npm/bower/etc. That position isn't without good reason. Refer, for example, to the linked post, explaining the engineering decisi
33.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
It's an odd thing. The way people talk, you'd think NodeJS and JavaScript are synonymous. Turns out, NodeJS is this generation's JScript, including shoddy support for the language proper, and it includes vendor-specific ext
34.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> I want to build web apps with low memory, cpu, and bandwidth profile. Give us a simpler language that doesn’t need crazy complicated hotspot profiling JITs. Just make the default, simple thing insanely fast. What makes you think it isn
35.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Agreed. They should have required an extra token like ? to disambiguate bindings from evaluations. Not only would it avert this pitfall, it would also obviate the need to have a special identifier to discard a bound value; instead of writin
36.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
This behaviour (id not changing after concatenation) is consistent with the original str object being deallocated and a new one allocated in its place with an identical id. It’s not what actually happens behind the scenes (in CPython), but
37.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
No. Instead, use <type> *buffer = calloc(n, sizeof(*buffer)) as that will also protect against multiplication overflow.
38.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
What a time to be alive when a Usenet newsgroup is now referred to as a ‘Google Group’.
39.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Fair enough. But SVG was defined by the W3C, the very same organisation that standardised XML itself. If anyone, they would know what they’re doing.
40.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Look at how many people are willing to ignore GitHub's transgressions. The privacy controls it provides are objectively worse than the other big companies that serve as the go-to examples when people try pointing to evil social netw
41.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
True. But it would have been much harder if they had to define a syntax for the entire document. I imagine they thought that the path DSL is simple enough to parse (and I seem to vaguely recall PostScript has something similar), while the o
42.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
So one reason for XML failing is that people who nominally used XML didn’t fully use its capabilities to capture data structure and kept their habits from the days of representing all data by fixed-width records?
43.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Because then you’d have to define its syntax and extension points. XML and namespaces solve that problem for you, so the only thing left for you to design is the actual structure of your data.
44.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Because it was popular, especially in web-development-adjacent circles back then. And there weren’t many open-standard extensible general-purpose structured data formats. (There are a few more now, but still not that many.) JSON technically
45.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
This doesn’t read as very well-argued. This post, and the human-versus-machine-readability one which precedes it, makes a number of general claims without pointing at any examples. I don’t feel like it will convince anyone who isn’t already
46.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Such non-Apple laptops with high-quality touchpads exist. Ever used a good Chromebook? The segment making up most of the Linux-using crowd is either ignorant to the problem (not having used good hardware with MacBook-quality touchpads, so
47.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
This is the same path that led to The Art Of Computer Programming.
48.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Anyone who's comfortable casually making proclamations like, "everyone has and knows Discord" is living in a bubble.
49.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
No, have you used it? The Gnome customizations that go into Pop_OS! are more noticeably influenced by Windows-isms than they resemble Mac-like design (unfortunately -- the Windows influence leads to poorer outcomes that only really make se
50.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
General trends? Yes, of course. But at Jobs's very last WWDC event, they demoed a lot of new Mac developments for Lion that specifically (not generally) mirrored some of the features going into Gnome Shell after (very public) desig
51.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Wow, it's almost as if computer viruses were named after biological ones!
52.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
A general solution for Wayback-style long-term distribution and archiving has been spec'd out (as part of the Memento Project), but nobody seems to be adopting it.
53.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
I'm aware of the equivocation, but there's absurdity in the statement "there's no discipline in the Linux community" demanding a definition that excludes Linux proper. Descriptivists and prescriptivists should ag
54.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
It's good that we agree.
55.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
These browser war threads always attract the worst kind of pundits: ones who have strong opinions but no idea what they're talking about. > That's true, but Safari uses a closed source JavaScript engine. No.
56.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
$9.5M one time is too little, but you could def get by with funding a competitive Firefox-level product on a budget of $25–30M annually if you ran lean enough and (counter-intuitively) paid high programmer salaries. Pay slightly higher tha
57.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> there's no discipline in the Linux community [...] look at projects like glibc or GNOME So not the Linux community then. Outside it. Do all the new GitHub-driven programmers who exclusively use MacBooks and constantly rev thing
58.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> And people wonder why Linux isn't popular outside of industry and hobbyists "Linux"? We're discussing a category that includes Gmail UI changes. Is Gmail not popular?
59.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
Just an observation, here's something that's a result of the fact that self-published opinion pieces on the Internet don't necessarily go through an editorial process before publication: > It has a real cost, you know, bei
60.
by pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> dumb terminal This is evoking imagery of a car whose mid console has been replaced with the tube of a VT100, maybe accoutremented with RoboCop-era keypads along the edge(s), and I like it.

More ›