ragnese

93 ms·

841.
by ragnese 6y ago
Everything except for the Android part, sure. But you're definitely letting perfect be the enemy of good if you think that closed-sourced drivers means that e.g., a closed source web browser doesn't increase your privacy attack su
842.
by ragnese 6y ago
My intention here isn't necessarily to tell you what to use or buy. 1. There is nothing legally binding here, as far as I can tell. Apple software is almost entirely closed source. Zoom told us they were encrypting our stuff, too. I kn
843.
by ragnese 6y ago
1. We don't really know what Apple is or isn't collecting from you. 2. You can run de-Googled Android and still do the important 80% of things that a smart-phone is good for.
844.
by ragnese 6y ago
I agree that "fearless concurrency" isn't the best tagline. While I'm definitely less fearful with concurrency in Rust, I'm still pretty fearful... I'm very good at writing deadlocks.
845.
by ragnese 6y ago
Syntax != semantics And, even with syntax, the singular part of the syntax that looks like C is the arrow for method calls. Everything else looks like Java, including the fact that you use `struct` to group data in C, not `class`. Also, you
846.
by ragnese 6y ago
First of all, I was talking about the language. Not the dev-ops. The language semantics are almost exactly Java. Also, if you're talking about a single-file project, you can do that in Java, too, using plain old javac. It's not qu
847.
by ragnese 6y ago
> Yeah, alright, I understand your example now but I would argue that it's more of a problem with actually using filenames as array keys than it is a problem with PHP. No. Just no. There is no reason, a priori, that you can reason t
848.
by ragnese 6y ago
The problem isn't about a preference between dynamic types and static types. I do think the tacked-on type system of PHP is pretty poor. But even without the mediocre type system, PHP still sucks. You want dynamic? Do Clojure, Lisp, Py
849.
by ragnese 6y ago
I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but I'm really suspecting that I'm just falling for a troll. I'm talking about WRITING PHP code. You don't WRITE top level functions. Every data type you WRITE i
850.
by ragnese 6y ago
The array key thing doesn't crop up often, but I've had it happen. Sometimes you are parsing something, such as "all files in this directory" and want to use the filename as the key and maybe store metadata or something
851.
by ragnese 6y ago
But if PHP in 2020 still has a TON of warts and other languages (even ones with large ecosystems) have WAY FEWER warts, does it matter if PHP has improved since 2008?
852.
by ragnese 6y ago
I didn't want to say it for fear of coming across as condescending... but, yes.
853.
by ragnese 6y ago
Your response is almost exactly the same as waheoo's. Please see my reply to his for everything you asked here.
854.
by ragnese 6y ago
I feel like your reply needs a little more context. Is the first part of responding to my claim of "effectively no top level functions"? If so, my response is that no public code seems to use them and they're much more of a p
855.
by ragnese 6y ago
For sure. But let's be clear- I'm not "demanding" anything. I don't want PHP to change, I don't want to use PHP at all. I don't like dynamic languages. BUT. Today's "best practices" for PHP
856.
by ragnese 6y ago
Stop looking at the syntax, then. PHP semantics almost completely match Java's- single inheritance, no const, everything is a reference, effectively no top-level functions, etc. And in what way is it actually less verbose? It's al
857.
by ragnese 6y ago
You're moving the goalposts. PHP was a great option in 1995. It is not today (except as a basic scripting language, where you and I agree completely. I would use PHP as soon as my bash script gets to about 100 lines). Your post here is
858.
by ragnese 6y ago
You're using the two super-fallacious arguments I refer to in my original reply: 1. You can write bad code in any language. 2. All languages have warts. My response to #1: Here is a rock. Please use it, with some nails, to hang a bunch
859.
by ragnese 6y ago
Which is basically impossible to do in PHP. How do you make a deep copy of an input argument to avoid mutating it? How do you do a map+(filter|reduce)(+array_values) on an array without looping over it THREE times?
860.
by ragnese 6y ago
> Why are you building arrays with mixed key types? It happens on accident. All keys are converted to ints if they can be. So if you read a file that is called "123", it'll suddenly become an int key whereas all the rest w
861.
by ragnese 6y ago
The parent comment to mine, though, said: > No one is claiming that PHP is and/or was without fault. I'm emphasizing the "is" part. "No one is claiming that PHP is without fault." My comment is asserting tha
862.
by ragnese 6y ago
Incorrect. Old PHP was more like C. If you see a modern, best practices, PHP code base today, it reads like Java 7 did in 2011.
863.
by ragnese 6y ago
And I think you've hit the nail on the head here. People who defend PHP as "not that bad" are probably people who have used it for so long that they just work around its insanity by muscle memory. It is NOT okay that `forea
864.
by ragnese 6y ago
I'm really surprised that PHP hasn't picked up in this area. It's a great tool when you're too big for bash, but not big enough for, well, a "more proper" language...
865.
by ragnese 6y ago
That's not being fair. There are many comments on HN of people saying exactly that PHP just isn't bad. The grandparent reply even says: >My only real gripe with PHP is the annotation syntax.
866.
by ragnese 6y ago
While I agree that PHP does have pros as well as cons, I find it disconcerting that I've read MANY assertions here on HN, that PHP detractors just haven't used it very much or are mostly complaining about things like bad standard
867.
by ragnese 6y ago
What color scheme helps with looking at my spouse? Ba dum tss!
868.
by ragnese 6y ago
My experience has been that there might actually be MORE boilerplate now than when I did ad-hoc translation to/from JsonObject. inline classes straight-up don't work with Jackson, and probably never will. So for every class that h
869.
by ragnese 6y ago
Does Gson still force you to write "beans"? In any case, this project kind of didn't need any auto-magical serialization library, but the promise was reduced boilerplate. Instead, we just got way more complex boilerplate and
870.
by ragnese 6y ago
Ugh. I cringe every time I have an actual, non-trivial, issue or fairly technical question about whatever I'm working on lately. I remember feeling it while I was working with Swift (50 articles titled: "What is a Protocol?"

More ›