sid0

48 ms·

451.
by sid0 16y ago
Does Google know about your passwords?
452.
by sid0 16y ago
To me, Firefox (4) with Panorama is the best UI a browser's ever had.
453.
by sid0 16y ago
You still haven't answered what you're going to do if the current SQLite code simply can't run on a particular OS stack. There's no guarantee that every future stack will have a C compiler, or even allow C programs.
454.
by sid0 16y ago
By "peculiarities" I didn't mean minor implementation differences but the major ideas behind the implementation. Be reasonable here -- the differences in implementation in the DOM between Gecko and WebKit (say) are trivial compared to "type
455.
by sid0 16y ago
And the multiple implementations of IndexedDB are...? (don't actually know. If you do, I'd be interested in links) There's an early one in Firefox 4 beta right now [1], and an upcoming one in Chrome [2]. Microsoft will probably implement
456.
by sid0 16y ago
Why does it matter to them that there's no competing spec Because ALL web standards are standards only because of the fact that there are MULTIPLE implementations. This is a basic principle behind the Web, and making even a single exc
457.
by sid0 16y ago
Well, I think having two implementations is necessary for a "standard" to actually truly be one, because if there's just one then you might as well be standardizing on the implementation rather than on the spec. I don't agree with standardi
458.
by sid0 16y ago
> where there is a standard There is no standard. There is a proposed standard, but it's failed because it didn't have multiple implementations. > and it's already been implemented by several No, it has exactly one implementation:
459.
by sid0 16y ago
It's the current W3C view of standards. Also * of course we have multiple implementations of python: CPython, PyPy, IronPython... * Python isn't a W3C standard, nor does it aim to be one.
460.
by sid0 16y ago
IE6's hanging around isn't looked at as a good thing.
461.
by sid0 16y ago
Because if everyone used SQLite there would be no second implementation, which is something that is necessary for a proposed standard to become an actual standard.
462.
by sid0 16y ago
Also I think IndexDB might turn out to be yet another compatibility headache because everybody will be creating their own implementation (I'm pretty sure there will be at least 3 - Microsoft, Mozilla & Webkit). It's a speculation but m
463.
by sid0 16y ago
Exactly. All proposed web standards require at least two implementations to become actual web standards. That was never going to happen with Web SQL.
464.
by sid0 16y ago
For any web standard to be valid there need to be two different implementations. There is no second implementation for Web SQL.
465.
by sid0 16y ago
With the same performance, static protection against irreversible side-effects, and clever aversion of the privatization problem? I'm not aware of any. While STM can be theoretically done in any memory-safe imperative language, Haskell -- m
466.
by sid0 16y ago
Do look at Haskell whenever you can. Haskell (and ML/F# to an extent) pushed me from the "static typing is a PITA" camp to the "static typing done right is a magnificent benefit to programming" camp.
467.
by sid0 16y ago
Unless you intend to strictly enforce types (rather than validity) on your dynamic code, there is no burden on the developer. Of course there is. I program more in dynamic languages (particularly JS) than in statically-typed ones, and I a
468.
by sid0 16y ago
There are cases when it makes sense to use dynamic typing (e.g. dealing with XML and friends). In my experience however, those cases are not many and doing it when you don't have to creates an unneeded burden on the programmer. (sorry -- th
469.
by sid0 16y ago
Unsound in a very specific and suspicious way - yesterday it was pointed out adding a single, do-nothing, line to the middle of the function makes the "optimizer" fail. That isn't unsoundness, that's incompleteness. An optimization being
470.
by sid0 16y ago
The part on the definition of Angles and that the "optimizer" should throw an exception it doesn't (most probably because it's not optimizing anything) is hilarious. What are you talking about? That code is getting optimized away into a
471.
by sid0 16y ago
So like ECMAScript 5 strict mode?
472.
by sid0 16y ago
> Static-typing is little more than a human doing the machine's work Interesting. I look at (good: e.g. ML or Haskell) static typing as the machine doing the work that a human would have to do in a dynamic language. Especially type infe
473.
by sid0 16y ago
Because not everyone thinks it is good UI?
474.
by sid0 16y ago
(Disclosure: I interned at MSR over the summer. These are my personal opinions.) Note that MSR is a basic research organization, not a so-called "R&D" unit. MSR is largely focused on academic research -- there seems to be an implicit ma
475.
by sid0 16y ago
> however will be able to answer questions about C++ quirks Turbo C++ quirks. :) (edit: not sure why I was modded down. Anyone who's gone through the system in India knows that most colleges are still stuck in 1992 and use an ancient
476.
by sid0 16y ago
What do you think of Microsoft Research?
477.
by sid0 16y ago
(I can't find a youtube html5 converter for firefox) Firefox doesn't support H.264. If you're using Firefox 4 you can opt in to the HTML5 beta and get a fair number of videos served as WebM, though.
478.
by sid0 16y ago
You post uninformed crap like this, then complain about being downvoted for anything "negative against Microsoft": http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1800507
479.
by sid0 16y ago
Both MS and Mozilla have explicitly stated that they're not going to get 100 in Acid3.
480.
by sid0 16y ago
I've posted about this on HN before, but I'm a TA for an OS course in one of the best colleges in India, where this year we switched to a pedagogic OS written in Java. It's gone off remarkably well, since students don't have to deal with ra

More ›