alexfrydl

It really rather seems like they achieved a near-perfect library for creating complex web applications, then in order to justify continued work on the project, simply kept making up unnecessary clever/cool features motivated by vibes that classes are passé.

The problem is that people are not statistics. It may sound reasonable on the surface to say that this heuristic minimizes harm on average because she doesn't perform unnecessary interventions on the 99.9%. However, there are still actual human beings in the 0.1% who are harmed. What you're really saying is that if a group of people is small enough, it's fair for them to suffer preventable harm if preventing it would expose the larger group of people to risk.

I'm not going to argue about whether that is true or not, because I think that clearly depends on many factors and may be unanswerable. But as a member of a minority group who is often denied health care, it is often denied for this very reason. If the wrong person is prescribed this treatment, it is harmful. I'm just saying that when you're in the 0.1%, it can be difficult to accept the idea that you have to sacrifice yourself because someone in the 99.9% might be at risk otherwise.

Last month, the main courses offered on meatless Fridays included grilled cheese sandwiches, mac and cheese and mozzarella sticks. February’s Friday entrees, are vegan veggie tacos, Mediterranean chickpeas and black bean and plantain rice bowls.

I think calling these new meals “vegan” almost buries the lede, in that they are also the first meals made of vegetables.

This is so weird to me because I'm very much a turbo nerd power user Linux dork and I will still contend that Windows has a significantly easier user experience. I certainly don't use Linux because it's a convenient desktop platform.

Exactly. I'm not sure what the person you replied to is talking about. This article is clearly well researched because it covers many classic games on the timeline of roguelike history, from Dwarf Fortress to Civilization 5 to Super Smash Bros.

…wait.

The only thing I don't like about HCL is that there are not enough good libraries for me to use it as the configuration language in all of my projects. I love HCL.

HCL 2 anyway.

I've been using Firefox for about as long as a person could possibly have been using Firefox and I think this just happens every time they change the UI.

Ruby's “for … in” is syntax sugar in the sense that is just another way to spell an identical piece of code. This would be like if Python let you write “foreach” instead of “for” if you wanted to. Another example in Ruby is how you can say “unless” instead of “if not”.

Python's “for … in” is syntax sugar in the sense that is an abstraction over constantly writing out the iterator protocol.

Honestly my first thought when I saw the title “why we use Haskell” was “because you have one engineer and they like Haskell?” I suppose I was wrong. It was two.

Very high percentage. At least in my experience, the effect is NOT subtle.

This is definitely true but just fyi by now you should be getting 2% back on everything, more if it's specific categories. If you're only getting 1% and have good credit, you need a new card.

Okay, gotcha. So who are the two sides of this argument, and what are they arguing about exactly? I'm just trying to get clarification on who it is in particular that needs to stop “formulating needlessly metaphysical conceptions of gender” (i.e. making things up) and accept your biologically-grounded definition instead. Who are these strange, confusing people who even “educated” people can't understand?

I will always be amazed at how many people can type “because this group is a minority, meeting their needs is unimportant and shouldn't impact the majority” and think they've contributed a novel thought. Your elephant in the room is just basic everyday ableism. You can't even stomach a link being underlined for someone else's benefit lol.

Old English has the same gender system as German. The reason English doesn't have gendered nouns now isn't because we are so progressive, but because language tends to lose all its excess features as it gets spoken and a LOT of people speak English. Basically, people can't be bothered to do grammar properly so eventually it just goes away (see: “whom”).

Also, English is not the language of gender progressives. Many cultures had different conceptions of gender, including additional gender categories or even a total lack of concern for categorization. All of this was stamped out by English colonizers, who had extremely rigid ideas about gender (that they apparently still haven't gotten over in 2021 tbh).

I think bad faith misrepresentations like this are the primary source of the supposed “impossible discourse” on the “subject.” What “subject” by the way? Who are the specific people who use this supposedly confusing, brand-new meaning of the word “gender,” who are so impossible to talk to?

I bet the results were too embarrassing.

They're probably dependencies of dependencies. You depend on some very useful package and somewhere down the line it depends on something written to be platform agnostic in 2012 when lodash wasn't modular and JavaScript wasn't as mature. The ecoystem hasn't adopted a better approach because it would require every individual package developer to understand the problem, get on board, then update and test everything they've written.

Until I heard Visual Studio 2022 was coming out recently, I literally thought Microsoft had ceded the ecosystem in 2019. It's very surprising to hear it's the total opposite. I've been doing C# since .NET 1.0 and I can't imagine why anyone would use VS over Rider. Won't they just have to buy Resharper anyway?

What you're describing is not actually a problem with async/await. Rather, async/await places a burden of knowledge on the developer to explicitly avoid this problem. Go makes a tradeoff on overhead in exchange for removing that burden of knowledge.

Explicit cooperative multitasking absolutely can be used effectively for CPU-bound work, but it requires the developer to know how to do that, rather than relying on preemption to cover for them. It's similar to the different pros and cons of garbage collection vs. explicit memory management.

You're acting like the athletes got together and demanded enormous contracts so UEFA was begrudgingly forced to make deals with Coca-Cola to appease their entitlement.

I was thinking that this word is not, in fact, below the level of discourse of HN and based on the other replies I don't believe I even have to back this statement up.

I hate the logic that because people have successfully used something, it is good. Having used MongoDB extensively, it is absolutely true that MongoDB is powerful and useful. However, it is also true that I would never choose it over something else for a new project. It has likely improved since 2013, but so has everything else.

Certainly I could endeavor to build amazing modern software in C, but unless for some reason C is an absolute must, I would rather try any other language first. I doubt this is a controversial statement, and yet someone will always be there to defend the opposite stance.

There's webview (https://github.com/webview/webview) which has bindings for many different languages, but it's a whole window rather than a UI component you can embed. It's intended to be a lightweight alternative to Electron.

All of those are aliased to the Linux commands and also have their own abbreviations (get-childitem -> gci).

Using TXT records for this kind of thing is not that unusual. For example, Kubernetes's external-dns uses TXT records to track which entries it manages.

This is way too much to write on the topic of what should and should not count for this goofy code golf challenge.

I think it's a bit much to name this a bug. This should have very little to no effect on real-world code, and the only way to fix it for real is to actually parse the languages.

Unless you mean right now because of carona, I'm not sure what about “this day and age” is more dangerous than when you grew up.