fayden

It's been said every time this argument is brought up: StackOverflow is a Q&A website. It's not meant for discussions, and while some interesting questions get closed, it's not arbitrary at all.

Why do you assume 116 people are "amazed and breathless"? It's an interesting question and I don't believe the answer is obvious unless you've been exposed to legacy C code before, and such users may arguably constitute a large part of SO's audience.

You may be able to solve the question by a simple search, but it still fits in on StackOverflow. The fact that it was upvoted a lot is irrelevant to me, it just means a few people bothered to press a button.

rorrr's message is unnecessarily rude, but I don't think he's wrong.

It's a very interesting feat, but it's just a showcase of his realizations, unrelated to computers or science. His thought process or his planning for making such patterns would probably fit here more than this post.

I don't think it's a problem either, because such posts are rare, but I would be disappointed if Hacker News was filled with this kind of post.

Thank you for your answer.

That is actually one of my concerns about Haskell. It's a bit off-topic to this HN post, but it's relevant to your comment and you seem to have some experience.

I find Haskell's syntax very elegant and concise, but I am scared about performances. Often, I read about three or four different ways to do one thing. If I were to pick Haskell as my go-to language, and let's say I wanted to build a performant (memory wise and speed wise) program, would I have a hard time?

Now obviously, for day to day applications, the performance topic is irrelevant, but how would Haskell compare for the example above instead of, let's say, Ocaml?

Why not use a librairy that validates emails? You save time, and you actually accept valid emails.

I agree that the example with a lot of symbols is over the top, but when a website doesn't accept foo+bar@host.com, I assume the product will be sub-par quality wise. The author did not follow of rigorous process for something as simple as email validation, I doubt he'll be more rigorous in other parts of his project.

Why don't you take some time to explain your opinion? Currently, your comment is only noise and completely useless.

There are ways to write Python2 code that will work when you make the switch to Python3. It _is_ a hassle, but it's quite doable.

This may not convince you (and I perfectly understand why), but I think it's worth giving Python a shot even if you're fluent in another language.

You seem to do, considering you cannot find an up to date browser to your liking. It also seems to be a valid alternative considering you do not want to buy software upgrades (OS).

I believe his comment is intended to people reading the comments and not to the author.

When you go to the public pool, you don't complain about not being able to play golf, do you?

StackExchange is a Q&A community website. Although sometimes discussion would be appreciated, it is not what it was meant for. And by all means, if you find an accepted answer to be wrong, downvote and comment it! The whole point of StackExchange websites is to rate questions and answers!