heretoo

I tried FreeCAD but all versions crash within minutes of using it, making it unusable.

It would be nice if I could scale the UI. Some text can be scaled with GDK environment variables, but not the icons.

Original version was written TCL:

https://gist.github.com/antirez/6ca04dd191bdb82aad9fb241013e...

Except that lead's toxicity has been known for thousands of years.

Now we just have to get a handle on all the leaky stuff at the edges of every “functional core”, because there lay many dragons

My gut is telling me erlang might have tackled this.

It sounds like you're making the mistake of thinking that TDD means writing the tests first.

Actually, Kent Beck, who coined the term TDD, has the following to say in his book "Test Driven Development":

"In Test-Driven Development, we Write new code only if an automated test has failed"

This implies that in TDD the test is written first.

Regardless of any definition, test-first and test-last are just two ends of a scale we can use.

It wouldn't surprise me if the original reason is the pervasive use of jupyter notebooks in ML, which don't adhere to normal python conventions, and are affected by slow imports only when those sections are explicitly evaluated.

Side-effects in imports are, in my opinion, unnecessary, losing some of the benefits of static analysis, running with different parameters during tests, compiling to native code (if those tools exist), slowing things down, and more.

Libraries could have an initializer function and the problem would go away.

You could consider Clojure. It is backed by the java ecosystem, which is substantial. Not quite the same as python's "batteries included" approach.

What if the warrant canary is from the developers of the encryption software? See truecrypt -- assuming it was actually a warrant canary.

Where "cross your fingers" is equivalent to the "warrant canary has not been revoked" when encryption is involved.

Another options is "nsjail". I landed on it having considered at firejail, apparmour, selinux, bubblewrap.

Not in the community edition, but the enterprise edition appears to be quicker than JIT because of profile guided optimisations.

The window doesn't close at 39 for either of you. From personal experience, I know.

Not comparing, but is it really safe? https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2021/09/cycling-injuries-three...

50,000 serious injuries in one year seems considerable.

So, if we followed this advice, none of these technologies should have ever been used in the first place, because popularity takes time to establish.

Developer ≠ programmer.

Noone agrees on the definition of any of these, and they have changed over the years. Wikipedia says they are the same https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmer

Maybe try a hallucinagen

Is there strong evidence to support this is necessary? Which great computer programmers attribute their abilities to this?

The CDC has lowered its threshold to 3.5 micrograms/dL https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/news/cdc-updates-blood-lead-re...

There is still aviation fuel using lead.

ClojureScript is just as leaky as Clojure

By leaky, I assume you are refering to the interop with the host platform. Overall, this seems like a benefit, simply for having access to many more libraries than would otherwise exist in Clojure(script).

Clojure brings all the XML pain of Java dependencies

Do you mean pom.xml?

better VM

The JVM seems extremely powerful with regards to performance and memory management, with 20+ years of backwards compatibility (mostly), and improvements still being made with GC and JIT.

I feel your frustration. Clojure, in my opinion, has always been niche, but is still effective and may actually be immortal? New things are always being tried by small groups of people leaving corpses strewn about.

I don't think it is the building, so much as the burying that needs more work, so that we know what libraries do or don't need tombstones.

To the best of my knowledge, Onyx and Cortex were both backed by companies which either needed to move onto more successful products, or in the case of Cortex, they closed up shop. It might be better to look at libraries that have stronger community support.

Onyx is an amazing library but it competes with other libraries like KafkaStreams which has community buy in, and commercial support if needed.

Cortex might be replaced with mxnet which got clojure bindings sometime in the last couple of years (see gigasquid). (Although libpython might make this redundant -- assuming language purity isn't a blocker to being pragmatic).

Others will have better examples, but here are some simple ones that are well maintained, but lets not forget that the java ecosystem is also available:

clojure clojurescript core.async mxnet integrant

Its good to remember that what might be considered "rot" in some ecosystems, is just a sign of maturity and of a library being finished. Many older libraries with no commits in years function as is, as documented.

Are you saying rocks have intent when they sink your boat?

That was aimed at everyone on this thread that feels comfortable with deleting databases that they don't own.

Vigilantes make their own choices, but professionals are judged by their reputation. As I've said elsewhere, I challenge anyone, especially professionals, to tweet "I will delete your data if you don't secure it" and to add it to your resume/CV as a strength.

So, you've answered "what good comes of it".

For completeness, would you mind answering, "what bad comes of it?"

If you really believe this action is warranted, as I've read on this thread, I challenge you to tweet under your real name "I will delete your data if you don't secure it", and add it to your resume/CV as one of your strengths.

Hippocratic Oath: "First, do no harm".

To the best of my knowledge, GraalVM native images are probably slower at runtime, due to the hotspot vm being unavailable.

You can't magically shoehorn types back into an untyped system when all the existing components assume untyped streams.

If this were true, then a typed system couldn't exist on top of machine code and random access memory, because the existing components (i.e. CPU + random access memory) have no knowledge of the types you are speaking of.

I think the assumption is false. Types can be shoehorned onto untyped data.

But that's not what an abstraction is! UNIX pipes are maximally low-level

To put a spin on it, maximally low-level within it's particular domain, perhaps, sitting on top of the transistors below them, sitting on top of quantum physics.

Thinking a bit further, an abstraction appears to be the mapping in both directions between two domains. That being said, the two domains themselves, are independent, and don't appear to be the abstraction.

The verb "abstract" would mean we are mapping from one domain to the other.

I think "homomorphism" is the mathematical term for what I'm describing.

What's my point? We can always go lower. :)

Are you saying that short term thinking has no utility? I am willing to bet that there are a multitude of circumstances in most peoples lives that require short term thinking, or their lively hood or lives will be destroyed.

In a threatening situation, you solve the short term problem in order to have an opportunity to think long term, which will help to prevent these problems subsequently.

If we were talking chess, you wouldn't ignore the immediate moves of your opponent, because their idea of how the game should be played doesn't fit with your long term desire of how you want the game to turn out.

Security has drawbacks.

Not really an argument for saying an implementation isn't possible.

Then, the conclusion can be that dynamic languages don't suffer from the expression problem.