@toon said:
schemas (schemae?)
For pedantic dickweeds, the etymologically-correct plural is schemata.
@toon said:
schemas (schemae?)
For pedantic dickweeds, the etymologically-correct plural is schemata.
@morbiuswilters said:
On the other hand, disabling JS is a useful development feature--I use it all the time when developing. But I'm sure this functionality will be restored by an extension (the usual solution when Mozilla pooches something), so for web devs it's probably no big deal.
Is the behavior with JS completely turned off significantly different compared to just blacklisting (or failing to whitelist) your own site in NoScript? Because that extension already exists and has a lot less of a baby/bathwater problem.
@Ben L. said:
I'm going to link to a FAQ entry that you are sure to ignore.
Having read said FAQ entry, I can now say I know what the project's goals are. I think that choosing that group of goals as the central principles around which a language was designed was probably a terrible idea, but at least know what the goals are.
Actually, since we're in full language war mode in this thread now, how about a point-by-point deconstruction of the FAQ's rationale?
@FAQ said:Computers are enormously quicker but software development is not faster.
Brilliant insight there, don't you think? And no, software development is faster, due to better tools and more use of high-level languages.
@FAQ said:It is possible to compile a large Go program in a few seconds on a single computer.
Seriously, one of the primary goals is optimizing for compilation time? I mean, I know typical C and C++ projects take way too long to compile and link, but I would never think that a language first developed in 2007 would need to specify that as a project target.
@FAQ said:Go is fully garbage-collected and provides fundamental support for concurrent execution and communication.
If you're developing low-level systems software, you usually don't want automated GC for everything and opaque concurrency support; whereas, if you're developing application software, you'd use an actual high-level language and wouldn't be thinking about things like header files. What kind of program is best written in Go?
@FAQ said:There is a growing rebellion against cumbersome type systems like those of Java and C++, pushing people towards dynamically typed languages such as Python and JavaScript.
Actually, given that the only real complaint they have about Java is its horrendously redundant type annotations, I'm wondering if they had just never heard of Scala when they started the project.
@FAQ said:And perhaps most radically, there is no type hierarchy: types just are, they don't have to announce their relationships.
Congratulations! You've invented Haskell's type classes, only crappier. (Those were invented in 1988. They called them "concepts" before they threw them out of C++11.) Also, it's kind of sad that the notion of not having subtype polymorphism is considered a radical idea at this point.
@morbiuswilters said:
Most of the Go I've ever seen made it look ludicrous, a mish-mash of other languages thrown together for no discernible reason.
Exactly. Most programming languages have some kind of guiding principle at their core, which drives the entire direction of the language. Typically, you can sum up the entire language in a single sentence. C is like a high-level assembly language. Java is mindlessly object-oriented. Python is supposed to be really easy to read. Lisp turns everything into lists for metaprogramming purposes. Haskell is all about embedding other languages' features in a purely-functional environment. Even Perl seems to have a coherent goal of a sort: make a language that supports or can support every feature ever concieved by anyone.
What the heck is Go?
Agreed. Every bit of Go I've seen makes it out to be an unholy union of C, Python, and Erlang. I'm not learning that unless I have to for my job.
@TheCPUWizard said:
No, that is 11% (i didnt double check the exact match) of DUPLICATION and 89% unique code...
Way to miss the joke. (I haven't actually used this feature, but given that the documentation says it only matches nearly-duplicated sections of 10 or more statements, a sanely-written program should have a reported duplicate code rate of approximately zero.)
I noticed this too when I had an HP laptop, although it didn't seem to induce the level of rage you are evidently experiencing...
(I think I was just numb to HP stupidity by that point.)
The more WTFy part was the alternative to the "Windows Power On experience"—namely, HP's useless pseudo-OS thing.
In this case, I think the particular user (my mother) was not at fault; it was just a sporadic failure. And this drive was apparently actually a "backup drive", with the canonical data being on her laptop's hard disk. But that doesn't mean that what you're saying doesn't account for a significant percentage of problems in the general user base.
I just had the Micro SD card in my phone give out a couple weeks ago, albeit not so spectacularly. Based on previous behavior (random files getting corrupted) and failure mode (detecting the presence of an SD card but saying it's unformatted), I suspect it's been decaying slowly for a year or so and finally flipped one too many bits in some table somewhere—i.e. the data might still be there, I just need to find a program that can autopsy the file system.
When my mother plugged in her 2 GB USB flash drive today, she discovered that some of her files had traveled back in time to warn her of the impending failure of mathematics:
And to further slaughter the joke: the "advanced movement system" quote was supposed to be a reference to what the scan for wall jump surfaces says before you get the Screw Attack in Prime 2. (Or was it 3? Maybe it was the Spider Ball. I don't know why I even remember that line.)