1,089 karma · joined August 9, 2015
Why not help bring some of Haskell's concepts to a more relevant language instead of bemoaning the entirely rational decisions made by millions of junior and senior developers?
Edit: the rabid insularity of the Haskell community definitely doesn't help. The Python community was dissatisfied with JS and created Coffeescript, and as of ES6 now everyone can enjoy the fat arrow syntax. Less pleasantly, the Java community got class syntax added to ES6, but at least they're trying to contribute. I'm sure Haskell has plenty of really cool things to bring to the table, but I've never heard of any of them, because all the Haskell community wants do is talk about how JavaScript sucks instead of embracing the functional side of it.
Safari has become the new IE in a lot of ways, and larger and larger websites/apps are starting to only target Firefox and Chrome, leaving Apple with the options to either give up or rejoin the mainstream.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergei_Magnitsky
http://imrussia.org/en/analysis/nation/2224-a-new-emigration...
The most substantive critics of Putin tend to reside in Russia, and they tend to have the most decisive evidence of corruption, while Americans' negative perceptions of Russia do tend to be based in ignorance. So that point is true, but saying that A is mistaken about why B is bad does not mean that B is actually great, nor does it follow that if A is bad, B isn't.
For most adults/businesses in developed countries, mobile is a secondary device, while PCs run everything from AAA games to filing systems to interfaces for medical equipment.
Later, when you do a real project, Redux makes debugging and state consistency about 10 times easier, especially on a team or coordinating between multiple teams.
IANAL, but if I was their counsel, I would definitely advise them to keep paying me a lot of money for a 10% chance it somehow works out with the regulators.
Thanks for helping my argument, I'm glad we agree that you're a bad engineer.
Plenty of other companies are able to both honor their agreements and prevent fraud, why can't HTC?
If we're both just throwing around opinions this is no different than arguing tabs vs spaces. I've noticed that Typescript tends to be embraced by teams with lots of subpar enterprise Java developers with limited knowledge of Javascript. The same is also true of Angular, so it's a good fit here, but it's more for mitigating a lack of personal knowledge and organization standards than a general benefit.
I think you're being sincere in expressing a common attitude within the Lisp/FP community, but it's an unfortunately limiting attitude. It would appear strange to an ancient Sumerian to see the Epic of Gilgamesh translated into English, but the translation is far more accessible and thus far more influential than the original.
I'm a front-end dev and I got into Clojure and Elm because of some books/libraries for functional programming in Javascript. It's doubtful I would've ever had enough interest to learn if no one in those communities made an effort to translate some of their concepts into a language that I already use.
But, on the whole, the AU is still an embarrassing dictator's club whose primary purpose is to run flak for violent undemocratic regimes and solicit foreign aid.
The vast majority of african heads of state are either outright dictators or president's of ethnically majoritarian effectively one-party states with election irregularities and numerous human rights violations.
Besides Botswana, South Africa, Ghana and one or two others, the rest of the continent exists in a state of totally irregular politics with governments that show little interest in civil or human rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
I would much prefer to see a Africa-wide organization made up out of democratic African nations and the democratic opposition within the rest of the countries, something like the early days of the ANC, although with less of a communist influence.
So we've got data plus my experience plus my team's experience in a large, very successful enterprise on one side, and we've got snark and defense of existing habits on the other? I'll take the risk, I think.
I maintain a medium-sized (50k lines) codebase with frequent requirement changes that uses a functional style, and the closest we've come to ever needing a type-check is null checks. Type errors are maybe 2% of total errors when developing, and because our code doesn't have too many layers of indirection, they've all been trivial to fix way before production. I'd much rather spend 30 seconds every week fixing a type error than spend hundreds of hours writing type files and code in a dialect of Javascript that doesn't provide 100% coverage.
If you embrace functional programming with mostly immutable data structures and avoid mutation, side-effects, and gross mixins/polymorphism, you reduce the size of your codebase significantly, which makes it much easier to keep documentation terse and up-to-date.
On the other hand, if your team is so undisciplined and untrustworthy that you need to throw errors on compilation because you don't trust them to update comments and docs or name variables descriptively and your entire team knows Java but not Javascript, I could see the huge amount of boilerplate involved in Typescript being well worth it.
As someone who's primarily a Javascript developer who does Clojure on the side, I feel that the Java approach is fundamentally impoverished. I've never met anyone who chose to develop in Typescript whose background wasn't enterprise Java, just like I've never met anyone using Ramda (before lodash replicated it) whose background wasn't in FP.
Police in the United States are used to generally treating everyone (including foreigners) with impunity, while cops in other countries dealing with US citizens are more wary of causing a diplomatic incident. There's also the novelty factor: people from high status countries are seen as interesting, and the more uncommon your presence is there, the more friendly interest officials take.
He's making a mistaken inference by assuming that how the police treat US citizens also reflects how they treat locals.
Sorry for the trouble, and thank you for moderating in a thoughtful and engaged way.
There's obviously no karmic justice, but that's still something.
Obviously it's your treehouse and you have the right to set whatever rules you want, but this interpretation of civility seems tilted towards creating an echo-chamber that nurtures increasingly authoritarian views among an increasingly homogenous community.
Or is there no way to couch that opinion in such a way that it won't be considered uncivil?
Of course we can question where technology is going, but saying "gee, group x commits crimes at 27 times the rate of group y, on average we should consider them to be more at-risk" isn't 1984, it's how car insurance, the job market, dating, the stock market, almost everything works.
It's not optimally fair by a long shot, but neither is the alternative of analyzing no data and making social policy out of how you wish things were instead of how the data tell you they actually are. The solution to data telling you unpleasant facts is to try to change those facts with policy, not put your head in the sand and bleat "totalitarianism" every time a fact enters the conversation.
I'd respect them a lot more if they came right out and said "let us sell your data or start paying for our services." That would at least be a fair choice, and I'd be happy(ish) to pay google 10 bucks a month if they promised not to sell my information on the side.
Still, I'm glad you read the wikipedia page: B+ for effort.
It's no different than $(<p>) in jQuery, so unless you're referring to some pre 2007 attitude, what are you talking about?