Mesopropithecus

Not a fan of snarky comments generally, but this one made me laugh. And cry.

The author's notion of OO is intentionally narrow. I don't know about Simula, but C++ is still reasonably close to Algol, compared to what Smalltalk and Self bring to the table (the author also mentions programming environments vs. text files).

If you accept that narrow definition at least for the scope of the article, it makes sense.

Oh absolutely - my critizism is about the decision to make them lazy by default.

TIL that the Clojure rationale doesn't mention or motivate lazy sequences which are all over the place in Clojure. That laziness (in collection APIs, duh) was a major reason that I stopped using the language more after 1 or 2 years of toying around. Maybe that concept was too foreign for me, but objectively lazy seqs don't compose with other language features like dynamic scoping.

Yet I'm happy I tried it, learned a bunch of stuff along the way.

The raw margin (per unit) can be high even when the manufacturer is a poorly run company.

ASUS Zenphone has a setting that lets you set a charging limit at 80, 90, or 100%.

Cool stuff. What's funny is that when learning Smalltalk, I got used to proportional fonts for programming, but only in a Smalltalk environment. I still find it odd to see that in another editor, and I have no idea why.

In what way?

Just wanted to mention that amending the Swiss constitution is near trivial, one could start there :).

My fist thought on reading the title and confirmed by looking at the article.

Looks like they meant C.

Technology is one thing. I'm wondering why the crew weren't required to hand in the CVR right after the incident.

Hasn't helped me either, and I'm in all likelyhood a bit younger than most people's dads :).

This is an anti pattern which good directly against the concept of "affordance."

Given the car is lightweight while the fan generates such strong downforce, would it lift off if it was to actually flip over?

> [...] most modern, procedural languages (C++, Go, Python, Java, etc.) all very similar in terms of their basic concepts. [...] With Rust, though, one needs to learn entirely new ideas — things like lifetimes, ownership, [...]

Maybe an oversight, C++ is misplaced in that list. C++ without knowing about ownership and lifetimes is a recipe for disaster.

Cool, thanks! This sticks out from PL syntax criticism that goes along the lines of "not enough curly braces" etc.

As somebody who appreciates Lisp, I feel your pain. As somebody who also appreciates Rust, I'm curious, what is your baseline?

> Rust does require structuring programs in a "Rust way" to avoid fighting with things it can't prove to be safe.

That was my concern that I had when I started learning the language. I think it is true, but I was surprised how quickly I managed to get used to the Rust way.

Thank you! I found that hard to dig up even on the linked page.

Not following, which 1 reliable power system do you mean?

Unfortunately you are right.

Morality and legality are two different things. If your morality is at odds with Human Rights, maybe your country with DiFfErEnT mOraLiTy shouldn't be part of the UN. Last time I checked, Qatar was part of the UN.

Mobilization could be a sign that it's no longer about face but about ass.

Unfortunately the HN text input won't let me do this, but a funny starter for the article would have been this:

'(Spanish flag)'[::-1]

basically ''.join([chr(127466), chr(127480)]) vs. ''.join([chr(127466), chr(127480)])[::-1]

I'll add this to my collection of party tricks and show myself out.

Cool article!

And worse yet, imagine you're liable for not supporting each and every new web standard that there is 100%, right away. Just to illustrate how absurd such a ruling would have been.

What you mean is that C++ doesn't have a way to (easily) let you check whether a given reference is null or not. int* a = NULL; int& b = *a; compiles and runs just fine.