1,579 karma · joined May 28, 2023
(Almost by definition, anything doable in a higher level language is doable in a lower level language, but not necessarily vice versa. In fact, many higher level languages are themselves written in lower level languages, e.g. Python is written in C.)
But Python has got dicts built into it, which are nothing but hash tables, and they are almost certainly written in C.
Google for some videos by Raymond Hettinger about Python dictionaries.
Or look at the source code of the Python interpreter.
and yet they aspire to run or work in startups. ... hee hee.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Elea
i like how he died. guts.
startup opportunity.
oops ...
Right. I used to compile many open source packages from source on many flavors of Unix back in the day, for years. Perl, Python, MySQL, many others. Miscellaneous utilities. Esoteric languages. Even Oracle, once, on a Unix server, right at a large manufacturing company site. Even building Unix kernels from source was common on some Unix versions. And not just for a regular install. Many times, (re)building Unix kernels from source, was the only way to get some software packages or hardware devices or peripherals, like printers or terminal controllers or even hard disk controllers, to work on the system. Typically you would edit some config files or settings files manually, change values of params, or in some cases use a TUI to do that, and then rebuild via a makefile. You had to save the old kernel in case the new one didn't work, and if so, lather, rinse, repeat, till everything did work.
And that practice was nothing special. A lot if people did it routinely. Most, in fact, I'd say. Talking about devs and sysadmins here, not end users, although some of the latter probably did it too.
Many apps, tools and utilities came as source code, often in a .tar or .tar.gz file. You would untar or gunzip it into a new directory, and do your stuff, running makefiles, other shell commands, setting env. vars., etc.
Thw difference is a disorder of magnitude.
- smart band (smartwatch startup)
- gang (or band) of four (s/w engg. startup)
- pink sting (rock music startup)
- hard times or hard wear (hardware device startup - oops, no)
Perl too, IIRC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterSystems_Cach%C3%A9
Which I heard about from a friend who was using it at work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_object_database_...
Caché is first one in the table.
I remember object or object relational databases were popular at one time. maybe they still are to some extent.
5. castrol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webvan
>Bankruptcy
>The company lost over $800 million and shut down in June 2001, filing for bankruptcy and laying off 2,000 employees.
>Reasons for failure
>CNET named Webvan one of the largest dot-com flops in history.
>I don’t know who needs to hear this
Plenty of people on this forum need to hear it. Because they think otherwise.
>but raising a ton of money is not success.
Yes. It's not even an accurate predictor of future success.
>With this large Series C, we have entirely de-risked capital going forward, which in turn assures our independence.
Independence from whom?
If they mean from everyone, they left out two important categories:
The Series C givers.
The other big C. Customers.
(when older words are good enough, why invent a new word. but I see that as a trend. each new generation wants to distinguish themselves from the past one. So they invent new words as one way of doing that. and some of them get adopted into general circulation or use.)
Unless the two words, fan and fanboy, mean the different things, which i'm not interested in checking out anyway.
Edit: i checked. it is for 32 bit. works on Linux. and uses Nasm.
What is that solution?
er ...
There is also Thinking Forth.
https://www.forth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/thinking-fo...
n coined the term careware. iirc.
first-hand info. i had downloaded n used arachnophilia.
he is on hn.
you nailed it.
>then keep breaking the problem down into smaller functions until it is solved.
That technique definitely works. i have used it. so have tons of others.
it closely resembles the methods of structured programming and stepwise refinement.
Both those terms are probably there in Wikipedia, because they are notable, being well known. and check out niklaus wirth. ditto. turing prize winner or other major awardee. pascal. modula family languages. etc.
Literally some minutes later, i scrolled down below my above comment.
And saw this one.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49053201
Which doesn't validate mine, but agrees with what I said.
Except that it was posted about one hour before mine.
go figure.
This has been almost a meme on hacker news for some time. You can google it via hn dot algolia dot com by using the right keywords.
Of course, i exaggerated it a bit, just like a lot of startups and vcs pimp their stuff, just that they do it much more, and they do it for money, while my mine was for fun. ha ha ha.
They should have done that from the beginning - demanding proof of increased productivity - if that was their goal. otherwise they were not using their brains well enough.
And you doubly don't want to work with them, first because they confused output with productivity at first. and second, because they're parroting the productivity metric.
You only need one guess for whose pockets the productivity benefits go into.
10 . 9 . 8 . 7 . 6 ...