5,651 karma · joined August 17, 2009
But for actual help and humanity (if you can afford the price and the more limited selection), Ace is consistently better near where I am.
What is it with a number of blogs recently that have turned off normal right-click behavior, and probably related, the scroll behavior is awful.
This is one, and as soon as I scroll on my work high powered Macbook and it's not smooth, I'm out.
This is performative marketing for the regulators to allow the merger. No one (including the regulators) believes this, and it won't come to pass. ("More choice" won't, I mean, the merger will and a lot of regulators and politicians involved will end up with new cars, boats, and kids' college tuitions paid.)
There's middle ground here.
Perhaps they have, but there are also no shortage of middle managers that are adequately described by it. I worked for one for a few years.
Is it? My experience in the past decade is that there are more memes about people who confuse the 2 than people that confuse the 2.
Which is what the Ruby test-heavy culture is all about. I prefer types for this very reason; the compiler/checker is a complete suite of testing I don't have to write.
And just up and changing companies is also not a realistic option for many, before people start bleating that tired, privileged trope.
I know the code...when I write it. But 2 weeks later all the context is gone, and that's just _for me_. For my colleagues who also have to be in that code, they don't even start with context.
I mean do what works for you, but understand the bulk of the work that this applies to is for >1 person shops with code bases too big to fit in ones head at all, much less for more than a day or so.
You might be interested in reading PG's treatise on "the blub paradox".
This lessens, but doesn't eliminate supply side vulns. You can still get a vulnerable new release if your schedule happens to land just after the vuln lands.
TFA proposes a _delay_ in a particular dependency being pulled in. You can still update every day/hour/microsecond if you want, you just don't get the "new" thing until it's baked a bit.
They're only wrong if they provide output that isn't in the spec. Adding "bazz" isn't in the spec, and assuming that something indeterminate MIGHT come later is also not part.
We have no idea what other insects can do this or when they got the ability. Sounds more like a first in Scientists. (tongue somewhat in cheek)
Just my opinion, but this says more about perl 6's insane development schedule than python's advantages.
The insane lead time of Perl 6 to even get to a point of backwards incompatibility was it for me.
I'd started on an early version of perl 4 and went through the 5 transition and was excited about 6. For what seemed like "Duke Nukem Forever" time, and finally my fickleness drew me to other languages and frameworks.
Of course. If history (and "IME") is any guide, this was all marketing and product manager driven. Creators of all stripes now create the thing THEY want, not the thing paying CUSTOMERS want.
That's perhaps overly cynical and sometimes this is not the case if some new set of features can't be easily done in the architecture of the original, of course.