nollidge

That SE page is 2 years old. Also, "performant" doesn't have any great synonyms, so unless there's a strong risk of being misunderstood (unlikely in this context), there's no reason not to use it.

(To be fair, you did start your comment pretty harshly: I doubt this is the worst product site you've ever seen.)

1) I doubt most people know what "Incognito Mode" is.

2) Why does the background & image move around with the mouse? It doesn't have anything to do with the app.

I'll add "menu navigation that relies on mouseover".

Not on Twitter it won't, because when you hit "back", there's 65 new tweets at the top of your timeline, so your position is not the same.

Do the Forms from Google Docs come anywhere close? (Serious question having not really used either product much.)

Still haven't found anything that beats Consolas (at least on Windows machines). Inconsolata comes close, but the strokes are a bit thin and spacing is too crowded.

EDIT: OK actually I just tried the hinted TTF version of Inconsolata from Google Fonts [0] and the stroke width is way better. Still crowded - like each glyph takes up juuuuuust a little too much of its bounding rectangle (whatever you would call that).

[0] http://www.google.com/fonts#UsePlace:use/Collection:Inconsol...

Text-only cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k4GBqYS...

Sorry, I downvoted this. Great code doesn't need no comments. Lots of comments is definitely a code smell, but anything of reasonable cognitive complexity will almost certainly require some comments.

I can't be certain about your first example, but writing a UX framework is a pretty straightforward thing in terms of what it needs to do, so there probably wouldn't be much need to comment about what it's doing. Why, though - that's a whole 'nother question. Surely it's missing some of those whys.

Also I'd argue one shouldn't be considered an expert programmer until they've been forced to maintain lots of legacy code. It's an incredible lesson in what not to do, knowing when to comment and when not, proper naming, which things to optimize "prematurely" based on your experience-based predictions of how your application will scale, how to organize code in support of a growing codebase, etc.

Similarly, this is a major problem with Chrome showing settings in a browser page.

At what point did they say that was supposed to be the end of the discussion?

Dunno about average, but certainly the median.

We're not talking about worst case. We're talking about 100 rows and 10 rows, which is what @pradocchia means by "selective".

Indexing shouldn't follow the theoretical worst case, it should follow what's actually in your table.

How could you possibly not mean to come off as snobbish? There is no other way to interpret your comment other than snobbery.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, necessarily, but at least be honest with us (and yourself).

EDIT: What's wrong about it is classism, though. Not everybody can afford premium microbrews.

You're not stating a fact, you're stating an opinion as though it were a fact.

Don't be surprised when nobody's fooled.

Another strong possibility is that it's not a selective adaptation at all.

OK? I'm not sure what that's supposed to do with the post I replied to.

Nobody mentions it because there's no evidence for that fact being an influence on the design. There's historical evidence for the other reasons. Yours is a just-so story.

That's one of those words that sound formal to American English speakers but not most others.

In its first year on Mars, Curiosity only travelled about 1.6 kilometers. So I imagine it'd have to be pretty damn close for them to risk driving her over there.

EDIT: source: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/06/tech/innovation/mars-curiosity...

You could have just googled "Vietnam" if you wanted to find out if you were talking out of your ass or not.

Milwaukee, WI, USA (about 100 miles north of Chicago)

Yes, my connection is fast enough.

It's way too slow for me. Taking 20-30 seconds to fill in map tiles while I'm panning around.

It's important to really know what those fallacies look like, though. Just insulting someone isn't an ad hominem, and just using emotionally charged language isn't necessarily an argument that's relying on an appeal to emotion.

And if you're going to call someone out on a fallacy, don't throw it down like a trump card. SHOW how their argument is fallacious.

I don't get how this is happening. Why are those links even in the search results?

Also it's not showing either of those sub-items for me when I google "gmail", so I wonder if it's fixed now.

Thank you for descending from the mountaintop to dispense your advice to such a lowly thinker as I, great wise sage.

(That was sarcasm. Opinions are not facts, and condescension does not signal wisdom.)

> When you're talking to people who don't, at best it does nothing

Citation needed. As I said above, and you apparently did not read, I personally find conviction and fire far more compelling than dispassion. You may differ, but do not mistake the subjective for the objective.

> when you are confident of your ability to defend your person

No, because this requires clairvoyance I don't possess in order to know the other guy doesn't also have a gun.

I mean, I'd also be pretty level-headed if I knew I could explode people's heads instantly with my mind, but we don't live in that sort of universe.