numeromancer

That's what I meant: the first you can do, the second, not.

I think the creators did it a disservice to xmake when they tried to unluaize the syntax. You can also do:

    target("foo", {
      kind = "binary",
      files = { "src/*.cpp" },
      includedirs = { "src" },
      defines = { "FOO", "BAR=BAZ" },
    })

which suits Lua better. Unfortunately you cannot do

    target {
      name = "foo",
      kind = "binary",
      files = { "src/*.cpp" },
      includedirs = { "src" },
      defines = { "FOO", "BAR=BAZ" },
    }

which would be the lua-est lua of all.

"photos of giants that built the pyramids in Egypt, all the way to short videos of pretty girls saying that the EU is bad for Poland."

Those sound funny; why would they make you sad?

I focus on peer-to-peer services, as I think it is the most important focus for free software:

- Radicle - IPFS - torrents and magnet links - i2p - syncthing - PeerTube/ActivityPub

&al

"allows them to have more resources to invest in patient care" LOL

PW;DR: Pay-Walled; Didn't Read. But...

Will this be the stuff of the housing of tomorrowind?

> will likely not be a major boost for software productivity

You can make plastic knives much faster and cheaper than metal ones. Production!

It failed to catch on outside the defense industry because that is where is started. It was long sneered at as a "language designed by committee".

In one programming class, in college, we used a text-book called "Oh my, Modula 3!". On the back they explained the title, saying "better 'Oh my, Modula 3!' than 'Oh no, Ada!'".

ASCII makes up 90% of all digital text; UTF-8 makes up the other 90%.

Just no.

    address = X
    length = *X
    address = address + 1
    while length > 0 {
        address = address + 1
        print *address
    }

I am not waiting for Janet for Ethereals. Once it ships, it will always have been available.

No.

Stanley Kubrick was one of that kind of people who cannot take criticism of anything they do.

The Abolition of Man - C. S. Lewis

All Things Considered - G. K. Chesterton

Some others I daren't mention.

Category Theory for Programmers - Bartosz Milewski

The Design of Relational Databases - Heikki Mannila, Kari-Jouko Raiha

Whenever you extrapolate the "corporate vision" of these VC pontificators, you see a company all of whose revenue goes to investor share-grabbers, and whose projects are all funded by employees who are paid nothing.

The Deep State treats human rights as damage, and routes around it.

I think we'll be led by a programmer from another language who comes and unites the tribes against the languages that now dominate, a voice from the outer world. The "Lispan al-Gaib", if you will.

Is this a trial run for an April 1 article?

A detailed criticism of Diamond's hypothesis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFECyeihuZY

We ran so much faster when we didn't have to run with shoes on.

> Any invocation of an external program can fail for a variety of reasons, and the shell doesn't provide adequate mechanisms for dealing with it, apart from exit codes and filtering error text output.

True, handling multiple sub-processes is difficult in most Unix shells. This is a function where Powershell could have done so much better, but didn't. It is somewhat better than bash&co, but could have been much more so. Python does it much better than Powershell does.

He built several utilities for doing what is described here.

https://cr.yp.to/ucspi-tcp.html

These are great for duct-taping connections. I created a whole suite of utilities for another programs for uploading firmware updates. I was able to create one program for handling the uploads with several different comms protocols and devices, without having to handle details of tcp connections, serial connections, UDP, etc. socat is another great tool for this.

This company creates sensors for monitoring power-grid lines which are powered from line induction:

https://www.gridsentry.us/

Worsidge's headline:

"Can this headline be answered by the word 'no'?"

The text implies that any second call to getenv invalidates the returned value of any prior call to getenv; even without threads, without calling setenv, a second call to the function invalidates the return from an earlier call. I re-affirm my conclusion, without qualification: BROKEN.

It says more than that:

"The returned string pointer might be invalidated or the string content might be overwritten by a subsequent call to getenv()"

You don't even need threads for this to be unsafe; another call to the same function may invalidate earlier-gotten pointers. I don't see how to interpret this as anything but broken.

I wonder if anyone has done a study of the relation of market share to software quality. It seems as though there is an inflection point of the market share measure above which software quality declines significantly because the fear of being outdone is diminished.

Or, perhaps, piracy measurement is link to box office revenue.

How much work does it take to go from an engine that can read standard XML to one that can read an ODT document's XML and do something useful with it? At what point of complexity does that engine create a de facto standard?

This is far too possible to be funny.