>The Bible is not remotely as well written as the Iliad, nor is it comparable as a work of philosophy to Plato.
Tens of Thousands of top notch literary critics, philosophers and intellectuals beg to differ...
972 karma · joined November 14, 2012
Tens of Thousands of top notch literary critics, philosophers and intellectuals beg to differ...
I don't see any joke. Jokes are of the type "Knock knock, who's there", etc. Using GoF patterns in a language without interfaces or type hinting? Not so much.
Most of the design patterns can be applied in any language, some languages even have inherent support for some of them. Not much to do with types or interfaces (besides them offering extra checks).
Facade, Decorator, Flyweight, Iterator, Proxy, etc... Equally at home in Java, C++, Smalltalk, Python or Ruby...
>On a recent article, another "Ruby expert" (who writes and sells programming books) was shocked by the fact that you can reuse code with inheritance. You should read it.
I guess you are referring to this:
Yes, no magic unicorns and fairies spreading pixie dust to wake you up at just the right moment, I'm afraid.
The indecipherable to you message of the story is: don't go back to sleep if you happen to wake up shortly before the alarm clock. Just wake up.
Now, if you woke yourself up at 3:00, as you ask in your previous comment, that doesn't fall on the "shortly" period before a 6:30 way, so by all means go back to sleep. I mean, Oh, those hard decisions...
>But it's not just this one thing. I see so many people intent on sharing their personal revelations that it's now impossible to find genuine insights that are more widely applicable than that one person's experience. This is the age of crowd-sourced "wisdom", where everyone thinks their own discoveries will apply universally. Anecdote over data, experience over research.
I think that what you write above ONLY APPLIES TO YOU. Perhaps you should do some more research into the matter, instead of shoving your personal anecdotes on to us.
Most of the times the guys that can come with "brilliant solutions" on new problems are those that know the solved problems inside and out.
The other guys just keep reinventing the wheel (only worse).
Then you are not good enough for them. They want someone that breaths and knows these things inside out and backwards.
Any half-competent dabbler can look them up and implement them. Creating novel solutions takes more deep understanding of them than that.
Then go back to sleep, dummy. Does he have to spell it out for you?
>Where is the wisdom that solves all my problems, enabling me not to have to make any decisions?
That's called being dead. Until then try to take advice for what it is: a recipe that you can try and adjust to taste.
Well known facts should need no citation upon an audience of educated adults.
Still, here's a secondary corroboration for you: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020474090457719...
I find responsive design a cheap copout, jack of all screen resolutions, master of none.
Just create a good desktop design, and make sure it plays on a modern smartphone with tap-to-zoom. Tablets will work automatically.
I dont'see "more diversity of screen sizes" coming affecting this at all. New screen sizes will just be bigger than an 2010 iPhone/Android phone. Those can play well with desktop-sized designs anyway.
And even if you have a 30" monitor you still don't need more than 1000-1200 pixels of webpage estate anyway. For one, people can't read or follow freakishly long lines of text easily.
No, you actually AGREE with this post.
The posts says "for 95% of cases", that is, for most cases.
Your case, "firefighting", is a 5% outlier.
It's not a manipulation or a trick.
It's a "reward system". You get X only if you do Y. Period.
It has worked wonders for ages. Still does in most parts of the world. The US has a messed up system that ends with annoying, over-self-indulged, entitled children and adults.
So your point is even more irrelevant to the original discussion.
Actually it's very much a law. And it's how the law works in the real world. It might not be "justice", but it's law alright.
From the kid who the local cop knows his family and lets him walk on something that would land someone else in juvenile prison to the rich guy literally getting away with murder. And there are stuff that cops selectively enforce everyday, e.g ignoring someone selling dope small-time, because he snitches bigger fishes for them.
A law can still be effective, if the selective enforcement prevents the majority of the people of breaking it.
While I am pro Aaron and anti-MIT this is argument is weak sause.
So what? I also know what I could do to secure my house more robustly (put an electric fence, more cameras, a steel door with secure locks etc), and I don't do it. Does that give you the right to enter into it against my will, much less to a robbery?
>This debate has gone on long enough; most of HN disagrees with your position. Let it drop.
And most of US citizens disagree with you (maybe), and say that abortions should remain illegal. Should you just let it drop? One should not abandon his views because of what a majority (or minority) says. And neither is what the majority agrees with always right.
For example, with all it's lisp scripting capabilities and 30+ year history, Emacs is an early nineties editor UI, UX and codebase wise.
What can't you do in ML that you could in OS X 10.1?
If and only if the app signing and approval by Apple gets mandatory to run apps, a la iOS, then you'll have a point.
As for now, all the new signing etc are additions on top of the regular infrastructure, and the reason they were added was security.
Most security nerds find app signing and sandboxing a good idea.
All those points are moot. It's like pointing C's many flaws (or PHP's myriads). Or Ruby's. Or Javas. All languages have several syntactic or semantic issues.
It didn't "took the industry a decade to learn Javascript". It took the industry a decade to have:
1) Mostly compatible implementation of JS and the DOM. 2) Powerful enough computers and JS VM so it can be used for fancy stuff. 3) A reason to use it (AJAX and involved web apps).
Nothing of which has anything to do with Javascript's "difficulty" or "quirkiness" as a language.
It was designed to be easy to use with callbacks for website UI style events (which is not quite the same as async programming).
The Node async is just a half-thought implementation of async on top of a VM that doesn't really support it. The thing it has going for it is traction (and some people new to async are amused by the callback style and find it "challenging", whatever).
Scala/Dart/Go/Rust/Haskell/etc have a better async story.
ES6 will add some promising stuff in the future (no pun intended).
Most Android devices are sold free with contract or with low tier phones to people who don't care much about smartphones. As for Android tablets, they don't sell that well, period. That's the huge majority of Android users. A minor one is geeks like us, open source fans, etc, that prefer it to iOS. (And that still leaves tons of geeks preferring iOS).
If you need any proof that the majority of Android users are not that technical, just check these "relative number of active devices": http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html
Half a year later, only 10 percent have the latest release. And over 50% are two releases behind.
Neither the majority not the minority of Android users are much likely to buy a programmers' editor for their Android phone or tablet.
Yes, but only if by "spreading shit on everyone else" you mean:
1) a comparison between the speed of development/releases of ST (which was the very topic of this comment thread) and that of TextMate.
2) a generic statement that ST2 was as stable as any other competing browser.
So, really NO, not at all. Oversensitive much? As if "the other editors" (of which I only mention _one_) are gonna feel hurt?
>This is a discussion about sublime, not other editors.
No discussion about anything can be made without relating to other things, especially of it's own category.
If someone tells you "is this editor worth it" the only possible answer will take into account the other editors and what they offer.
Actually true. And truer to the dynamic spirit of Javascript than ===. Sometimes things don't have to be absolutely equal to be equal, "1" and 1 will do just fine. You can sanitise at another level.
>Oh, you didn't wrap your all your code in an anonymous, self-calling function? You lose.
You loose nothing. You merely expose some names to the global namespace. Which might just be just one name, anyway, sans the anonymous self-calling function. (e.g
window.ns = {}, ns.doSomething = function() ...
>Oh, what you thought it was okay to leave off semicolons and var statements because they aren't required? Sorry.
Sorry for nothing much. A lot of people leave them off with no problem at all. The few edge cases are not unlike any other language's edge cases.
>Hmm, you didn't know how to manage dependencies between scripts? Should have studied harder.
Or not. If you got the result you want.
>You tried to iterate over an array? Ridiculous.
You probably mean the "for i in" idiom. Which is perfectly fine over an array. The only problem arises if someone has extended the Array prototype, which you shouldn't do anyway. And even that can be bypassed with one extra hasOwnProperty check. Not to mention it's solved in ES6.
>Your brain exploded when trying to write a series of asynchronous functions in continuation style? A pity, really.
Well, that's just because Node async style is amateur hour BS, like trying to do closures in C or logic programming in PHP. Doable, but not supported by the language. Use Go or Dart or Haskell or C# or Scala or Tornado etc for your async needs.
Really? I don't see IntelliJ Idea suffering much from NOT being Open Source. Or even TextMate for that matter, which still has friends even while being mediocre at launch and 7 years late to show any improvement.
>TextMate was suffering from not being open sourced, and hadn't shown any improvement in 7 years. So he open sourced it, and it is now actively developed by the community.
I follow the repo but I don't see any exciting action. Maybe in a few more years (which is my definition of stagnating).
>IntelliJ CE has been open source for quite some time now.
Yes, but that's just a gimmick. All the interesting stuff is in the commercial edition, and it's not like IDEA is managed like an Open Source project, it's just released as one (like Oracle's MySQL).
And it makes ST another bloody Open Source project, designed by a community, to fall by the wayside and stagnate like Gnome, Emacs, Vim etc...