serichsen

Take a look at Common Lisp. There, string is a synonym for vector of characters.

There are no encoding problems, either.

At least in ECMA-262 5, Ch. 15.12.2, there is a NOTE: "In the case where there are duplicate name Strings within an object, lexically preceding values for the same key shall be overwritten."

It still does not feel right.

Come on, "considered harmful" is really overused now. I usually do not even read articles with "considered harmful" in the title anymore, because it is usually someone whining about a thing he has not properly understood.

This obviously only applies when grep is all you have to find-who-calls and find-definition.

I agree, but this still will not make a bug tracker superfluous---if only for tracking change requests.

Significant whitespace is evil.

The following shows a common misconception:

"There is no reason why you cannot combine strong types or optional types with LISP, in fact, there are already LISP dialects out there that did this."

Common Lisp already has strong, dynamic, optional types.

"Strong" means: there is no implicit type conversion.

"Dynamic" means: runtime things (objects) have a type, not necessarily the (static) variables that hold them. This is also called "late binding".

"Optional" means: you need not specify a type for everything; types can be inferred from context.

I can confirm that the map-reduce thing does not hold up to any performance-wise expectations.

Slide 56 states: "Schema vs. Schema-less is just a different version of dynamic typing vs. static typing."

Wrong.

If anything, it is a different version of weak typing vs. strong typing. That is totally orthogonal.

Java is the next COBOL.

For someone from the civilized world, there is a clear way from "innocent" to "convicted": through a conviction.

Only a court can convict someone.

Only a convicted person may be legally punished.

Before a conviction can occur, there must be suspicion, and most probably an arrest. A suspect is still to be treated as innocent.

If you allow suspects to be punished, you allow innocents to be punished. At that point, the rule of law has ended, and your country is not part of the civilized world anymore.

You should always loose your motivation. That is no problem. Go wild!

Wait, did you mean "lose"?

You can actually get quite far just with Hunchentoot (and even its built-in "easy handlers"), CL-WHO and some Parenscript.

Continuous deployment! In your face, Agile! :)

Everything can be done in one line of code of a language that does not require newlines.

Define a function that transforms an infix form to a prefix form. Write a reader macro that understands some special character to mean that the following form is an infix form and uses the function above to transform it. Done.

The description "one per line" for the input does not reflect how it is displayed afterwards. It rather seems to be separated by any whitespace.

Well yes, if you have a _really_ dumb editor that makes keyboard navigation clumsy as hell, then you are faster with a mouse.

It is just like that if you go into the jungle, you are faster on foot than in a Porsche.

I would not even touch it if I was _paid_ $ 15 for getting it.

What happened to "ne bis in idem"?

Take a look at that list of features. Every single point is a "what to do", not a "how to do it". That's not what patents are (or rather, should be) about.

Seriously, who is "they" in the title, Apple or Samsung?

They can protest however they want, they will not change the basic facts: that a country with Japan's population density needs dense power---a lot of power from as little land as possible.

Keeping existing nuclear plants for as long as possible, while the next generation of nuclear plants is being actively developed, is a sane choice for any country, but especially for Japan.

Of course, I can see the incredulous voices "How can you say that, when in Fukushima etc.". However, please see (again) the facts: radiation death toll is still zero. Compare that to the death toll from pollution, if Japan had built coal plants instead of nuclear plants all those decades. For numbers, google "deaths per terawatthour".

Yes.

German.

To me, this question sounds like: "You moved your furniture by foot across town? Why didn't you use the bus?"

To those still not convinced: do you really like to work on an intellectual need-to-know basis?

I don't understand the attractiveness of "no-semicolon" in the sense of "a statement/expression ends at a line end, except if ...", with some arbitrary rules replacing "...". This seems to be a current trend. Why can't we have simple, unambiguous syntax with no pitfalls in new languages?

I want to point at the start of a statement/expression, ask "where does this end?", and get back a single, general answer, like "at the semicolon" or "at the corresponding closing parenthesis".

That is what punctuation is for. Imagine reading an english text with no punctuation, where the author just made sure to end a line wherever he wanted a sentence to end. Do you really want to stop at each line end and have to answer the question whether it ends the sentence?

Yeah, well, I opened the site and it was all just a mess. There were perhaps some messages jumbled together, but in a much too big font to sensibly read. In front, there was an actually readable message in a white box with red borders that told me that my browser (just a few months old) cannot display that "puppy".

I have no idea what that is supposed to tell me.

I'd like to see ABCL in that list (a Common Lisp implementation for the JVM).

Sorry, but the author just has not understood how git works. It is explained in the Stackoverflow answers linked to.