Should we come up with a language that's easy to teach for both computers and humans? A sort of generic human/machine DSL?
Would spacemacs work on Android?
> companies with 'absolutely no AGPL' policy cannot try the open source version of these DBs which puts these products behind others. Many companies have dumb policies. They are the ones that need to change.
>Flatly, re-writing a several decade's old, matured codebase in today's flavor-of-the-week language is not a good idea. It's a waste of time and effort. That's the sort of thinking we'd benefit from having less. Legacy…
So python will be better in version 3 and people will move to better languages? Sounds like a win-win to me.
No, it's not nonsense. The things you listed in there are incremental fixes, not fundamental. http://php.net/manual/en/language.types.type-juggling.php How would you fix this without breaking most PHP code out there?…
You don't understand. To fix problems like python3 did, you have to break older code. Php7 did nothing like that, that's why the "porting" process was so light. But it also means it didn't fix any of the big things.
> It's far more than web-based IRC How exactly?
Perhaps it's slightly subjective, since I would place FreeBSD ports in between rpm and deb in terms of difficulty.
> But why improve performance by switching to a language that's well suited to the task at hand when you can do it by switching to a language that's hip? Because your question is loaded?
php 7 is just as fast, or a teeny bit slower, than 5. Isn't that a rather interesting result, given how the php community has claimed huge performance increases in 7?
What's a monthly cap?
Does Scala fix the null problem?
If we could reliably track politicians' money flows, their opinions, their comments and their actual actions in a system that's easily queriable, it might just be easy enough for the common people to be more aware of…
Perhaps the question should be rather: Why is Post::belonging_to(usre).load(&connection) an improvement over SELECT * FROM posts WHERE usre_id = 1; ? ... to which the answer is probably more obvious.
How they got Varnish to run so slowly is indeed an interesting result :P
The sad Jolla tale made me seriously ponder about making a full change to Apple. I'm currently testing how an iPad Pro might work for a 95% laptop replacement.
In what, a decade? Seriously though, this is "Handling 1B connections in a week with Varnish".
- In the modern world, people are afraid of XML - 95% of people still don't understand XML namespaces I guess that's one way of saying that something is too complicated :)
Like all things in life, higher abstraction level of Haskell is not free. The price is more complex language (which many people don't have the capacity to properly learn) and less predictable runtime behaviour.
If you think any young language can be as complicated as C++, you're trying to be cute or do not actually know how complicated C++ actually is.
>Rust is a young language and I would be pleasantly surprised to see code written today still compile in five years. Without changes to the code? Has there even been a language where that has been true?
> As if with "modern" languages you would be safer. Poor new delusional kids. That's a rather amazing quip. How would I, in my mid-thirties, accidentally write a buffer overflow in Haskell or Rust?
The old site was broken, though: all the links lead to non-existent pages.
> Node is javascript. You may want to run the same code on client and server, and it's simpler than compiling Rust to JS. What would be the reason to do that?
Should we come up with a language that's easy to teach for both computers and humans? A sort of generic human/machine DSL?
Would spacemacs work on Android?
> companies with 'absolutely no AGPL' policy cannot try the open source version of these DBs which puts these products behind others. Many companies have dumb policies. They are the ones that need to change.
>Flatly, re-writing a several decade's old, matured codebase in today's flavor-of-the-week language is not a good idea. It's a waste of time and effort. That's the sort of thinking we'd benefit from having less. Legacy…
So python will be better in version 3 and people will move to better languages? Sounds like a win-win to me.
No, it's not nonsense. The things you listed in there are incremental fixes, not fundamental. http://php.net/manual/en/language.types.type-juggling.php How would you fix this without breaking most PHP code out there?…
You don't understand. To fix problems like python3 did, you have to break older code. Php7 did nothing like that, that's why the "porting" process was so light. But it also means it didn't fix any of the big things.
> It's far more than web-based IRC How exactly?
Perhaps it's slightly subjective, since I would place FreeBSD ports in between rpm and deb in terms of difficulty.
> But why improve performance by switching to a language that's well suited to the task at hand when you can do it by switching to a language that's hip? Because your question is loaded?
php 7 is just as fast, or a teeny bit slower, than 5. Isn't that a rather interesting result, given how the php community has claimed huge performance increases in 7?
What's a monthly cap?
Does Scala fix the null problem?
If we could reliably track politicians' money flows, their opinions, their comments and their actual actions in a system that's easily queriable, it might just be easy enough for the common people to be more aware of…
Perhaps the question should be rather: Why is Post::belonging_to(usre).load(&connection) an improvement over SELECT * FROM posts WHERE usre_id = 1; ? ... to which the answer is probably more obvious.
How they got Varnish to run so slowly is indeed an interesting result :P
The sad Jolla tale made me seriously ponder about making a full change to Apple. I'm currently testing how an iPad Pro might work for a 95% laptop replacement.
In what, a decade? Seriously though, this is "Handling 1B connections in a week with Varnish".
- In the modern world, people are afraid of XML - 95% of people still don't understand XML namespaces I guess that's one way of saying that something is too complicated :)
Like all things in life, higher abstraction level of Haskell is not free. The price is more complex language (which many people don't have the capacity to properly learn) and less predictable runtime behaviour.
If you think any young language can be as complicated as C++, you're trying to be cute or do not actually know how complicated C++ actually is.
>Rust is a young language and I would be pleasantly surprised to see code written today still compile in five years. Without changes to the code? Has there even been a language where that has been true?
> As if with "modern" languages you would be safer. Poor new delusional kids. That's a rather amazing quip. How would I, in my mid-thirties, accidentally write a buffer overflow in Haskell or Rust?
The old site was broken, though: all the links lead to non-existent pages.
> Node is javascript. You may want to run the same code on client and server, and it's simpler than compiling Rust to JS. What would be the reason to do that?