archived stringclasses 2
values | author stringlengths 3 20 | author_fullname stringlengths 4 12 ⌀ | body stringlengths 0 22.5k | comment_type stringclasses 1
value | controversiality stringclasses 2
values | created_utc stringlengths 10 10 | edited stringlengths 4 12 | gilded stringclasses 7
values | id stringlengths 1 7 | link_id stringlengths 7 10 | locked stringclasses 2
values | name stringlengths 4 10 ⌀ | parent_id stringlengths 5 10 | permalink stringlengths 41 91 ⌀ | retrieved_on stringlengths 10 10 ⌀ | score stringlengths 1 4 | subreddit_id stringclasses 1
value | subreddit_name_prefixed stringclasses 1
value | subreddit_type stringclasses 1
value | total_awards_received stringclasses 19
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
True | [deleted] | null | > I'm curious if you are also going to complain about QT, GCC, and LLVM/Clang then, as they also have language extensions.
Well, but GCC and Clang didn't rewrite the complete language with their extensions :) | null | 0 | 1316455106 | False | 0 | c2l0vrb | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l0vrb | t1_c2kz6yw | null | 1427620066 | -1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | pnpbios | null | well, Windows is proprietary. It's understandable to be upset about the one or the other (either using extensions or being proprietary), but not reasonably both at the same time, while not being already upset at at-least one.
If you are upset about an extension being used, that's understandable, but to now be upset that it's a proprietary one for an always closed platform doesn't make sense.
If you were always upset about proprietary software, and are just now upset about a set of C++ extensions, it seems silly.
| null | 0 | 1316455418 | False | 0 | c2l0xdv | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l0xdv | t1_c2l0u3s | null | 1427620088 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MaRmARk0 | null | It's not working only on Apple products so it's probably Flash. It would be problematic to make it using html5&javascript only. | null | 0 | 1316455435 | False | 0 | c2l0xhf | t3_kkod0 | null | t1_c2l0xhf | t3_kkod0 | null | 1427620088 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Print as a PDF?
Something in an eBook format would be better though... | null | 0 | 1316455445 | False | 0 | c2l0xj4 | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l0xj4 | t1_c2l08cz | null | 1427620097 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | jimbokun | null | There are a few topics on performance improvements, and I would say Java performance improvement from 1998 until now has been a resounding success.
I would also count JDBC as something that just performs its assigned purpose so well hardly anyone talks about it anymore, except maybe for new ways to bind it to JVM languages. I don't remember Java Blend, but certainly the OO-Relational niche has been well served in Java.
As others have mentioned, creating a standard, popular UI framework pretty much failed.
The EJB stuff kind of succeeded in a lot of it getting developed and deployed over the years, but kind of dismally failed in the sense of programmers universally despising it and moving to better technologies if given the chance. | null | 0 | 1316455485 | False | 0 | c2l0xqm | t3_kjf91 | null | t1_c2l0xqm | t3_kjf91 | null | 1427620092 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I just thought it was dumb... | null | 0 | 1316455516 | False | 0 | c2l0xw9 | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l0xw9 | t1_c2kzzr9 | null | 1427620094 | 11 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | pnpbios | null | neither did Microsoft. Nothing is stopping anybody from doing it the hard way. Just think of the new sugar as some really expressive macro. | null | 0 | 1316455517 | False | 0 | c2l0xwi | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l0xwi | t1_c2l0vrb | null | 1427620094 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | banuday | null | This is what Joel Spolsky calls [apps hungarian](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Wrong.html), and it is a fairly pragmatic way to make "wrong code look wrong". Although [some](http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/808) would tell you "here's a dime kid, get yourself a real type system". | null | 0 | 1316455613 | False | 0 | c2l0yex | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l0yex | t1_c2l0mkk | null | 1427620101 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | skilldrick | null | You can only change enumerable if you're using ES5. | null | 0 | 1316455615 | False | 0 | c2l0yf7 | t3_kkbpe | null | t1_c2l0yf7 | t1_c2l0uc1 | null | 1427620101 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | malkarouri | null | Thanks. It's clearer to me now. | null | 0 | 1316455668 | False | 0 | c2l0yoi | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l0yoi | t1_c2ky71q | null | 1427620104 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | stonefarfalle | null | >Java, not all type checking is done at compile time.
All type checking from a type safety perspective is done at compile time. Null pointer exception isn't a type exception it has nothing to do with the type of the variable only its value. The equivalent in Haskell is taking head of an empty list, it compiles just fine and blows up during execution. Not sure what you mean by everything is bound to its type in Haskell, everything in Java is bound to its type as well. | null | 0 | 1316455693 | False | 0 | c2l0ysl | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l0ysl | t1_c2kze54 | null | 1427620105 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | stonefarfalle | null | Null isn't a type it is a value.
int is a type so I can say int i; null is not a type I can't say null i;
I can't show you a type error in java it is type safe. | null | 0 | 1316455763 | False | 0 | c2l0z6k | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l0z6k | t1_c2kz2eq | null | 1427620110 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | lanzkron | null | To quote a few of the comments
**Paul**
> Android more “popular” or more “difficult” requiring more aid from other developers? Did iOS 4 solve a ton of the development challenges from previous releases?
**Darryl**
>Android sees more activity than iOS on StackOverflow because the Android documentation is much worse than than iOS documentation. There is also the fact that Google explicitly refers new developers to StackOverflow if they have basic questions about Android development. | null | 0 | 1316455881 | False | 0 | c2l0zsh | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l0zsh | t3_kkp4z | null | 1427620119 | 21 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | introspeck | null | I was sort of a FORTH evangelist back in the '80s. We did some amazing things in very limited memory footprints. But in the end, I got really tired of SWAP DROP ROT. Stack manipulation is something compilers can do very well.
Edit:: what I miss most about FORTH is the ability to define new programming constructs on-the-fly. I suppose LISP offers that too, but I haven't taken the time to learn LISP.
| null | 0 | 1316455996 | True | 0 | c2l10cv | t3_kkegr | null | t1_c2l10cv | t1_c2l0km3 | null | 1427620126 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | NinjaBob | null | They're using flash. On a slightly related note if you are using chrome you can right click and select inspect element to see the pertinent bit of script. | null | 0 | 1316456188 | False | 0 | c2l11cp | t3_kkod0 | null | t1_c2l11cp | t3_kkod0 | null | 1427620139 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | introspeck | null | FORTH packs down very small. Its code is just a sequence of function addresses or literals. For very small apps, assembler would be smaller, but once they get a bit larger, FORTH overtakes it in space efficiency. | null | 0 | 1316456221 | False | 0 | c2l11ho | t3_kkegr | null | t1_c2l11ho | t1_c2l0t4i | null | 1427620141 | 10 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316456284 | False | 0 | c2l11vl | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l11vl | t3_kkp4z | null | 1427620151 | -15 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | lanzkron | null | I'm not saying that Android isn't greater than iOS, just that the methods used to _prove_ that fact are a tad dubious. | null | 0 | 1316456361 | False | 0 | c2l12aq | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l12aq | t1_c2l11vl | null | 1427620153 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | juancn | null | I always liked this version better: "Syntactic sugar produces semantic cavities"
It's something you learn the hard way when writing compilers. | null | 0 | 1316456398 | False | 0 | c2l12hm | t3_ki52y | null | t1_c2l12hm | t3_ki52y | null | 1427620158 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cdsmith | null | I'm confident that "never gets slower" will be false. It's nearly impossible to replace one reasonable heuristic with another one that *never* performs worse. | null | 0 | 1316456421 | False | 0 | c2l12m5 | t3_kkfbs | null | t1_c2l12m5 | t1_c2l0j4y | null | 1427620160 | 22 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | fubarfubarfubar | null | Where the heck do you work that's actually like this? | null | 0 | 1316456504 | False | 0 | c2l131x | t3_kk5f4 | null | t1_c2l131x | t1_c2kyz7y | null | 1427620162 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kilrizzy | null | Yeah, I had to comment to help with people's sarcasm meter :/
Reddit: serious business | null | 0 | 1316456629 | False | 0 | c2l13p5 | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l13p5 | t1_c2kzzr9 | null | 1427620169 | -1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | jinglebells | null | Did you see [this](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/kketr/javascript_garden_a_must_read_for_all_javascript/c2l0a8k) | null | 0 | 1316456731 | False | 0 | c2l149o | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l149o | t1_c2l08cz | null | 1427620177 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | gospelwut | null | The only way to surf.
Do you rage when you have to whitelist JS just to read an article? I do. Then I leave the site. | null | 0 | 1316456767 | False | 0 | c2l14hd | t3_kkod0 | null | t1_c2l14hd | t1_c2l0txp | null | 1427620180 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | s73v3r | null | Trade Secrets are not an answer to this problem, for the simple fact that they never have to be released. The recipe for Coke is a trade secret; it still hasn't gotten out. Note that I'm just using Coke as an example of trade secrets that don't become public, not as something that progresses the sciences and useful arts.
Furthermore, you talk about others reverse engineering the secret, or coming up with it independently. But what reason do they have to release their discoveries? Why don't they just keep them secret as well? If you have all these secrets, nothing really gets disclosed, and the wheel keeps getting reinvented over and over and over again.
This comes to the core of why patents were invented in the first place. Master craftsmen would discover new ways of doing things. These new discoveries were highly valuable and prized, so they were often kept top secret. The master would not just give out this knowledge. And often, if he didn't have a trusted apprentice to pass it down to, the knowledge would die with him. Thus, time and energy would have to be spent in trying to reverse engineer that knowledge, instead of building on it, and creating more knowledge.
>I just can't reconcile the arbitrary time period that a patent sets where that knowledge is available but inaccessible with the Constitutional charge to Congress that it must "Promote the Progress of Sciences and of the Useful Arts."
It's quite easy. Having the knowledge available after a period of time means that others can eventually use that knowledge. Having the limited time gives inventors incentive to create and make their findings public by giving them a limited amount of time to which they can exclusively use it and profit off it.
>It doesn't do that when the world is forced to sit on their hands for 15-20 years while they wait for this knowledge to pass into the Public Domain.
But it does. Inventors make a discovery, and in exchange for making their findings public, they get a limited monopoly with which to profit off it. The public still gets that knowledge, furthering the body of knowledge in the world. | null | 0 | 1316456782 | False | 0 | c2l14kt | t3_khvyw | null | t1_c2l14kt | t1_c2ktaca | null | 1427620180 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | s73v3r | null | They would have tried to do it, but when their design was ripped off, they'd have to lay most of those people off. Having the patent allowed them time enough to prosper from their design so that they could hire those new people, and not worry about their customers just taking the design and getting it made in China. | null | 0 | 1316456882 | False | 0 | c2l1544 | t3_khvyw | null | t1_c2l1544 | t1_c2kvucv | null | 1427620188 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | LinkMePlox | null | This is a really awesome tutorial and should be upvoted more than it has been... | null | 0 | 1316456962 | False | 0 | c2l15jq | t3_khxzd | null | t1_c2l15jq | t3_khxzd | null | 1427620194 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I know it's an oft repeated mantra, but I don't like this idea. If I happen to be building on some code someone else wrote, which is pretty much every day, and I find a bug I'm gonna fix it. I don't want to have to notify whomever wrote it in the first place and wait for them to find the time to fix it. If it's a serious bug I'll tell them about it after I fix it. | null | 0 | 1316457166 | False | 0 | c2l16kh | t3_kk5f4 | null | t1_c2l16kh | t3_kk5f4 | null | 1427620208 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | maxime1008 | null | But it does not target Leon (sparc) binaries, as used in space systems. | null | 0 | 1316457323 | False | 0 | c2l17gn | t3_kkih6 | null | t1_c2l17gn | t1_c2l0lia | null | 1427620219 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | midri | null | Waaayyy more useful timeout/interval code I wrote a while back:
// Timeout
Timeout = function(func,time,scope,args) {
if(typeof func == 'function') {
var timeout = setTimeout(function() {
func.apply(scope,args || []);
},time);
return {
kill: function() {
clearTimeout(timeout);
}
}
} else {
throw('Function required for timeout');
}
};
// Interval
Interval = function(func,time,scope,args) {
if(typeof func == 'function') {
var interval = setInterval(function() {
func.apply(scope,args || []);
},time);
return {
kill: function() {
clearInterval(interval);
}
}
} else {
throw('Function required for interval');
}
};
This lets you pass variables in context as well as returns an object for each you can object.kill() on to cancel. Have not extended this in a while, feel free to use it.
This allows you to do stuff like this:
function test() {
var timeout = new Timeout(function(arg1,arg2){
console.info(this); // Outputs this as if you called it from inside function test
console.info(arg1); // outputs var1
console.info(arg2); // outputs var2
},1000,this,['var1','var2']);
} | null | 0 | 1316457358 | True | 0 | c2l17nk | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l17nk | t3_kketr | null | 1427620222 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ChiperSoft | null | ... because patents are stopping chinese ripoffs SO well.
And what company stops making a product just because their competitor comes out with something identical? | null | 0 | 1316457457 | False | 0 | c2l186o | t3_khvyw | null | t1_c2l186o | t1_c2l1544 | null | 1427620229 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Oh wow, this would be incredibly awesome to have. It'd be nice to get back into Plan 9 / Inferno hacking. | null | 0 | 1316457493 | False | 0 | c2l18cy | t3_kjj9n | null | t1_c2l18cy | t3_kjj9n | null | 1427620231 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | 00kyle00 | null | >Why do people _(snip)_ insist on checking for errors everywhere?
I hate you. | null | 0 | 1316457565 | False | 0 | c2l18pf | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l18pf | t1_c2ky8gl | null | 1427620236 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | LifeBandit666 | null | Hahahaha | null | 0 | 1316457918 | False | 0 | c2l1ail | t3_kjj9n | null | t1_c2l1ail | t1_c2kxc1j | null | 1427620264 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | KyteM | null | Because it CAN be programmed in C++? And OP is showing how? Maybe you don't like COM, but the fact is, it worked, it works and it'll continue working. If it's a PITA to use, well, sucks. That's why C++/CX was made to deal with the suckage. If you want more classic C++, build the wrappers yourself. You should only need to do it once. | null | 0 | 1316457978 | False | 0 | c2l1atq | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1atq | t1_c2l0j2s | null | 1427620268 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | FEiN | null | Thanks, was a good read. I've always been interested in compilers and their workings. | null | 0 | 1316458104 | False | 0 | c2l1bho | t3_kkfbs | null | t1_c2l1bho | t3_kkfbs | null | 1427620280 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | funkiee | null | Did I just read an entire novella? | null | 0 | 1316458297 | False | 0 | c2l1cim | t3_kgqnz | null | t1_c2l1cim | t1_c2kac45 | null | 1427620288 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | KyteM | null | When I say "native C++", I mean "native code with no special runtime requirements". Jeez, way to nitpick. It means "I can write the equivalent code in pure C++ and they'll both compile to the same binary".
And Haskell can NOT be compiled to native code. Not without embedding/linking to the Haskell runtime, in which case we could say any and all apps are equivalent because you can always embed/link their respective runtimes. C++/CX compiles to native code with no additional dependency on a runtime library like VB6 did & .NET does. (Well, beyond #includes and whatnot, but those happen in pure C++ too, so it doesn't count)
COM is not unusable. You just don't like it. Too bad. | null | 0 | 1316458322 | False | 0 | c2l1cm3 | t3_kgl4f | null | t1_c2l1cm3 | t1_c2l0ka3 | null | 1427620296 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | 299 | null | So Office, the best selling software of all time, isn't good for production use? | null | 0 | 1316458331 | False | 0 | c2l1cnl | t3_kip3s | null | t1_c2l1cnl | t1_c2kpvba | null | 1427620293 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | It was basically a demo were he took an existing silverlight app and built it on Windows 8 without making any changes. Showing it was compatible with Windows 8.
Then he showed how to change the silverlight app into a metro app, which entailed changing a few namespaces and the lines of code making calls to the network API.
The last thing he did was demo binding the old data source to some new metro UI control. Also, hooking the app into some sort of Windows 8 search feature. | null | 0 | 1316458380 | False | 0 | c2l1cvl | t3_kip3s | null | t1_c2l1cvl | t1_c2kwew7 | null | 1427620291 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MarshallBanana | null | > No, you do not. The platform SDK has been free and will always be free.
Specifically, you do not have to *buy* Visual Studio. You still have to use Visual C++, and can not use mingw, if for some reason you'd prefer to do that. (C99 support, cross-compilation, ideology...) | null | 0 | 1316458524 | False | 0 | c2l1dk3 | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1dk3 | t1_c2kz6yw | null | 1427620300 | 10 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | coob | null | Or you can file a bug report and have the issue fixed, as I have done, multiple times.
I'm a moron. | null | 0 | 1316458596 | False | 0 | c2l1dwg | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1dwg | t1_c2l11vl | null | 1427620304 | 9 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316458624 | 1423145597 | 0 | c2l1e14 | t3_kkod0 | null | t1_c2l1e14 | t3_kkod0 | null | 1427620306 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | skew | null | I think all you are seeing is that unsafePerformIO can violate purity. That's pretty bad, but bad like ClassCastException, not bad like segfault - bad like passing a Bool where a String is expected.
It *can* be used to violate type safety as well - it might be fun to figure out how (I saw a spoiler, maybe it's too hard). | null | 0 | 1316458650 | True | 0 | c2l1e51 | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1e51 | t1_c2kzzbz | null | 1427620307 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MarshallBanana | null | What exactly is "proprietary" about it, though? Is there anything preventing gcc, or (perhaps more likely) clang from implementing the same extensions, other than the fact that they might not want to, and have not yet had the time? | null | 0 | 1316458650 | False | 0 | c2l1e55 | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1e55 | t1_c2l0u3s | null | 1427620307 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kunjaan | null | Do you remember what his username was? The guy seems to have posted some inflammatory remark and deleted his comments while totally derailing the conversation in this thread. | null | 0 | 1316458662 | False | 0 | c2l1e7a | t3_kk1hp | null | t1_c2l1e7a | t1_c2kya5k | null | 1427620308 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316458670 | False | 0 | c2l1e8j | t3_kk1hp | null | t1_c2l1e8j | t1_c2kwwvh | null | 1427620308 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | trezor2 | null | While the methodology used is somewhat lacking (as lots of others have commented on here) I don't think the claim sounds entirely unreasonable either.
Anyone on any platform can develop Android-apps. At least any platform with a JVM, and that's quite a few. Only people who have invested in Mac-hardware can create iPhone apps. That represents around 7% of the machines out there (according to wikipedia :1). Mac- usage may be rising, but Mac is clearly the underdog, and developers are not that different from most people. So the statistics implies that most developers are not using Macs.
So if we accept these terms as *reasonable*, and they remain reasonably unchanged over time, there being more iOS developers than Android developers would in fact be a very, very strange thing.
I'm not saying this data *proves* anything, but I don't think it proves anything the other way either as some commenters here have hinted (like the Android SDK being of significantly lower quality than iOS SDK).
I can't possibly be the only one here thinking along these lines?
:1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems | null | 0 | 1316458750 | True | 0 | c2l1eld | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1eld | t3_kkp4z | null | 1427620321 | 12 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | pnpbios | null | If your ideology prevents you from using the right tools for the right job, you probably aren't even targeting windows in the first place. | null | 0 | 1316458769 | False | 0 | c2l1eov | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1eov | t1_c2l1dk3 | null | 1427620314 | 8 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | grelphy | null | There is such a conversion, but it's not a typecast. A typecast takes an object and changes its type in the program without changing its content; in ML or Haskell (or other ) such a conversion is a function with a signature that looks something like "`fn: string -> int | syntaxerror`" (forgive me, I don't entirely recall ML type syntax). Yes, within this function, it must check that the string it is passed can be parsed into a valid int, but this is distinct from programmatic typechecking: it's not checking that the string is of a particular type (it must be a string), but that it contains data in a particular pattern.
It is analogous to a Java typecast only in that a conversion takes place. It has statically checkable behavior with respect to types throughout, and it pushes verification of things which can't be statically checked (e.g., user input or Turing-complete properties) into the program and out of the type system. | null | 0 | 1316458805 | False | 0 | c2l1euo | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1euo | t1_c2l0s9t | null | 1427620320 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Expresionista | null | > I hope C++ programmers use more restraint with auto.
I can assure you they won't. If a feature can be abused, it will be abused. | null | 0 | 1316458997 | False | 0 | c2l1fso | t3_kjja4 | null | t1_c2l1fso | t1_c2kyg5g | null | 1427620338 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | grelphy | null | It is typesafe (with, again, the caveat of fringe behavior with the runtime and exceptions) but not (completely) statically typed. You're right, but your prior post is still misleading, in that while the type system *is* "checked by the compiler at compile time", it's not *only* checked by the compiler at compile time. | null | 0 | 1316459099 | False | 0 | c2l1gb3 | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1gb3 | t1_c2l0u65 | null | 1427620341 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MarshallBanana | null | > Indeed, 3 implementations I looked at do the same
If I recall correctly, at least GCC changed its C++ ABI at some point to more closely match COM, so that might be more an effect rather than a cause. | null | 0 | 1316459143 | False | 0 | c2l1gi0 | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1gi0 | t1_c2kys7o | null | 1427620343 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316459153 | False | 0 | c2l1glc | t3_khtuh | null | t1_c2l1glc | t3_khtuh | null | 1427620344 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | rossryan | null | I'm more of a "I like my weekends free and my code sane kind of guy."
^_^ | null | 0 | 1316459227 | False | 0 | c2l1gzp | t3_kjkxj | null | t1_c2l1gzp | t1_c2l0rq7 | null | 1427620347 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316459247 | False | 0 | c2l1h3q | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1h3q | t1_c2kycpk | null | 1427620347 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | julesjacobs | null | IMO he doesn't get it. All of his points are predicated on the assumption that we'd like to run Javascript, which I can understand is his position because he invented the thing and bytecodes would kill his baby. If you take that we want to run Javascript as a given then obviously you'd want to send Javascript source to browsers. The thing is, we **DO NOT** want to write Javascript, and then bytecodes are obviously much better on the important counts: performance and size of code sent over the network. | null | 0 | 1316459287 | False | 0 | c2l1hb8 | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1hb8 | t1_c2l0bj2 | null | 1427620349 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Why don't we just look at market share, where android overtook iOS several months ago? either way, there's nothing to misinterpret here. They clearly demonstrated how the usage in stack overflow for android overtook iOS. What is there to get wrong?
Is this just a post created by some butthurt fanboys because they want to challenge unarguable fact for the sake of it? If so, I'll pass. | null | 0 | 1316459294 | False | 0 | c2l1hc4 | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1hc4 | t3_kkp4z | null | 1427620349 | -9 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MarshallBanana | null | Also, C99. | null | 0 | 1316459328 | False | 0 | c2l1hhh | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1hhh | t1_c2kyt53 | null | 1427620351 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316459339 | False | 0 | c2l1hj8 | t3_khtuh | null | t1_c2l1hj8 | t1_c2kkd8o | null | 1427620351 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | lanzkron | null | And another thing...
Comparing HTML5 to Flash is like comparing Oranges to Blues, only a very specific subset of HTML5 is in the same space as Flash. | null | 0 | 1316459673 | False | 0 | c2l1j7h | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1j7h | t3_kkp4z | null | 1427620374 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | MarshallBanana | null | Maybe your ideology is that you do not want to encourage any company that does not provide proper C99 support.
I am merely enumerating reasons. | null | 0 | 1316459717 | False | 0 | c2l1jga | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1jga | t1_c2l1eov | null | 1427620378 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | greyfade | null | > Furthermore, you talk about others reverse engineering the secret, or coming up with it independently. But what reason do they have to release their discoveries? Why don't they just keep them secret as well? If you have all these secrets, nothing really gets disclosed, and the wheel keeps getting reinvented over and over and over again.
Does the Free Software movement and the related Creative Commons community not demonstrate the fallacy in that line of thinking? *Someone* will decide the information should be public knowledge, eventually. I have faith that it will always happen at some point.
In the case of Coke, I confess I'm impressed that they've held on to the secret so long, but chemical analysis is advancing by leaps and bounds - eventually it won't be a secret, as someone will gleefully announce that they've tracked down the balance of flavorings, and probably publish it as an academic paper.
I'm of the belief that the academic mindset of shared public knowledge will win out as technology advances.
> This comes to the core of why patents were invented in the first place. Master craftsmen would discover new ways of doing things. These new discoveries were highly valuable and prized, so they were often kept top secret. The master would not just give out this knowledge. And often, if he didn't have a trusted apprentice to pass it down to, the knowledge would die with him. Thus, time and energy would have to be spent in trying to reverse engineer that knowledge, instead of building on it, and creating more knowledge.
And this is a strong case for patents *in the past.* I believe modern technology obsoletes this notion. Communication is more easily shared, and information is more easily collated. Often key inventions rely on a few small key pieces of knowledge - once that knowledge is exposed in an environment where information is easily brought together, the puzzle can be assembled and the Public will have the larger picture.
This wasn't possible a hundred years ago. It is now. I don't believe forced disclosure is needed any more.
> It's quite easy. Having the knowledge available after a period of time means that others can eventually use that knowledge. Having the limited time gives inventors incentive to create and make their findings public by giving them a limited amount of time to which they can exclusively use it and profit off it.
How does it give them incentive to create? Presumably it does so by offering a monopoly. But is that the only incentive? Absolutely not. It's an archaic mechanism to force disclosure of inventions by providing an incentive to create a patent.
Again, I don't believe forced disclosure is needed. And since monopolies aren't the only incentive to invent, I fail to see the current need for patents.
People will invent to meet their own needs. If they have a problem, they solve it, and that is invention. Patents then are only an incentive to disclose, not an incentive to market or to invent.
I don't understand where this idea came from, but it's clearly mistaken.
> But it does. Inventors make a discovery, and in exchange for making their findings public, they get a limited monopoly with which to profit off it. The public still gets that knowledge, furthering the body of knowledge in the world.
And then when someone independently comes up with the same idea, they're penalized, prices rise, and everyone loses until the patent expires.
In a world where invention takes place rapidly and iteratively; and where communication is cheap and nearly instantaneous; and where data collection, collation, and storage is virtually effortless; monopoly protections only serve to raise prices while everything is held stagnant and development of ideas is forced to take a more inefficient path, patents are only serving to get in the way. | null | 0 | 1316459781 | False | 0 | c2l1jsh | t3_khvyw | null | t1_c2l1jsh | t1_c2l14kt | null | 1427620380 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | tryx | null | That's essentially the same as LINQ in lambda form. | null | 0 | 1316459956 | False | 0 | c2l1kqz | t3_ki83r | null | t1_c2l1kqz | t1_c2kppe4 | null | 1427620394 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | yellowstuff | null | C# 2 is only slightly better than Java, but idiomatic C# 3 or 4 with LINQ contains a lot of composable higher-order functions, which seems to be what the author considers the essence of function programming.
I agree that it is odd to ignore Lisp. | null | 0 | 1316460158 | False | 0 | c2l1lsq | t3_kjkxj | null | t1_c2l1lsq | t1_c2ks7dt | null | 1427620406 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | funkiee | null | You sure do post a lot of links for Google Go... | null | 0 | 1316460298 | False | 0 | c2l1mjq | t3_kkr3x | null | t1_c2l1mjq | t3_kkr3x | null | 1427620416 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | lanzkron | null | I don't program for smart-phones nor do I own a smart phone (_gasp_). If I were to get a new phone I would get an android so I don't think I qualify as a _butthurt fanboy_.
However I do like to see data used a bit more responsibly than my reading of the linked post. | null | 0 | 1316460311 | False | 0 | c2l1mlg | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1mlg | t1_c2l1hc4 | null | 1427620417 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | iiB | null | JavaScript is the kind of language that is mostly used as a component of the front-end for manipulating the browser DOM.
For this usage a deep understanding of the language constructs and behavior is largely unnecessary (though useful). if you have basic programming skills and you've gone with a js framework that wraps the DOM in magic - you are pretty much set.
The big question is does this make a 'javascript developer'? maybe for your cv it does, and maybe for a lot of web-dev jobs.
I did a lot of the above, and some more, and I wouldn't call my self a 'javascript developer'.
Places who do large scale javascript development (conduit, google, yahoo etc) will first test your development skills, and may not worry much about the details of javascript. by the time you'll actually get to deal with these large projects - you'll know the inner working of javascript.
The reason you'll know is that you'll have to deal with one or more of the following:
* Performance
* Extensibility and large scale development
* Robustness, quality and security
* Non trivial goals requiring not trivial algorithms, data structures etc.
>[edit] I often worry that I'm one of "those" developers that are only able to code because the barrier of entry has become so low with all the layers of abstraction that we stand on top of now, and that I am probably writing a bunch of icky trash code and polluting the world lol
I think this is true for 90% of developers until projects require the former criteria i've mentioned.
| null | 0 | 1316460410 | True | 0 | c2l1n5h | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1n5h | t1_c2l0a03 | null | 1427620424 | 12 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | bloodredsun | null | Ignoring its use in controlling db transactions, you want to log the performance of third party libraries like Apache Http Client? AOP does a very sweet job. | null | 0 | 1316460423 | False | 0 | c2l1n7n | t3_kjiii | null | t1_c2l1n7n | t1_c2kt6pd | null | 1427620425 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | So answer my question. What did they misrepresent? | null | 0 | 1316460484 | False | 0 | c2l1nia | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1nia | t1_c2l1mlg | null | 1427620428 | -6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | So answer my question. What did they misrepresent? | null | 0 | 1316460508 | False | 0 | c2l1nq2 | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1nq2 | t1_c2l1mlg | null | 1427620432 | -5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | tgehr | null | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type-safe
'The formal type-theoretic definition of type safety is considerably stronger than what is understood by most programmers.'
Type safety as understood by most programmers is not a boolean condition. Some languages can be more type safe than other languages, even when both languages' type systems provide some type safety guarantees. NullPointerException could be prevented at compile time by a stronger type system (for example in the way haskell does it). Taking the head of an empty list can be prevented by having an even more powerful type system, namely one that supports dependent types. But note that taking the head of an empty list is not a common error in Haskell, because idiomatic Haskell code normally uses safe pattern matching to extract a list's contents instead of the head/tail functions.
| null | 0 | 1316460580 | False | 0 | c2l1o3x | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1o3x | t1_c2l0z6k | null | 1427620437 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | mycatverbs | null | Be aware that ECMAscript 4 was deliberately abandoned.
ECMAscript 5 is what browser vendors are currently working towards implementing, and it doesn't. | null | 0 | 1316460589 | False | 0 | c2l1o5h | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1o5h | t1_c2l01xa | null | 1427620438 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | The subsect that makes up easily 90% of all implementation use cases for flash. But I guess we should just ignore logic since this is a stupid witchhunt based on silly nonsense. | null | 0 | 1316460648 | False | 0 | c2l1og3 | t3_kkp4z | null | t1_c2l1og3 | t1_c2l1j7h | null | 1427620442 | -6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | newbill123 | null | Greed is good! | null | 0 | 1316460654 | False | 0 | c2l1ogy | t3_kkfbs | null | t1_c2l1ogy | t3_kkfbs | null | 1427620442 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | bloodredsun | null | Agreed. It's about time Java had something like this. I hate to be a language snob but compared to Scala's .par operation I have to say it is really clunky. | null | 0 | 1316460890 | False | 0 | c2l1pnb | t3_kjdt6 | null | t1_c2l1pnb | t1_c2kt4a8 | null | 1427620457 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316460998 | True | 0 | c2l1q6p | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1q6p | t1_c2kywk2 | null | 1427620464 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | NULLACCOUNT | null | If someone calls themself a "JavaScript Developer", yeah probably. But most people who use javascript are more of Web Developers working with php/mysql/whatever they need at the time, and only write small pieces of javascript at a time. | null | 0 | 1316461087 | False | 0 | c2l1qma | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1qma | t1_c2kyy06 | null | 1427620471 | 8 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | luqui | null | "Expressive means different things to different people", thank you, this is one of my major points. I didn't make it clearly for this particular term. | null | 0 | 1316461179 | False | 0 | c2l1r24 | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1r24 | t1_c2kwmpn | null | 1427620476 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I already use the language "C/C++" so the language "C/C++/WinRT" will be easy to learn.
Oh, wait.... | null | 0 | 1316461203 | False | 0 | c2l1r6t | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1r6t | t3_kk7c6 | null | 1427620481 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | luqui | null | First define expressiveness. Then define clarity. Then do it in a way that is programming-background independent. Then realize you have a contradiction.
Another take: to some, expressiveness is more important; to you, clarity is more important. Surely, one set of values must be wrong! | null | 0 | 1316461293 | False | 0 | c2l1rnq | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1rnq | t1_c2kzdf6 | null | 1427620484 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | sidcool1234 | null | Awesome. | null | 0 | 1316461358 | False | 0 | c2l1rzy | t3_kems7 | null | t1_c2l1rzy | t3_kems7 | null | 1427620489 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316461399 | False | 0 | c2l1s86 | t3_kkq9c | null | t1_c2l1s86 | t3_kkq9c | null | 1427620490 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | montibbalt | null | It will (sort of) after 5 though. Really it is a shame people couldn't reconcile their differences on 4. | null | 0 | 1316461435 | False | 0 | c2l1seg | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1seg | t1_c2l1o5h | null | 1427620494 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | DestroMania | null | Looks nice. To nit pick, I am a believer that, unless you are a recent college grad, your work experience should come first, before your education. Unless you are applying for a teaching job, or you otherwise want to purposefully highlight your educational achievements, I feel that a few years after graduation, what you did in school is mostly irrelevant.
I'm interested in hearing counter arguments. | null | 0 | 1316461441 | False | 0 | c2l1sfl | t3_kkq9c | null | t1_c2l1sfl | t3_kkq9c | null | 1427620494 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Cthonk | null | I used to spend hours working on my resume in LaTeX, under the belief that it would buy me geek cred from employers who could recognize the typesetting. Not one person ever noticed it and the hassle from recruiters that wanted a Word doc finally motivated me to switch to Word. Sad but that's the way it goes. | null | 0 | 1316461498 | False | 0 | c2l1soa | t3_kkq9c | null | t1_c2l1soa | t3_kkq9c | null | 1427620497 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | luqui | null | Typically is just a weasel word. It asserts that something is the general case while eliding the need to provide evidence for that fact. | null | 0 | 1316461511 | False | 0 | c2l1sqc | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1sqc | t1_c2kwenk | null | 1427620497 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | henk53 | null | Nice constructive argument! Love the level of detail you provided in describing the exact pain points, while still balancing your debate by highlighting the things in which JSF is strong.
Thanks for your technical sound contribution. | null | 0 | 1316461515 | False | 0 | c2l1sr9 | t3_kjwil | null | t1_c2l1sr9 | t1_c2l04td | null | 1427620497 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | VikingCoder | null | This is from Lars Pensjö - the creator of LPMud.
Is there a Go-based MUD coming soon? | null | 0 | 1316461593 | False | 0 | c2l1t3p | t3_kkr3x | null | t1_c2l1t3p | t3_kkr3x | null | 1427620503 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | luqui | null | Way to continue the pointless twitter debate without contributing to the topic of the post at all! | null | 0 | 1316461596 | False | 0 | c2l1t4h | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1t4h | t1_c2ky1wu | null | 1427620503 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | chasmaniandevi | null | As a counterpoint, I've recently had two interviewers recognize (and comment) on me using TeX because they recognized Computer Modern. One commented that I should have typed '\latex' instead of just 'latex' (I agreed of course, but mentioned that I didn't want to be too flashy). I got offers from both.
I don't use recruiters, preferring to rely on personal connections, but would they really balk that much at a PDF resume? | null | 0 | 1316461612 | False | 0 | c2l1t7i | t3_kkq9c | null | t1_c2l1t7i | t1_c2l1soa | null | 1427620504 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | subsetr | null | Thanks for sharing, though it seems the only added benefit one would get out of this is being able to pass parameters directly into the timeout wrapper, at the cost of some complexity and confusion. I'm not a fan of passing scope around (hard to debug), though things like Prototype's bind() function can come in handy.
However, this could easily be accomplished by using an anonymous function to close around any parameters you might want to pass, as the article suggested:
var timerId = setTimeout(function() {
myFunction(parameter1, parameter2, parameter3);
}, 1000);
clearTimeout(timerId);
Which is of course much more readable for anyone else who might ever have to read and/or work on your code.
| null | 0 | 1316461674 | False | 0 | c2l1thi | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1thi | t1_c2l17nk | null | 1427620508 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I can understand the general desire for that sort of thing, but it would bring with it a whole new bundle of security problems, interoperability issues, and the fact that troubleshooting web page based code would be increasingly difficult. Not to mention all the really bad code that would be written all over the place.
These aren't really insurmountable obstacles, but they would take very focused effort over a long period of time, and the support of a big company wanting to push this idea forward. | null | 0 | 1316461679 | False | 0 | c2l1tih | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1tih | t1_c2l03bv | null | 1427620508 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Yeah, I thought about mentioning people who can't use C++ for religious reasons, while Microsoft caters to a more pragmatic bunch, but, first of all, Axilmar talked about C++, second, their C interface doesn't use any proprietary extensions and can be targeted from Mingw, I suppose. | null | 0 | 1316461820 | False | 0 | c2l1u6h | t3_kk7c6 | null | t1_c2l1u6h | t1_c2l1hhh | null | 1427620517 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ascii | null | ...
Crap. Guilty as charged. :-( | null | 0 | 1316461997 | False | 0 | c2l1v0x | t3_kjw0j | null | t1_c2l1v0x | t1_c2l1t4h | null | 1427620528 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | AlyoshaV | null | there's nothing nearly about it | null | 0 | 1316462083 | False | 0 | c2l1vgd | t3_kkfbs | null | t1_c2l1vgd | t1_c2l12m5 | null | 1427620532 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | midri | null | sadly that causes problems in loops, which is what my constructors were made to work for.
for(var i=0;i<100;i++) {
var timerId = setTimeout(function() {
myFunction(i);
}, 1000);
}
will cause 100 to return for all instances of the timeout.
Where as:
fforeach(var i=0;i<100;i++) {
var timeout = new Timeout(function(arg1){
console.info(arg1);
},1000,this,[i]);
}
will give you 0-100 | null | 0 | 1316462086 | False | 0 | c2l1vh7 | t3_kketr | null | t1_c2l1vh7 | t1_c2l1thi | null | 1427620533 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Your post title is making my brain divide by zero. =( | null | 0 | 1316462328 | False | 0 | c2l1wql | t3_kknjo | null | t1_c2l1wql | t3_kknjo | null | 1427620549 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | s73v3r | null | The one that goes out of business. | null | 0 | 1316462357 | False | 0 | c2l1wwm | t3_khvyw | null | t1_c2l1wwm | t1_c2l186o | null | 1427620551 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | xardox | null | The OLPC uses [OpenFirmware](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Firmware), which Macs and Suns also used to use, but no longer do.
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OFW_FAQ
| null | 0 | 1316462731 | False | 0 | c2l1yud | t3_kkegr | null | t1_c2l1yud | t1_c2l0km3 | null | 1427620576 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
Subsets and Splits
Filtered Reddit Uplifting News
The query retrieves specific news articles by their link IDs, providing a basic overview of those particular entries without deeper analysis or insights.
Recent Programming Comments
Returns a limited set of programming records from 2020 to 2023, providing basic filtering with minimal analytical value.