DagAgren

Making a performant list view is actually a very non-trivial task. All the weird complexity you see in the API is there to make it possible at all to have large list views that do not absolutely kill your phone.

Yes, this is definitely not great.

Did anyone make any replacement login-only libraries for Facebook?

I was saying it is not saying it is "not a choice", it is saying it is not an acceptable choice.

It's a shitty choice, which is exactly why it is not a genuine choice.

And yes, that is exactly what it does. That is the point. We have decided that that is a good thing to require.

No.

I am tried of obviously being asked to help train a system that is dangerously incapable of the task to learn to drive a dangerous vehicle.

That is the exact thing that is "all warts". It is bending the OpenGL API far beyond its breaking point to desperately try to get it to match what the GPU actually wants.

OpenGL in 2020 is basically all warts, if you want it to actually be performant at all.

> lack of anonymity

The anonymity of Bitcoin has led to it being mostly only used for crime and scams. Getting rid of it may be seen as a feature by many rather than a drawback.

Several ways, none of which are any good for a lot of software.

You can sell free software, but it is very much the exception rather than the rule, and it is pretty disingenuous of those who promote it to keep making this claim.

What "same accusation", exactly?

Personally, I brush my fingers across it all the time and trigger random functions.

A touch bar that was pressure sensitive with haptic feedback would fix it for me, but mixing keys that you need to press down with a screen you just have to touch in the same area just creates a mess.

We absolutely need people working in warehouses. Our society would collapse far faster without them than if all of us reading this would go away.

And that means we need to treat them with respect, and pay them properly.

Russian bots are a thing, you know.

> Booting people off of platforms merely reinforces their pre-existing beliefs, and further radicalizes them.

This is just not true. Or rather, it may be true, but it is entirely irrelevant.

We as a society don't care who radicalised David Icke is. It just doesn't matter. What matters is that letting him spread his misinformation causes harm and death. Actual people die because of this. And that can be stopped by denying him a platform. If it makes him more angry, that is absolutely irrelevant.

He tried to use whatever influence he had to change things. It did fuck all. At that point, he would just be lending legitimacy to them by staying.

In pretty much every case, "virtue signalling" is code for "this person is being virtuous, and I don't like it".

Speaking as a C developer of twenty or thirty years or so who's used make for all that time:

Make is absolute, utter arcane bullshit. It is mad. It is complete nonsense.

It's not, that is a perfectly logical thing to do: Use a more generic primitive to implement more specific functionality.

It's not about liking one thing or another more. It's that coroutines are coroutines, and cooperative multitasking is cooperative multitasking. The two are often confused, and all I am saying is that that is incorrect.

Cooperative multitasking can easily be implemented with coroutines, but doesn't have to be. You could implement coroutines with cooperative multitasking but doing so is highly silly and a massive hack.

Sure, you could implement some kind of anti-scheduler, but that is just plain silly, and really doesn't affect the point at all. You can do anything in any Turing-complete language, but that doesn't mean that Brainfuck is equivalent to Prolog in any way that is actually useful or interesting.

Thus why coroutines are more fundamental and powerful.

I'm not. The scheduler decides what code to execute next, the caller does not. With coroutines, the caller explicitly decides what code to execute next. That's a fundamental difference.

But it's not part of the text, it is a decoration. Even if it was in Unicode, I would not expect it to be part of the copied text.

Cooperative multitasking usually involves a scheduler. Coroutines are called explicitly, which you can't do through a scheduler.

I guess that is a good point, but I guess that the backspace symbol gets a bit of a free ride by literally being on your keyboard.

Emoji are not at all the same. People type emoji as part of their text. People do not type "external link symbol" as part of their text.

Unicode does not determine what can or can not be included in fonts. Fonts can include symbols not defined by Unicode if they want.

Why wouldn't it be part of plain text? People type it as part of their text messages constantly. They certainly use it as a part of plain text.

Nobody would type an external link symbol. It would be added by the UI presentation layer. It is not part of plain text, because it is not typed as part of textual content. But the poop emoji is.

No, it is saying that Unicode is used to encode what people think of as plain text, and that UI symbols that are not part of the text content are outside the scope of it.