Sawamara

When I was around 16 years old and started training with weights (just like what my father recommended me doing), and gradually increased the weights, there were joints and muscle groups in my body that just could not adjust. I had no way of improving triceps reasonably alongside the rest for pushups for example, and my right shoulder had the weirdest pain points whenever I moved weights with it beyond the initial smaller scales. So I eventually gave up.

Fast forward a decade, and my right shoulder still remembers these pains - I dunno if the weights caused it or some previous injury, but when I started training with my own weight, one sign that I was getting ahead of myself was that small pain. Now I can progress slower, but still I have to be very careful. Some of the exercises with heavy weights are just not natural for the body and simply exhaust/strain it more than it should. If you are experienced, you can work around these limitations, but I prefer body-weight exercises now.

Actually, no, you are making it a LOT more difficult to get into proper shape WITHOUT injuries if you are starting from scratch and use heavyweights instead.

Your body needs time to adapt to exercise, and body-weight exercises can provide a longterm plan to get that growth without threatening some serious injuries.

But you cant solve this on OS level, really. People read New York Times differently when compared to how they shop and want to checkout.

People browse Stack Overflow and hacker news differently too. There is no set of rules that are generic AND usable in all these cases.

And you do not read a Medium.com article the same way you set something up with your goverment in a goverment website, browsing through hundreds of options.

You have to actively ignore the web's landscape in the past 5-6 years to state something like this.

Lately, major vendors (with Edge, that includes Microsoft) are agreeing on standards, developing them FAST, and the web moves forward faster than it has ever moved. Long gone are the days where your standards can get stopped for multiple years. And vendor prefixes are less prevalent now as features get implemented properly sooner.

UX is not some evil witchcraft, it is an accumulation of best practices that are not based on hunches that solo developers conjured up out of thin air, but resulted from measuring user feedback.

I am sorry, but I honestly do not think that PYTHON of all the things would be the solution to a "UI-problem".

To have a good UI system, you need extensibility, you need testing, you need strong types (this one is debatable, but I truly believe this to be true after working with Typescript-based HTML UI-s for the past 6+ months now), and you need performance.

I can understand that a lot of programmers got into the mindset of "no, I wont deal with HTML", and I frequently see devs mentioning that they prefer that apps look "native", which is something that has not been a standard in the mainstream dev world for quite a few years now, but the reality is that that "native" dream is gone. People all around the world interact with mobile apps MORE than their dessktop/mobile system'S native ui, so there is no baseline to go back to, there is no good old days to retrieve.

We can only move forward with what we have learned, imho. And that might be or might not be HTML, but if something comes along, it better learn all the lessons that we collectively are learning with working through HTML-CSS-JS SPA's.

Primitive types and properties that are primitive types are pass by value, objects and functions are pass by reference.

The site took me less than a second to load, and I have a mediocre Pc. Problem is on your end.

Thank you! Oh, now that you mention it: just a few years ago, web streaming was not possible without using either flash or (maybe?) silverlight or something else because it was not implemented yet. Youtube crashed my pc regulary during the hd4850 end-days due to driver crashes. Node was not even a thing yet, let alone Electron/NWJS....

It is not really a brutal lifecycle at all, to be honest.

Everyone loves a good rant about how fast the JS frameworks burn out, but it is not frameworks that burn out, but rather:

In the 8+ years since Iphone/Android duo made a HUGE change in how we consume web content, we went from:

- Having static resolution for websites to dynamically changing site resolutions - Having static HTML renders with some dynamic bits sprinkled over to full-blown SPA-s because of a variety of reasons* - Having major new JavaScript versions and INSANE amounts of Javascript engine speedups that allow things that were unimaginable 8+ years ago - Having gone from "nothing" to a CPU-based <canvas> to a full OpenGL ES-implementation, full GPU-based (<webGL>), - Had went from procedural code to semi-class based systems towards functional towards functional reactive programming systems

And I could go on and on and on and on.

The DOM api matured during these years. The renderers got replaced. Their performance altered dramatically. Layouts went from "JUST USE TABLES" towards CSS, then towards Compile-to-css alternatives, etc. Single-core event systems got SharedArrayBuffers, webWorkers, we got from callbacks to promises, towards async/await. And do not get me started on almost getting observables properly.

The web has seen more transformations in terms of what is an "app" or a "website" in 8-10 years than ANY OTHER area in programming. It is only natural that widely different tasks need widely different tools to work with.

"Everyone ended poorer as a consequence of trying to fix this"

Software dev here too? Provide data on this, please. Otherwise you are just appealing to emotion or worse, authority.

I think that the article is actually correct, because the reason why in other - mostly static, and better designed dynamic -languages, you knew that member functions were bound to the object being called is because that is how the functions were actually handled by that language's runtime. There is no such assumption in JS, so where in C# you explicitly design a delegate, the reverse is true here. You need to explicitly bind the function or declare the function as a property with an arrow function and capture the execution context.

This is a very solid foundation to work with, for anyone who might have struggled with the contexts and how arrow functions, local variables, thises (hah) and prototypes fit into the bigger picture.

It also clearly shows that Javascript is not the mess that it looks like from a beginner's perspective. Yes, anyone can create a 15-20 min video about how == and === can mess up stuff, how you cant just pass around a function with a this in it without being careful, how NaN is wtf, and all that jazz. But at the end of the day, stick to this language long enough and it works for you.

Ideas are not material. Even if they are stored in material brains.

Especially not when they can be independently rediscovered without having any trace of them stored anywhere.

You should have just seen how the compiler works. There are examples on the side.

For example: an {a,b} struct is compiled down to a [a,b] array in JS. (by the compiler).

This is an optimization. V8 can only optimize the code that it is given (and sometimes, deoptimize). The better your code is, the more easier V8 can optimize it.

You cant be leaked on if you do not use technology! runs away

Oh, you seem to be using the code words of state-sponsored media pretty well. Demagogue and populism in the same sentence, nice! : )

Lets not pretend that the tenders made by the BKK is any more lawful or fair than the rest of the tenders that dominate the market around here.

This is actually useful for many rpg games.