aidanhs

If you really wanted to, I think you could set up an endpoint on your server to be long polled with synchronous XHR in a while loop, while you set up the popup in an iframe. When the popup is clicked, you send a notification to the server so the next synchronous request returns 200 and you dispose of the iframe.

On searching, I discover someone else has had this crazy idea already - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16934667/what-methods-are...

I've used build/release management/dep management tools from/like go, python, ruby, node, erlang, make, autotools and cmake and I've never before had to read a manual to tweak an existing setup.

Go is probably my favourite ecosystem because everything is very simple. I suspect Rust will be good as well.

Absolutely. I'm not even sure how you would do such a thing.

I personally have found it interesting when considering the difference between an array of pointers and a linked list, simply because they both have the same overhead but one doesn't require allocating any more memory for a merge sort.

I basically agree with what you say (maybe bar it not being useful knowledge) but I don't think it's worth continuing trying to clarify my initial statement.

For sure, if it doesn't make sense to use a linked list in the first place then linked list merge sort definitely doesn't make sense...

I think it's interesting how choice of data structure affects algorithm characteristics.

> http://technotes.iangreenleaf.com/posts/2013-12-09-reddits-e....

Reading that article, I get sent to https://github.com/reddit/reddit/pull/583 which contains https://github.com/reddit/reddit/pull/583#issuecomment-35440... which notes that the issue discussed has actually been fixed.

It boils down to there being a big performance penalty on garbage collection in memory-constrained environments.

I suppose row-level locking is a necessity when you want to be able to scale vertically. By comparison, I understand that MongoDB doesn't even try to support vertical scaling so it makes sense to not bother with complex locking systems.

Personally, I'd prefer to have to option of scaling without being forced to increase the number of moving parts in my single most important system (the database)...but the MongoDB docs make the fair point that there's a ceiling to vertical scaling. It's probably higher than most people think though.

As an aside, I discovered recently that Informix supports byte-level locks for 'smart large objects' (namely CLOBs and BLOBs). Makes me wonder whether field level locking will appear some day.

> We can't manage nuclear waste.

But it is tightly regulated and under close scrutiny, unlike coal ash contamination.