rollo

Lol. Of course they are, but German people are not very smart. They're upset their allies spy on them for their own protection, but if their enemies do that it's normal and not even a reason to cool relationships!

We need it because Germany has shown it is unable to do the right thing or even act in its own interest without external help.

It's precisely the other way arround. This sketch is a humorous but precise assessment of this strategic issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_d_vMKswE Relying on nuclear deterrent against modern hybrid warfare means you will lose.

Russia has infiltrated our political class on multiple fronts. The most visible of course has been former chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who works for Gazprom. But there are quite a few people involved in that, both in the SPD but also in the CDU. Nevermind the corporations involved, like Wintershall and E.ON. Other vectors of attack have been The Left, through their old SED roots and connection with the KGB. now FSB. And of course the new right-populist AfD party, who are pushing Russia's agenda in Europe.

We are back to cold war levels, even further than that. And it's a mistake, the USA guarantees our security right now, since the EU states reduced their military to a point that they are unable to deal with an aggressor. Nor is there the political will to deal with it.

As a German I don't see this as an issue. Some German politicians have deep connections to enemy states, so why wouldn't the NSA spy on them? It's in our best interest even, because those politicans are a danger to Europe and Germany itself. You can also see the problem with Germany and France not behaving as allies of the USA in the war against Russia.

Sounds like it was great last year, so it's absolutely worth it. Such events are definitely needed.

Companies have social responsibilities. Supporting human rights is a positive thing.

I think you are. And what's the problem with political statements?

Ctrl-f metal.. nope. Metallicity. I would've thought at that time when the first stars were forming there weren't enough heavy elements to produce rocky planets yet. Some time after the first few supernovas, which should've taken just a few million years more, it should've been possible.

Eventually those who need static typing and parametric polymorphism will switch to Haskell anyway, where both are done in a much better way, both syntactically and implementation wise.

I'm just getting confused by the terminology. Those are pure functions too. And you have different functions because they're doing something completely different, operating on computational structures that are different from primitive values the 'normal' functions as you called them operate on.

It's like saying C++/Java etc. are confusing because you can only print certain values, but you can't print the print statement.

You can't apply normal functions to monads? Since when? Or what is a 'normal' function?

I'm a Haskell newbie, and when I test a program and it shows a laziness-related space leak, I just put strictness annotations on the parameters I suspect of generating large unevaluated thunks. This has always made the issue go away so far.

Programming languages are not natural languages. And where imperative programming can benefit from something that looks like a series of instructions resembling natural language, functional, declarative programming works better with the language being closer to mathematical notation.

Because concepts from the bleeding edge of language research are slowly trickling down from Haskell & Co. to mainstream languages. Ten years after they emerge.

  fizzBuzz x = if null str then show x else str
    where str  = concat [tag | (n,tag) <- tags, x `rem` n == 0]
          tags = [(3,"Fizz"), (5,"Buzz")]

  main = mapM_ (putStrLn . fizzBuzz) [1..100]

Extendable.