scscsc

Another possibility would be to place them as side-notes (the essays only take very little horizontal space -- the rest could be used for notes).

Negative, the Visitor pattern cannot be naturally replaced with map and fmap. Read up on double dispatch at e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dispatch

I really like the minimalist design of the site. The other game I found is more challenging:

http://connect4.cwoebker.com/

"mentions article processing charges (APC) around GBP 2,000 per article, presumably paid by the institution to some private institution to manage the peer-review process"

I would gladly (and highly profitably) run a for-profit which "manages the peer-review process" for GBP 1 per article.

The problem started to haunt Microsoft as well -- there are (simple) cases where their files don't open up correctly in slightly different versions of Office. In fact, I've recently had to open some .doc files with LibreOffice instead of Microsoft Office (on Mac) because of this.

"When the clock hits 8, I sit. I plop back in my rolling chair, crack open the laptop on my desk, and spend the next nine hours with my butt glued firmly to seat. [...] When that clock hits 5, I bolt. I’m out the door in the blink of an eye, gunning my way through traffic to finally make it home. "

I take it he spends the night over at someone's.

There seem to be a lot of people confusing complexity with practical issues.

I think we can agree that: 1) you can write most software in a functional programming language without any (noticeable) loss of performance 2) there will always be software (video encoders, HPC stuff) that will always be done in Fortran/C :D

However, I think the question is very interesting from a theoretical point of view: if you model imperative algorithm as programs for a RAM machine (good theoretical approximation of real single core computers) and purely functional algorithms as programs for a TBI machine (good theoretical approximation of a hypothetical machine executing pure algorithms), is there a problem for which a faster solution exists for a RAM than for a TBI?

Note. RAM machines exist and are standard in literature; to my knowledge TBI (to-be-invented) machines do not (yet) exist.

I find it ironic that the author says that you should just shut up and make stuff without taking his own advice (the part about making stuff will probably follow soon).

Having written a C(++) web-app (using CGI), I'm ok with writing in C++ (it's not that bad), but the advantages of using a language more suited for web development are not negligible. The author would probably find this out the hard way (if/when (s)he gets to making stuff).

Bidirectional programming is somewhat related.

http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/papers/lenses-etapsslides...

e.g. read a file, parse it into an AST, modify AST (i.e. rename a variable), unparse the new AST, close the file.

It doesn't seem to work for me.

So writing a JavaScript drag-and-drop widget framework counts as complicated?

Whenever I see lists like this, I think:

- why doesn't it read "list of good programming books"? (the more the merrier, but how about quality?)

- how can such a huge list help anyone? Certainly no-one will read a significant percentage of them.

I'm all for free quality content, but these lists seems to be just for collectors.

This makes me think about an interesting attack vector ;-)

If you want to silence emails in email provider Y about subject X, you send email to many accounts of Y about X. Then you have the accounts report the messages as spam. Now every email to an account of Y about X goes into the spam folder...

He's missing scriptability, modularity and extensibility.

Also, most GUIs (that programmers care about) lag behind the CLI in features (i.e. command-line GDB vs graphical debuggers).

I got ~12K, but I highly doubt the accuracy... I suspect that I know ~1K words, maybe 2K. I remember hearing that people usually use around 100 or 200 distinct words/day.

According to http://math.ucdenver.edu/~wbriggs/qr/shakespeare.html, Shakespeare used ~32K words in all of his works.

I've played very little with GO, and it seems to be a nice language overall.

Anyway, it's designed to allow easy parallelism. It's a system's language for parallel work.

The only thing that I don't like about it is that the built-in types get special treatment (if you want to write a map yourself, you can't use the same syntax). This indeed feels like a design smell.

GO is still very useful this way, but I do hope that it gets generics/templates sometime in the future.

"You will not feel any difference between your language and Java."

There seems to be a PhD thesis behind, so you should check it for the grammar.

Here is the problem: PayPal was born in the US. Among other things, probably because it was easier for them to do business there. PayPal couldn't have been concieved in Europe.

Nothing.

He does not use a JIT, he translated his code into C by hand.

I somewhat agree. I have a stronger postulate: current proof assistants are worse for writing proofs than machine language.

There is a reason not to panic: it can only get better, not worse...

I do not think it's a matter of connection speed. This way of "browsing" is not "browsing" -- you're just getting what you want. It's really about efficiency (in the sense of not wasting your time).

It was known at the time that correlation is not causation. That is a classic example of taking dietary advice from the incompetent.

You listen to science and not to crackpots who pretend to do science. Note that most advice regarding nutrition appearing in newspapers/blogs is total crap (as opposed to science).

If you can't distinguish science from crap (or can't be bothered to search for science) I would suggest you go with what seems reasonable to yourself.

Ok, so Prolog is nice. We know that already. But the story lacks any real content... It's really just: we used Prolog, it seemed to be a lot faster to code and the customer was happy.

This study is broken in multiple ways, so you should not take it seriously. Why can't people (= medical "researchers") learn their statistics?

When people say "get hit by the bus" in this context, it means "decide you don't wanna work here anymore and leave".

Actually the problem is too much privacy. University staff have access to your email without any problem if you store it on their system. However, on Google's system, they can't access it at all. They probably don't like this very much.

Funny, I thought that the technologies he (clearly) enjoys (and appreciates) today were built by people who were thinking along the lines of: oh shit, it takes 30 years to walk to California, why couldn't we just fly there?

It's ok to appreciate things, but it's also ok to expect (and ask for) the best possible service instead of settling for less.