copergi

6 ms·

1.
by copergi 12y ago
Javascript is weakly typed. And untyped does not mean no type declarations. It means no types, just like it says. Assembly is untyped. Javascript is dynamically typed. Very different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
2.
by copergi 12y ago
>I accept that I will be downvoted for this. Why would that happen? Ignorantly bashing haskell strawmen is pretty common here. Btw, while you hit two of the biggest ones, you did forget to complain about it being "academic" a
3.
by copergi 12y ago
>It's sad that we should expect Haskell users to be chauvinistic about static typing. We don't expect that. We expect them to recognize that better type systems are better than worse type systems. Which seems pretty obvious w
4.
by copergi 12y ago
>Welcome to the world of languages with type systems that don't suck Go is not in that world. It isn't even in the same star system.
5.
by copergi 12y ago
If there's one thing SLWs hate, it is other SLWs.
6.
by copergi 12y ago
He also gets a lot wrong in that talk, so that doesn't seem like a particularly compelling case.
7.
by copergi 12y ago
>If anything it's the old "Goto statement considered harmful" that's a little too naive. No, people who didn't read it and just repeat the title without knowing what he was talking about may be too naive, but the
8.
by copergi 12y ago
>You can do that with ctags And I can do it without ctags. That's the point. >Depends, one proeminent C project doesn't use that: the linux kernel That doesn't make his statement "depends" at all. A single p
9.
by copergi 12y ago
Are you sure you aren't confusing it with K&R style with the argument names on a different line? That would indicate old code. Having the return type on a different line is incredibly common, virtually every C project with decent
10.
by copergi 12y ago
Odd. I have cookies disabled period, and only enable them for specific domains where I want to log in to something. I still get constant ads on youtube unless I use an ad blocker.
11.
by copergi 12y ago
I love that those of us who give a shit about the users can use the mobile trend to push good user-centric design on otherwise unwilling marketing weasels. I just wish they would stop pretending it is in any way unique to mobile users. Al
12.
by copergi 12y ago
The tools in question, and the OS in question, bear little to no resemblance to unix or its tools. Blaming unix for the monstrosities that it inadvertently spawned isn't really fair.
13.
by copergi 12y ago
That someone was mistaken. How exactly do you think they "struggled to maintain" a fork of software that was barely active in the first place? How does "apache but chrooted by default" constitute "frankenapache&qu
14.
by copergi 12y ago
You can do whatever you want. But drawing nonsense conclusions won't suddenly become reasonable just because you are defensive about the shootout.
15.
by copergi 12y ago
>Please contribute your Haskell regex-dna program No. I stopped bothering with that cluster fuck like a decade ago. It is a complete waste of time.
16.
by copergi 12y ago
>For example, I wouldn't tell someone to write a web server backend in Haskell if it's going to be in production. You probably shouldn't be giving advice then. >This is how Galois and Facebook are taking advantage of Ha
17.
by copergi 12y ago
Linking to the benchmark game as if it means something should be a bannable offense. When you look at something that encourages speed at all costs, that is what you will see. People do low level optimizations like that to gain 0.5% better
18.
by copergi 12y ago
>The main force holding me back from learning Haskell is the cryptic syntax Haskell doesn't have a cryptic syntax. The same complaint would be just as (in)valid leveled at any commonly used language. We're not talking APL her
19.
by copergi 12y ago
>"hard to explain" or "easy to obfuscate." I wouldn't call it either of those things. They are so general that people have a hard time getting them. That's all. >That's what the "mumble mumble
20.
by copergi 12y ago
>Why do you magically trust OpenBSD? It isn't magical. I've spoken to many of them. I've seen the work they've done over the last 15 years. They earned my trust. >Much of the projects early funding was via DARPA
21.
by copergi 12y ago
You are only looking at a tiny subsection of CPUs, which happen to be the niche intel dominates. CPUs are in a lot more devices than just PCs and laptops.
22.
by copergi 12y ago
It is pretty crazy that nobody is will to give you two ethernet on anything sub-$100. You literally have to pay an extra $50+ just for a second NIC.
23.
by copergi 12y ago
ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/OpenNTPD/
24.
by copergi 12y ago
11/11/2009 is not 8 years ago. That "better link" is exactly what I was referring to.
25.
by copergi 12y ago
Yeah, fuck those openbsd guys and their totally not portable openssh that you can't run on anything but openbsd!
26.
by copergi 12y ago
>You can have great software without insulting half the internet You overestimate how many web hipsters there are. And annoying them is not "being an immature brat". It is precisely to discourage their involvement. Because t
27.
by copergi 12y ago
>Count the number of vulnerabilities in OpenSSL over the last few years, relative to the size of its code base. A single vulnerability You might want to take your own advice. There have been tons of vulnerabilities in openssl, not one.
28.
by copergi 12y ago
>OpenSSL has provided years of free software, supporting thousands of sites and applications. And has done it so poorly that it has been a security nightmare the whole time. Just because something is given away, doesn't mean the wo
29.
by copergi 12y ago
>Portable OpenNTPD seems to have died: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/OpenNTPD If you follow that through the series of links, you find that it is just an assumption based on one guy who didn't know the p
30.
by copergi 12y ago
>Ain't using CVS potentially an issue here? No, why would it? If you don't trust the openbsd developers, the don't use their code.

More ›