Notch funds a real life Mooshroim when?

See, that’s the kind of “America is a shithole” argument I can support.

Calling the US a “shit hole” because it’s hard to commit identity theft is odd.

That would be a Chromebook.

Is that what has happened to the storage market historically?

A huge number of apps these days are web sites compiled into an app, and it shows. For example, an app should be able to remember your address and payment information without signing into an account, yet so many don’t. Almost like they want to force you into signing up. Why might that be?

Just give me a mobile web page if you’re going to do that shit.

The Onion wanted to play on hard mode. How do you write satire when that shit head was in the White House?

Languages don’t die. They have long tails.

That’s a very narrow view of programming.

BufferedReader cannot accept file name because it makes arbitrary reader… well buffered. It’s not BufferedFileReader, even that would accept something like Path or File, not string, because File can be remote file, should Reader now know all possible local and remote protocols and path formats? What else it must do?

You’re just describing the problem. Yes, I see where they’re going with this. It’s still a usability nightmare. I can’t think of another language that makes you jump through hoops like this on IO, and they get along fine without it.

Eh, I’d still go for it. I find the Rust compiler tends to amplify my impostor syndrome–it tells you all the ways you are objectively being stupid. I know that’s not really selling it, but it’s doing that stuff for a reason. I’m especially hopeful that it becomes the standard way to do things with microcontrollers; that’s about the only place I write C/C++ at all.

It’s slightly less close to the metal as C. Array bounds checks are always going to cost you something, for example. However, if you look at the speed of numeric computation in C, Rust, and Go, they’re all in the same order of magnitude performance compared to things like Python or JavaScript (not including things like PyPi, which is C with extra steps).

Baroque? Because he does actually say that.

Its standard library reads like someone’s Object Oriented Programming 101 final project, and they probably got a B- for it. Everything works and follows OO principles, but they didn’t stop to think about how it’s actually going to be used.

Let’s try to read a file line-by-line:

BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader("sample.txt"));
String line = reader.readLine();

We’re having to instantiate two objects (FileReader and then BufferedReader) just to get an object that has a readLine() method. Why? Can’t BufferedReader take a file name on its own and work it out? Or FileReader just provides readLine() itself?

Not only that, but being parsimonious with what we import would result in:

import java.io.BufferedReader;
import java.io.FileReader;

But we’re much more likely to be lazy and import everything with import java.io.*;. Which is sloppy, but I understand.

I can see what they were thinking when separating these concerns, but it resulted in more complexity than necessary.

There’s a concept of “Huffman Coding” in language design. The term itself comes from data compression, but it can be generalized to mean that things you do often in a programming language should be short and easy. The above is not good Huffman Coding.

Goddamit, can Wisconsin have a lead quarterback that doesn’t implode their image?

Mostly, yes.

I’d like to find a better way to phrase "why aren’t you . . . " questions. It carries an accusatory tone in text, even if you don’t intend that. The answer is almost invariably going to be either “I didn’t know it existed” or “because reason X”. Neither case justifies the accusatory tone. Maybe if the “I didn’t know it existed” answer was something so basic that they really should have known it existed, but probably not even then.

I have seen SQL written by professional Oracle DBAs. What I learned is that I do not want to look at SQL written by professional Oracle DBAs.

Given Putin’s theory that nations comprise a set of territory they’ve historically held–Ukraine and Alaska being “rightfully” Russia’s–he surely wouldn’t object to China taking this part, right? And Kaliningrad goes back to Germany? He’ll be good with all that, right?

It’s a shipping lane, so no.

It makes more sense if you start from the premise that there are “good people” and “bad people”, and bad people need to be punished to protect good people. The people who do the protections–like Joe Arpaio–can do no wrong. Even if they seem to do bad things, that’s just in the service of protecting good people.

This premise is bullshit, but everything follows from there.