On Tuesday, 24 November 2015 at 06:31:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
I thought this anonymous comment about his pacemaker example
was funny:
"I surely hope you are talking about the programmer device for
pacemakers and not the actual pacemaker inside someone's body.
I worked for Intermedics until
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 15:12:27 UTC, Joakim wrote:
He advocates for a tool like gofix, to automatically convert
such features to be deprecated:
http://scottmeyers.blogspot.com/2015/11/breaking-all-eggs-in-c.html
Good to see C++ finally trying to deprecate more, long overdue.
Also
On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 03:28:42 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
And something like Erlang does all of the above at much better
performance and quality of implementation. Most importantly,
though, you completely ignore the performance overhead costs
that matter for most companies that are not
On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 08:00:51 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Erlang makes state terrible to work with (but doesn't bound
state to a request). PHP has request local state. The model is
very different. One of these models is way easier to work with.
I see the point but it is quite
On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 07:36:40 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
15 years ago, everyone loved to bash BASIC as a terrible
language. I did too. But then I was looking at some Visual
Basic code for a friend, and noticed something I had forgotten
- it was really easy to manipulate strings. I was
On 2015-11-22 09:00, deadalnix wrote:
Last but not least, Erlang has a foreign syntax, so ramping up devs is
harder.
There's Elixir [1] as well, which runs on the Erlang platform. It has a
syntax that is quite similar to Ruby. I know some developers don't like
Ruby but the syntax less is
On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 10:58:33 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
comments on topic. You take social factors (getting the
momentum, gathering large stable community) and derived
beneficial factors (good tooling, good platforms, lot of out of
the box solutions) and proceed to use it as a backing
On Sunday, 22 November 2015 at 01:53:01 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
There's nothing inherent in having a rigid schema or using SQL
as a query language that prevents scaling.
That's right, except that joins and desirable consistency
requirements creates a ceiling when it comes to scaling. It does
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 22:12:13 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 22:01:58 UTC, Chris wrote:
D is not in that league.
Doesn't matter? It is clear you shit on things you don't
understand. That makes you sound like an idiot to these who
understand.
Thanks for the
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 10:29:57 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Yes PHP sclaes. PHP scales like crazy? PHP scales better than
whatever modern framework you'll present me. There is just
nothing that came up with the same execution.
Not what I've heard. Thankfully, I've been able to avoid
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 13:28:20 UTC, Joakim wrote:
an inroads into. They simply optimize programmer convenience
over efficiency and that's an acceptable tradeoff in certain
niches. However, even in that market, there are badly-designed
languages that do unreasonably well.
That's
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 13:28:19 +, Joakim wrote:
> Actually, it is. What percentage of the PHP code out there needs to
> scale much?
Wordpress and MediaWiki are both written in PHP. But this level of
scaling doesn't require a framework that scales. It requires a database
system that scales, a
On 11/21/2015 3:32 PM, deadalnix wrote:
Rather than having an aristocratic attitude toward these languages that we
perceive as badly designed, we should be really asking ourselves the question
"what did they get right ? Can we get it right too ?". Because we have signal
here, that is telling us
On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 21:51:43 +, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 17:31:15 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
>> Collating a large number of examples like this would give us a good
>> overall estimate of each platform's scaling properties.
>
> In order to scale easily you
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 22:47:46 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Could you elaborate a bit on this? What about the execution
model is so right?
PHP runs every request in complete isolation. All global/static
are in fact request local storage. This has many consequences,
namely:
- It scales.
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 13:28:20 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Not proud, I've argued in this forum in the past that scripting
languages have an audience that D is unlikely to make much of
an inroads into. They simply optimize programmer convenience
over efficiency and that's an acceptable
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 17:31:15 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
Collating a large number of examples like this would give us a
good overall estimate of each platform's scaling properties.
In order to scale easily you need to use NOSQL databases, but you
can use any language.
IIRC youtube
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 11:40:41 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Actually, that's not surprising, Rasmus Ledorf is a specialist
of the web, while he doesn't knows much about PL both
theoretically and practically (by his own admission). As a
result, you get a passable language, but you know
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 13:28:20 UTC, Joakim wrote:
As to Gresham's law, it's kind of defeated by the move to hack
(http://hacklang.org/) isn't it. But let's not get the facts
get in the way of a good story.
Doesn't that prove it? Why create something that you feel is
better
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 20:37:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
PHP scales. This is why people use it. And this is why people
will continue to use it. This is why Facebook, wikipedia,
Baidu, wordpress and many others are using it.
This is one of most ridiculous statements I have ever heard from
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 07:20:07 UTC, Joakim wrote:
PHP scales. This is why people use it. And this is why people
will continue to use it. This is why Facebook, wikipedia,
Baidu, wordpress and many others are using it. There is always
a reason, and if you don't understand it, you are
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 10:29:57 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 21 November 2015 at 07:20:07 UTC, Joakim wrote:
PHP scales. This is why people use it. And this is why people
will continue to use it. This is why Facebook, wikipedia,
Baidu, wordpress and many others are using it.
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have never had the pleasure of writing
PHP, lots of PHP code does completely different things
depending on the compiler switches
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:12:41 +, Chris wrote:
> On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
>>> For those of you who have never had the pleasure of writing PHP, lots
>>> of PHP code does
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 16:38:02 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:12:41 +, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have never had
On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 16:48:06 +, Chris wrote:
> On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 16:38:02 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:12:41 +, Chris wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
>>> wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 12:12:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have never had the pleasure of writing
PHP, lots of PHP code does
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 22:01:58 UTC, Chris wrote:
D is not in that league.
Doesn't matter? It is clear you shit on things you don't
understand. That makes you sound like an idiot to these who
understand.
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 20:37:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 12:12:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have
On 11/20/2015 09:06 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
...
When people complain about others being offended, it's usually to
distract from the issue at hand.
When people complain about others being offended, I think it is usually
because being offended can be a way to artificially add weight to the
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 20:37:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 20 November 2015 at 12:12:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
Would you guys please stop calling PHP a language. JS and PHP
are not languages, they are a fiddly feckin mess, which
accounts for their high adoption rate. Sigh. Please, no
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 15:12:27 UTC, Joakim wrote:
He advocates for a tool like gofix, to automatically convert
such features to be deprecated:
http://scottmeyers.blogspot.com/2015/11/breaking-all-eggs-in-c.html
Good to see C++ finally trying to deprecate more, long overdue.
I
On 11/18/15 10:12 AM, Joakim wrote:
He advocates for a tool like gofix, to automatically convert such
features to be deprecated:
It isn't going to happen. See the caveat at the bottom, along with his
other post.
As long as C has the preprocessor, a tool like gofix is nearly
impossible to
He advocates for a tool like gofix, to automatically convert such
features to be deprecated:
http://scottmeyers.blogspot.com/2015/11/breaking-all-eggs-in-c.html
Good to see C++ finally trying to deprecate more, long overdue.
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 15:46:38 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On 11/18/15 10:12 AM, Joakim wrote:
He advocates for a tool like gofix, to automatically convert
such
features to be deprecated:
It isn't going to happen. See the caveat at the bottom, along
with his other post.
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:43:59 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 15:29:04 UTC, ponce wrote:
The idea that you could bring the C++ community to use an
automatic upgrade tool, or to get everyone to follow optional
"Core Guidelines" is optimistic.
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 15:29:04 UTC, ponce wrote:
The idea that you could bring the C++ community to use an
automatic upgrade tool, or to get everyone to follow optional
"Core Guidelines" is optimistic.
What community? Compilers can have pedantic compiler-switches.
C++ needs what
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have never had the pleasure of writing
PHP, lots of PHP code does completely different things
depending on the compiler switches when the interpreter was
Php is a dynamic language, that's different.
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 21:08:38 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
Is it really though? In theory, yes. But in practice it's the
same problem.
Not the same problem. In dynamic languages changes are caught at
runtime, not compile time.
When changes affect compile time only then you can
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 19:09:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 18 November 2015 at 18:52:02 UTC, Jack Stouffer
wrote:
For those of you who have never had the pleasure of writing
PHP, lots of PHP code does completely different things
depending on the compiler switches
40 matches
Mail list logo
