Yeah, the amount of money they get from donations is so tiny compared to what they need for developing Firefox, that they don’t even divert it for Firefox.
They use it for activism, community work and in the past, they’ve also passed it on to other open-source projects, which are also important for the web but don’t have the infrastructure or public awareness to get donations directly.
I guess, you could buy a handful of USB sticks…
I mean, if we’re talking about all those problems, the no-type-annotations issue is rather specific for Python, JS/TS and Ruby.
But in general, I feel like there’s somewhat of an old world vs. new world divide, which happened when package registries started accepting libraries from everyone and their cat.
In C, for example, most libraries you’ll use will be quite well-documented, but you’ll also never hear of the library that Greg’s cat started writing for the niche thing that you’re trying to do.
Unfortunately, Greg’s cat got distracted by a ball of yarn rolling by and then that was more fun than writing documentation.
That’s the tradeoff, you get access to more libraries, but you just can’t expect all of them to be extremely high-quality…
Honestly also annoying as a not-so-new folk. I just thought about this yesterday, I reasonably expect to clone a random project from the internet written Java, Rust et al, and to be able to open it in my IDE and look at it.
Meanwhile, a Python project from two years ago that I helped to build, I do not expect to be able to reasonably view in an IDE at all. I remember, we gave up trying to fix all the supposedly missing dependencies at some point…
I’m guessing, they meant to write “that the language has no default way”.
I don’t know, man, far too many people seem to think that “easy to learn” means they’ll know all they need to know in relatively short time.
Like, you talk to our data scientists and they’ll tell you doing anything in Python, no problem. But you talk to our seasoned software engineers and you see the war flashbacks in their eyes, because it racks up in complexity so fucking quickly, it’s insane.
Yeah, same. The game where that screenshot is from (DCSS) also has an ASCII mode, where that skeleton dragon would probably look like this: D
The text log would say that a skeleton dragon appeared, and I could even imagine a skeleton dragon by itself quite easily, but when it comes to a whole room full of monsters, then it’s just a lot of info to keep track of. The small textures are almost like icons, in that they’re a compact way of telling me where which monster is.
Yeah, man, I’ve got this chronic fatigue thingamabob and if you’re asking me when I’m most energetic, the answer is never…
But that’s what I mentioned regarding Java there. Java calls them “exceptions”, but generally forces the caller to either handle them or explicitly bubble them upwards…
On the flipside, you give real intelligence 32 pixels and it infers photorealistic images:
(The textures are 32x32 pixels. Yes, that’s technically 1024 pixels, but shhh. 🙃)
I wouldn’t get my hopes up. Them announcing something like this looks good PR-wise, so they’ll do it, even if they don’t actually expect this effort to lead to anything.
But even if they do implement such an API, companies won’t start adopting this API until its capabilities are roughly comparable to the kernel-level solution AND it’s available on most Windows systems in the wild. So, we’re likely talking more than a decade before this sees sufficient adoption…
The guy keeps on picking on Go, which is infamous for having terrible error handling, and then he has the nerve to even pick on the UNIX process return convention, which was designed in the 70s.
The few times he mentions Rust, for whatever reason he keeps on assuming that .unwrap() is the only choice, which’s use is decidedly discouraged in production code.
I do think there is room for debate here. But error handling is a hellishly complex topic, with different needs between among others:
And even if you pick out a specific field, the two concepts are not clearly separated.
Error values in Rust usually have backtraces these days, for example (unless you’re doing embedded where this isn’t possible).
Or Java makes you list exceptions in your function signature (except for unchecked exceptions), so you actually can’t just start throwing new exceptions in your little corner without the rest of the codebase knowing.
I find it quite difficult to properly define the differences between the two.
Many people grew up playing Flash games and may want to revisit those. I doubt, there’s many websites out there, which still require Flash…
I guess, their tiers weren’t already confusing enough…?
Statcounter relies on web tracking to try to estimate the usage shares. Theoretically, there could be millions of science PCs running Linux, but one guy is browsing the internet with a Windows PC. Basically, take this data with a massive grain of salt…
I’m pretty sure that’s not how dyslexia works, but either way, I didn’t write that. And while the title of the article suggests otherwise, the news here isn’t that Google says something is easy. The news is that they published a guide to make that thing easy.
Wut? They’re a member, because they find Rust useful. This is just them saying another time that they find Rust useful.
While they (and everyone using Rust) will benefit off of more people using Rust, it’s not like they have a vested interest to the point of spreading misinformation.
Just because a company has created a product, doesn’t mean that anyone has made a moral judgement. Even if some vegetarians decide to eat this, it still doesn’t mean that all vegetarians agree.
I had my mum try some fried tofu recently and she said, it tastes like spam. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Big difference to the Wikimedia Foundation is how much money they need. The Mozilla Corporation (which develops Firefox) has around 750 employees.
Optimistically, only 500 of those are devs and work on Firefox. If you pay those a wage of 100,000 USD, that makes 50 million USD of costs just for wages.
Firefox has less than 200 million monthly active users, so everyone using it would need to donate $0.25, or alternatively 1% of users would need to donate $25, yearly.
That’s a lot of money to hope people donate, and this is a very optimistic ballpark estimate.