But does this not make the assumption that the Identity being provisioned is exactly you and only you? I've always seen these identities as my pseudonym on some identity provider and use them in that manner.
I suppose I've used some identities in enough places that it would be hard to deny to certain entities that the identity was mine, but even in that case it's a small subset of entities which have seen the identity that could prove that it's me.
That's odd. I have been following along here [1] and it seems just as interactive as Svelte, Angular or any of the others I've tried. There might be a few more tools that have to be installed, but that's a one time step.
The founder of Leptos makes a pretty good argument [1] that the bottleneck for WASM isn't really the DOM and that they are already faster than some popular JS frameworks even with the current constraints.
That's what I was thinking. Or any application at all. If MS word started doing this, how long would it take to recognise? Especially if it's only periodic and only some small percentage of their install base.
I used to get a lot of tickets until I cruise control got reliable traffic detection. Now I have it on almost exclusively. The only places I get tickets now are usually places that the speed changes and I don't notice.
I would like to set my cruise control to just be "current speed limit". If these cars are going to start monitoring the speed limit to the degree of being able to tell if you're breaking the law, they better have such a setting. If they don't then it seems almost like some sort of entrapment.
>Great! (Imagine having wallgardened Windows computer where you could not install whatever you want).
Again, you are presenting this as if it has only one side to it. I need a computer that has no walled garden for certain kinds of work. For other kinds of work I'm happy to know I can't break it. Even more important, I'm happy when my parents can't break the one I buy them.
>More ads won’t scare me because I won’t use app with any ads. If app offers one time purchase - I’ll buy it if I like it.
As long as such an option exists. But in a true race to the bottom situation, there may not be anyone willing to invest in developing an app and then selling for a one time purchase. One time purchase is a model that's nearly dead anyway.
>What if Apple decided you cannot install apps outdide off their App Store on a Mac neither?
This I wouldn't accept because I can't. It's a development machine for me. But an iPad is a consumption device, I need the thing to just always work.
Why are you presenting something that happened as entirely one sided? This move means the end of an enforced, curated walled garden for iOS. This will mean a race to the bottom for iPad apps. Which, of course, means even more ads (since everything must be paid for one way or another). It likely means iPad prices go up even more because now they're forced to support configurations they've never tested.
For me personally, all of the above is the cost and what I get is something I wasn't using and didn't miss (if I want to install things outside the walled garden, I use a my Mac not a mobile device).
Exception handling, for example, uses dynamic scoping since you don't know what will be handling your exception when you write code which throws it.
Another way of thinking about it is, with dynamic scoping the value of the dynamic variable must always be on the stack and the closest one is the value that will be used. This is a really good behaviour for global variables since a common source of bugs is some global variables (and I'm considering class members "global" for this) getting changed unexpectedly. If the variable is lexical then it can be very hard to figure out what changed the value (especially when threads are involved) but if the variable is dynamic it's easy: the culprit is in the stack trace.
> Leftpad is an entirely pure, non-diverging function. And I should be able to ask my language to enforce that, ideally with trivial code. Maybe even by default.
I think you can do this in Idris with "total" functions.
I think the GP meant polymorphism. Rust traits being static ad hoc polymorphism. I thought it was possible, though, to achieve the same thing with Functors. Just the standard library deliberately didn't and chose to have things like 'print_int', 'print_string' and so on instead of a Print Functor.
The only one who can have responsibility for anything is the one who has the authority. So long as developers are in a position of "just get it done or you're fired" as well as being outsourced to save costs, they have no authority in this and therefor zero responsibility. If management "doesn't know what we do" and doesn't want to have the responsibility then they have to give us the authority to say "no, this is not going to be done tomorrow and we're not cutting any corners".
It's not automatically generated though, it's just specified somewhere else. This is what makes OO projects so hard to read from the outside: you first need to figure out what thing is having an effect on what. In a proper functional style I can go to main and follow everything from there.
As someone else said, if you have some kind of interface to "mock" you can just make this a parameter to a function and pass in the "mock" versions for tests and the regular one for the real program (or select from a set of them based on some parameter or something). A framework would just mean I can't just read from main, I'll have to figure out which DI framework is being used, where that is configured and what things effect its decision making. I see why we ended up doing this in OO but I really don't see the benefit anymore in functional programming with the more direct (and no less flexible) approach.
Why would Rust need a Dependency Injection framework? It's functional, no? I really hope drifting OO practitioners don't wreck the language putting a bunch of OO stuff that is better done in functional programming.
When I read these kinds of comments, I can't help but wonder: did you attend a US public school? I went to probably an above average number of public schools growing up since my parents moved around a lot. There were differences between the big city and small town ones but there was one constant: violence and abuse. How should I expect teachers to notice a child being abused by parents when they turn the other way to abuse by other children happening, daily, right in front of them (sometimes even egged on by the teachers themselves).
If you adjust for scale, I would be utterly flabbergasted if home schooling had a higher per capita rate of abuse than actual public schools unless public schools have changed to the point of being utterly unrecognisable from the 80-90's when it was inflicted on me.
I thought the point was that society was completely wrong and was basically overhyping the thing they'd all bought into. They had decided their method was so superior that naturally born people wouldn't live past 30. He'd already well beaten that, outlived his parents and didn't seem sick now. Society was far removed from reality and somehow forgot that natural birth worked fine for all but very recent human history. I find this statement about how society works more compelling than the cautionary about genetic discrimination.
I suppose I've used some identities in enough places that it would be hard to deny to certain entities that the identity was mine, but even in that case it's a small subset of entities which have seen the identity that could prove that it's me.