Algebraic data types please. When you programme in Haskell, you use them all time, and yet support is missing in so many languages. It's one of the things that makes Swift look attractive to me.
the main reasons for my preference are that: gmail/fastmail are simple, I can use from multiple computers easily, have good defaults and most importantly, they almost always work. Outlook users seem to constantly have something broken.
I do realise that i am reaping the benefits of a centralised system, and in the case of gmail, monetised by advertising, surveillance and user lock-in. Probably the ideal for me would would be a self-hosted web client, e.g. Mailcow
In the beginning, when you read papers like this, it can be hard work. You can either give up or put some effort in to try to understand it. Maybe look at some of the other Jepsen reports, some may be easier. Or perhaps an introductory CS textbook. With practice and patience it will become easier to read and eventually write like this.
You may not be part of that world now, but you can be some day.
EDIT: forgot to say, i had to read 6 or 7 books on Bayesian statistics before i understood the most basic concepts. A few years later i wrote a compiler for a statistical programming language.
Serious question: why Rust? Sounds like this is not exactly systems level programming or any user would suffer from or even notice garbage collection latency.
Is Rust building up a decent ecosystem now for application programming? When I tried developing in Rust I came to the conclusion that you pay a heavy price for not having a garbage collector. Was I doing it wrong?
The idea is that after first sincerity, and then authenticity, we are moving into a new identity generating technology (in the philosophical sense of the word technology) called "profilicity" which is focussed on curating a profile across a variety of media channels. This profile is more multifaceted than an authenticity and is created or evolved with deliberate intent.
Can you clarify how you do this? the type annotation TC39 is not approved; but I'm interested in hearing if you have a "userland" approach that works for you?
The author never actually says what is so wrong with JavaScript. I think it is quite a good dynamically typed language, and it certainly has some very high-performance implementations. If you don't like it, just use something else?
> Ultimately, JavaScript was the right thing at the right time. It ended up being folded, spindled, and mutilated to serve purposes that it isn’t well suited for
Counterpoint: many quirks in the language were addressed, e.g. introduction of === and with ESLint you get many of the practical advantages of a type checker. And when you need more safety, sprinkle TypeScript on top.
What I really want for Christmas is a TypeScript-to-native compiler.