Why wouldn't the author cover this if the issues the vaccine caused were so obvious? I mean, they mention (paired with some stats) the number of lives saved.
Armed with that knowledge, you're suggesting that the number of people impacted negatively was so high that we should have forgone releasing these?
So was the Ghost Stream Manager meant to also help combat packet loss? Or is it more simply a form of "Game state redundancy"? I'm speaking out of wheelhouse here.
I'm always a bit fascinated by these write-ups because so much has to happen in such a small window.
I could see that, to a degree. But I agree with this article that most (if not all) of the "bad" of PHP has been completely papered over through best practices, documentation, fantastic tooling, or removal from the language. So the pro-PHP movement is more of a "guys, we're doing the same thing as you, why can't we all just get along?"
When was the last time we saw a "PHP is Great!" article make it to the front page of HN? Most of the time, PHP developers are on their heels because it seems others are constantly on the offense. I've not figured out what value this constant aggression provides to these developers making the arguments. My only conclusion is that they're just trying to make themselves seem more important. To that note, the pro-PHP camp becomes more of a "non-anti-PHP." :)
I've mostly tried to fight the anti-PHP movement because I WANT new developers to come on board and create great things. I want new packages to pop-up as soon as some new tool/api/widget becomes available.
I've felt for quite some time that most of the anti-PHP sentiment is an effort of other developers to justify the language they've selected to focus on. "Yeah, I'm doing Javascript and Node.js and yeah it's got it's sharp edges, but at least it's not PHP!"
The problem is, if the negativity continues, the next step is that business WONT want PHP in their ecosystem... And not because it can't get the job done for them, but just because "ew PHP. I heard that was bad."
Armed with that knowledge, you're suggesting that the number of people impacted negatively was so high that we should have forgone releasing these?