Node.js in Flame Graphs

Re:Node.js in Flame Graphs by gadders on Wednesday November 19, 2014 @12:13PM (#8631215)

I flagged it as Offtopic. But it is correct. "Learnings" is at best a pointless affectation, like saying "utilised" instead of "used". At worst, according to the OED, it's not even a word.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/19227/plural-of-l...

Also: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/learning No plural option.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Node.js in Flame Graphs by chocolateboy on Wednesday November 19, 2014 @02:18PM (#8632013)

> "Learnings" is at best a pointless affectation

No, at best it's a deliberately wonky usage for comic effect [1], like "Internets". It's quite possible the author is being gamesome. [2]

[1] https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borat:_Cultural_Learnings_...

[2] http://youtu.be/Wc1pxO_-5S8?t=6m43s

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Node.js in Flame Graphs by Scramblejams on Wednesday November 19, 2014 @12:51PM (#8631458)

Continuing the OT and heedless of the downvotes: I appreciate your efforts, but they can't help themselves -- so many people love using recently invented (and redundant) words because they think it makes them sound smart and hip. Sorta like people who think JS is an amazing language and love to sell that point of view.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Node.js in Flame Graphs by gadders on Thursday November 20, 2014 @04:17AM (#8634928)

I think their must be a voting ring of marketers that are upset their latest buzzword-bingo entry has been called out :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Node.js in Flame Graphs by cdelsolar on Wednesday November 19, 2014 @12:46PM (#8631425)

I play tournament Scrabble and learnings is a valid word in it.

[ Parent | on HN ]