KamBha

I find this argument a little odd:-

"Frameworks do not keep retro-compatibility"

I would argue that is a good thing and in the case of Spring, doesn't feel true. In part, Spring is so hard to learn because it has too much support for legacy stuff (though this may have changed in the last few years).

The only issue with not supporting retro-compatibility is because the JVM doesn't support retro compatibility. I recently tried to upgrade an application to the latest version of Java (I think it was Java 12) and found that date formaters were completely changed to match an ISO standard which broke a lot of code. We also found a similar problem with the Java 8 transition as well forcing a huge upgrades to our libraries.

I am of the view that libraries and frameworks should support not support retro compatibility but the language should. This way, if you don't want to upgrade your library then you don't have to.

Using the web as an example, old Angular JS applications still work today as they did back when they were first written. I doubt applications written in the first version of Spring will work with the latest version of the JVM.

I daily drive FF and even develop using it. Everyone else in the company use Chrome. Recently one of our clients complained about a performance issue, I tried to replicate it on my fast PC, but could not replicate. The people who could replicate it were on Chrome, but when they followed the replication steps in FF, the problem disappeared.

Google web applications still not great, but still usable I find. Facebook performance isn't great either.

I only test in Firefox, because FF is my browser of choice. Everyone else in the office only tests on Chrome because that is their browser of choice. We all know it is wrong, but cross browser compatibility makes it so much easier to forget that there are subtle differences.

Fun fact, we recently found a performance issue on one of our products which I was completely unaware of because it didn't affect. Even now, we cannot get Chrome to match FF's performance especially (of all things) for Google maps. Just goes to show that basic assumptions that Chrome is faster than Firefox are not 100% accurate. Like most things, it depends.

I use Firefox day in and day out and the only time I have found myself using Chrome is when I have to do profiling and even then that is because profiling tools in all browsers kinda sucks.

I have often wondered what is the killer feature that Chrome dev tools has that Firefox does not that forces people to switch back to Chrome as this seems to be a common refrain and while I don't work on the dev tools I sometimes wonder what awesome feature I am missing in Chrome...

In some cases, I actually find Chrome lacking. For example, the ability to see what events are attached to a dom element.

DISCLAIMER: I do not work on the developer tools for Chrome or Firefox and don't do much CSS.

We have been using Stride for a few months and are baffled by how bad it can be and how it seems to miss key features that was in Hipchat (such as a call indicator). I used to always say "this is not the hard part of your job, stride " because it would fail to do basic things such as display images.

A colleague of mine found a security issue but had a hard time logging it and had to make it public.

Basically, I got the impression that the stride team in Atlassian was a bit of a mess.

All that said, it is sad to see it go because it was an alternative to the near monopoly of Slack. The only other alternative is rocket chat and MS teams now.

While I agree that the more investment is probably required in rural areas, I think your assertion that the reason why rural areas are being under funded is incorrect.

Reality is that more people now live in urban areas[1]. Democracy being what it is, most funding goes to the majority - which are in the city. Add to that that setting up this infrastructure is often not cost effective for a private business (due to a lack of customers) and that most rural communities prefer less government intervention (ie less taxes), we have a situation where there is little impetus to invest in rural communities by private companies and governments (at least local) don't have funding to pay for service.

[1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2016/comm/acs-...

I have never really coded in C# or in the .Net platform, but I remember when it came out.

I always thought that prior to C# 1.0 being released, the Java language was stuck. There was no generics, annotations, enumerations, for/each loops or auto boxing which made programming in Java not only painful but dangerous (especially with the lack of generics and for/each). I personally, never considered anything before Java 1.5 "good enough".

I was always under the impression that these language change were in response to what C# and many of these language concepts were practically copied from C#. Is this actually the case?

Regarding FF headless mode:- https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1338004

Basically, WIP. For now, if you have NodeJS:-

https://slimerjs.org/

It is kinda headless.

Not sure if the author of this link is responsible for this page, but it does not work in Firefox :(

"Tell me about that one time you solved an interesting problem?"

I agree if that was the only thing you asked, you wouldn't get a good answer. However, if you then dug into their answer you can probably tell if it is BS or not.

I remember having this exact experience with a junior dev who claimed to worked on some interesting projects at Uni, but when you dug deeper, you realised he knew very little about the technology he supposedly used.

That said, my company isn't really interested in hiring people who can code an algorithm to balance b-trees. My company just need people who know how to ask questions, write maintainable code, and use a profiler.

Personally, I disliked the fact that Chrome would spawn so many processes. This has become less of an issue (as each process is no longer as heavy), but was a big deal previously as other people at work would constantly complain about their computers being slow.

Call me old school, but I actually like the fact that the URL bar and the search bar are two separate things and that I can actually have a menu bar. I find the way that Chrome handles its navigation a little annoying at time and I don't see a big deal about losing a few hundred pixels to FF's chrome.

I actually like the way that Mozilla communicates information about Firefox (less automated).

Aside from that, unabashed fanboyism.

Just curious, has anyone seen if there are performance improvements in Javascript DOM manipulation (eg adding elements or attributes in JS)?

Reminds me of Paganitzu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganitzu)

I also follow this rule or I try and state things as if they are my opinion. So instead of:-

> This method should not be static.

I would say

> I think this method should not be static.

I will also follow up with a reason. For example:-

* I think this method should be static as this class is instatiable.

Whether I give a reason or not depends on the experience of the person whose work I am reviewing.