andreasgonewild

JavaScript and PHP are badly/barely designed languages, period; no amount of excuses and comparisons is going to change the fact. Anyone with a bit of experience in either Ruby or Python will tear their hair out when doing JS, because they know it doesn't have to be that difficult. These days it's looking more and more like C++ every day...

That says more about Java than Script though, and I've done enough of that to feel your pain. Coming from plenty of experience with sane dynamic languages (Common Lisp/Smalltalk/Clojure/Julia), it looks exactly like the madness it is. It's a difference in perspective, that's all. It's not about foolproof, it's about having any kind of intellectual integrity at all.

For a programming language, I much prefer function over form. Same goes for gadgets, but that's another story.

Good luck with that.

Because real languages allow creating your own abstractions to fill the gaps, Go doesn't. Witness the total lack of decent error handling and data structures; despite probably thousands of people trying their best from user code. It's the iPhone of programming languages.

C is primitive but powerful. Go is primitive and safe. I would classify the Wirth-family of languages as safe but powerful. It all comes down to power; Go was explicitly designed to enable armies of lesser code monkeys to work together without anyone getting hurt.

That, or some sort of Forth; the separate keyword also enables calling anonymous functions recursively:

https://github.com/andreas-gone-wild/snackis/blob/master/sna...

Been there, done that :) It's a neat trick, but the issue for me is that you still need to pass a separate struct for state which breaks the illusion enough that you might as well just write an ordinary iterator.

How can it be better when it fails randomly and we don't even understand how it works? Where I come from, that's the worst kind of software.

Write lots of code, in different languages; find increasingly real problems to challenge your skills. Unless, of course, you're just interested in becoming another whatever; then you're better off memorizing buzzwords and JavaScript frameworks.

Go kill yourself (?) for someone else's (?) profit then, you can lead a horse to water but not make it drink.

Google not working for you? I picked this at random, you'll have to use your own brain if you want to know more:

https://draxe.com/canola-oil-gm/

"Canola oil is a Canadian invention that’s backed by Canada’s government, cheap to manufacture, and many packaged or processed foods contain it. Canola oil was first created in the early 1970s as a natural oil, but in 1995, Monsanto created a genetically modified version of canola oil. As of 2005, 87 percent of canola grown in the U.S. was genetically modified, and by 2009, 90 percent of the Canadian crop was genetically engineered."

Yes, and rape seed oil has the about the same combination of fatty acids as olive oil; which is healthy; but it's still poisonous gmo crap. Same goes for HFCS. The amount of genetic manipulation, processing and refining matters.

You are also most probably human, have you even bothered to have a look inside?

It's always there for anyone to grab. Try lying on your back with all your gadgets turned off and eyes closed; and observe your brain thinking for a while; which is about as difficult as meditation needs to be. Might take some practice to not identify with the thoughts and get carried away, or to not block yourself by trying too hard. Then ask yourself while lying there: Who am I? Literally :) Who is observing the thoughts? The experience is not of this world, it can't be transferred using words. There are other ways to get a glimpse, mushrooms, ayahuasca etc; but introspection is the way to go for lasting results. I spent 32 years writing software, and I just know that a computer will never be able to do the same thing.

Pharo (http://pharo.org) is also worth mentioning on the subject of modern Smalltalk environments.

This boils down to a fundamental divide in life view. Anyone who has done any amount of expanding their consciousness will tell you that there is a ghost in the machine. It's always a mistake to assume that all you can see is all there is to see.

They're tested by the same psychos that created the drugs and their bought fan club, otherwise things like Oxy would never have made it to market. It's worth repeating, big pharma is all about creating return customers; nothing that comes out of that mess is ever going to solve problems.

From my perspective, OxyContin is obviously designed to be as addictive as possible; and they have been lying all along. These people are not fully functioning humans, they will do whatever it takes to generate more profits. I promised myself to never touch their artificial crap again; if it doesn't grow on the ground, I'm not interested.

I was on Oxy for about a month after smashing one of my vertibraes into pieces in a climbing accident, I was prescribed more than three times as much. I walked through hell to get out of that crap; nothing else I've encountered even comes close, including heroine and cocaine. There are several natural, less addictive and less harmful methods for treating chronic pain; cannabis, mushrooms and meditation among others. Pharma is all about creating return customers; profits, at any cost; the people involved in creating this mess have some serious karma to deal with in the near future.

What does building for people (which I am) have to do with making profits (which I don't)? What about sharing? Building for profit is the opposite of building for people, the two mind sets are not compatible.

I wholeheartedly disagree; write more tools, more code; own your skills.

There are plenty of things worth doing that are not profitable. If anything, the people who made the profits where standing on the shoulders of giants like Kay; I think we can afford him some space to be grumpy over shitty execution and lack of vision. It's a matter of perspective; what you call cool things, Kay would call consumer bull crap; and I tend to agree.

One true language, one true paradigm, one true database, one true encoding, one true editor; the list goes on and on and on, that's where forum flame wars and hate mobs are born. The problem is lacking experience; you need to earn enough scars to knock you out of the loop, bump your head against enough walls to realize that the one true way will always fail. As usual; the people who make all the noise don't really know which way is up or down yet, that's what they are so busy trying to figure out.

Depends a lot on what type of companies you want to work for, but I would say that Go is definitely more popular overall. Popular is unfortunately mostly crap, which is why it sucks as a long term optimization target.

, and not a second too early. Definitely cause for celebration!

Edit: Sore toes, anyone? Too invested to see clearly? I did enough EE-consulting to have an opinion; it's over-engineered, marketing-driven bullshit; designed to make everything as complicated as possible.

"Recently, using indentation as the sole grouping construct of a language has become popular".

Given that popularity doesn't say a peep about merits, it's worthless as an indicator of where to go. There are plenty of good reasons to not treat indentation as syntax. One of the more enjoyable aspects of Lisp is that that grouping is obvious, especially given an editor that knows how to count parens.

I have one word for Facebook: Myspace; and it's not a second to early for that bunch of scheming zuckers.