lazersharkman

Why would you? The philosphy is the same even if you have better locking. It hasn't changed substantially. The only time you get schemas even are when you use it with like BI connectors. And that's just an accomodation.

Yes. No recursion. Essentially what could be fabbed as a circuit

Typescript. We try not to be type/pl theory fanatics. Choose your tools well. Haskell is great since the core of our product is an interpreter/compiler with multiple stages. But I don't wanna use it everywhere.

Personally I'd be using JS (or TS) + jQuery. Almost no dependencies, but a lot more manual. No one would be happy on the team if we did this of course. And it can be impractical

Same. We founded on Haskell but had some need to more front-end oriented code. Can say Elm was never considered because I was hearing this weird stuff back in 2016--not to mention it would just make hiring even harder. Can't trust tooling that will be capricious.

The worst was when I searched for gorilla glue once. Good ol' Jeffy B thought I'd also want a $100k watch, a racecar/nascar (themed) Bible, and an anatomical model of some gonads. Pretty sure I still have the screencap somewhere

I had to stop reading when there was some moral tinge that Berhringer is somehow doing something wrong by producing technology for cheap that is out of patent, namely that somehow it's wrong for Berhinger to produce the Model D when Moog produces one as well. Author claims these "compete". Maybe. Different price points and different quality of builds.

Moreover, this guy is a modifier not a manufacturer. Having his name on a product is a huge marketing scheme, probably providing him with more business than he could keep up with. I didn't know Studio Electronics until Roland. This just reads like he let something fall through, and he wants to blame berhinger somehow. It's not even as if his tech was patented, so, what's the point of writing this? IP is an abstract philosophical farce and no one really owns ideas.