prevedmedved

If you're starting with TDD and unit tests, then you're doing it wrong.

You have to start with integration tests, then go down the stack if you have time and resources.

Salo is not lard. Salo is cured bacon without the thin strips of meat.

Lard is closer to margarine.

> First of all, Rome did not unite neighboring groups in Italy as a culture

This is simply false. Please learn about the pre-Roman history of Italy.

Are you seriously claiming that you can understand seal script inscriptions?

Are you Indiana Jones?

I've never in my life eaten crab or lobster with butter. Is this some retarded American thing?

No FB2 support, not very useful.

It's not just you.

Adtech handles money. It's financial software that also needs to be (soft) real-time. It's harder than the usual money software.

What bullshit. The whatsisname congressman is 100% correct, and the article author is spewing a load of autistic idiocy.

Of course "tech" isn’t the issue, nobody cares about the SERP coefficients. The values and processes behind the scenes at Google is the issue, and they are absolutely evil and partisan.

A DLT is just a database. You can't build a business peddling an open source database in 2018.

Looks like we need a Python 4. (/s)

"Properly raising their kids" in this situation means installing timer controls into videogames, something that needs to be forced by the state because videogame publishers will never do such a thing willingly.

No, but board games will be.

RPG's are escapism, while real art is hard work. (Fun, but still hard work.)

There is art involved in making and playing RPG's, but the end result is not artistic.

Because Google and Bing are in the advertising business, not the search engine business. (There is no "search engine industry".)

Their goal is ad clickthrough, not accurate search results.

The dislike comes from the fact that some people abuse exceptions as a flow control mechanism. This is due to the "everything is a nail if you have a hammer" problem: exceptions and RAII is a resource lifetime control mechanism that every modern and sane language should have, but very few programmers are ready to reason in terms of resources and lifetimes instead of instructions.

You're right that you can get Python 3 to behave correctly if you jump through some hoops. However, wasn't the point of Python 3 to remove the hoopjumping in the first place?

Anyways, the point is that Python 3's design was broken from the start. Anglophone programmers think that internationalisation means "upgrading" from ASCII to Unicode. In reality, though, the rest of the world's programmers got along just fine long before Unicode was invented and will continue to do fine long after Unicode gets replaced by something else.

True internationalisation means mechanisms to deal with the world's text encodings in a neutral and culture-agnostic way. (And "Unicode only everywhere and no exceptions" is definitely not that.)

I'm one of those people for whom English is not the only language.

Python 3 is objectively harder and more confusing to use in a multilingual environment. Python 2 didn't pretend that only Unicode exists and Python 2 was encoding-agnostic. This is the correct default for the real world.

Ironically, the effect of Python 3 was the opposite: it made life really hard for those that aren't exclusive anglophones and made life a lot easier for American programmers who now don't have to bother with the whole character encoding mess.

Personally, Python 3's broken support for internationalisation made me drop Python altogether. Python 2 was confusing, but the defaults were at least workable.