skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Routinely I see in numerous online discussions that people refuse to even consider Perl 6 because they hate Perl. Or there are younger people who think of Perl as "their grandfather's language" (in much the same way people in my generation view COBOL).

I am not a fan of Perl, but this feels tragic to me. Perl was so radically different. I remember being on Perlmonks way back in the day, and someone would post a question about why their code didn't work, and there would be dozens of people who could instantly, intuitively post a corrected version of the code, but then the poster would say "oh, shit, what was my code doing? and why does the correct code do something different?" and you'd be lucky if there was a single person (cough chromatic) who could explain it. And none of the Perl fans cared, because Perl made them extremely powerful and productive, and they could (almost always) confidently produce a line of Perl code that did what they wanted. The analogy to natural language carried further into practice than Larry Wall could have dreamed. Nobody worries that the difficulty of resolving linguistic conundrums impairs their ability to have a conversation, and the Perl ninjas in my company enjoyed a very close and chatty relationship with the systems they worked on.

I'm the opposite kind of person, who got sick to his stomach looking at a line of code like !#$foo->%_[] (note: not real Perl) not knowing why it worked, even if I wrote it and knew that it would work. Even now, I have a nagging fear that if I executed "!#$foo->%_[] (note: not real Perl)" it would print "Yes it is! Ha ha. Love, Larry" to the console. I can't stand that, so Perl was never for me, but I still hope that against all odds this long, drawn-out apparent deathbed scene turns out to be the middle of a successful convalescence.
I run a paid Google Chrome extension - I'm terrified there's going to be similar stories for Chrome extensions since this year Google introduced a review process.
The author (and many comments here) make good cases for renaming; but other than, "Perl 5 is dead, long live Perl 6", what case is there to be made for keeping "Perl 6"?

Having written some terrible scripts in perl 20 years ago (and still occasionally using it as an awk++), I am interested somewhat to learn what Perl 6 is like. But honestly, Rust and Swift are both ahead of Perl 6 in the "interesting new languages to learn when I have some free time" queue (having picked up Go over the last few years).

(edit: spelling)
I previously worked on a team that used Clubhouse (clubhouse.io) to find this balance, and it was demonstrably excellent—to the point where I almost wish I hadn’t been exposed to it, because it’s made dealing with Jira that much more painful.
I would indicate that engineers' feelings ("hating" something) are quite orthogonal to business needs or technical challenges.

Probably every technical decision maker pushing for microservices knows the perils of distributed debugging. They have some weight - just some.
I'm not sure about this specific case, but they can use uranium-lead dating, looking at its isotopes, to determine stones several million years old. They examine the rock the fossil is in to determine the fossil's age. They also combine that technique with some confirmation techniques: examining the bones of the other animals found with the homonids, knowing the time period those animals were alive; looking at the plants in the same stone layers and knowing those time periods; they also look at the stone tools (or lack thereof) knowing how tools evolved to help confirm the age.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium%E2%80%93lead_dating
> Bad example: Java actually has many VMs available for it: Oracle, OpenJDK, Zing, and IBM come to mind. I'm unsure if Java has multiple compilers, but its quite possible.

It does have multiple compilers for java, at least javac and ecj (eclipse compiler for java) http://blog.deepakazad.com/2010/05/ecj-eclipse-java-compiler...

And if you consider groovy and scala and kotlin it has many more compilers.
Huawei Mate 30 Blocked from Using Google Apps
This is the lie created to overthrow the PT that eventually elected Jair Bolsonaro.
There is evidence on the internet (leaked audios from authorities) that there was a major national agreement to take down the PT.
These companies are much older than the PT government. JBS was founded in 1953. The large building contractors were truly enriched during the military dictatorship (1964 - 1985).
It does not take much in-depth research to realize this.
That's a question more people should probably ask themselves. I screwed around with various ads, affiliate links, and so forth at one point. I fairly quickly came to the conclusion that the small amount I was bringing in wasn't worth having the ads/code/etc. on my site.

I might feel differently if it were a site focused on a particular topic, ads might be relevant to the audience, and the income were material. But, as it was, it just seemed better to keep it non-commercial.
The irony of your comment is that the threat of Chinese hegemony has increased several fold precisely because of the actions of the US military in response to 9/11, the effects of which are being felt nearly two decades on.

The US has wasted over a trillion dollars trying to police areas it had no business in being in. Meanwhile, China's military buildup went uncontested, and today the US is in a trade war of its own making, only now the shoe is on the other foot.

America's the one exporting agricultural produce and China's the one selling world-leading 5G and other advanced technologies.
I agree on the idea, but where to draw the line?

A direct report is definitely a bad idea, but what if it's someone who reports to one of your reports?

Or someone who report to another manager?

etc.

At some point it should become ok. Completely forbidding people to find romance at the workplace would make it feel so gray, especially given the time you sink in it.
Like PHP
Fit: Framework for Integrated Test
So I basically agree with you & jschwartzi. But to expand or reinforce my original point, it is very clear there is a substantial contingent of programmers who do not. While of course in my own opinion, my own opinion is correct (duh), at a more global level, or maybe in a more academic sense, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong. I've already flopped on that matter once in my career and I reserve the right to be convinced by another language that I'm wrong now, too.
My experience with debugging with RabbitMQ was not bad, but we had to do a bit of work to ease the process. For example, we configured error queues where processors publish error log and input message information, which is enough to reproduce the bug and understand what happened.
How convenient this is, as negative PR grows surrounding their 2016- MBP product line.
Can't help but wonder how Brendan Eich would have fared in the job.
"Isolationism" when discussing U.S. history, and as relevant here, generally refers to our reluctance to our avoidance of alliances with European countries. (Or, really, anyone. In this context, "isolationism" isn't inconsistent with "expansionist." It's more about unilateral versus multi-lateral.)
Years riding BMX has taught me the truth of this.

I remember when I was younger doing an x-up (turning the handlebars backwards in the air so your arms make an x) over a pretty big jump. This was something I'd done many times before, but this time, while trying to straighten out before landing, my handlebars got tangled in my shirt and stuck at a 90 degree angle. Somehow, instead of landing in that very unfortunate position, I managed to stuff my bike down between my legs and behind me before, reasonably gracefully, sliding down the landing on my knees. I was completely unscathed, but a little baffled as to how.

I ride a lot more conservatively now and a lot less regularly so I don't fall very often, but it seems like when I do, that lack of practice shows. I don't seem to get as lucky any more.
Warren Buffett hasnt stockpiled this much cash since before the financial crisis
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/2000-years-economic-history...
Imaginea Becomes First Non-Microsoft Contributor to Microsoft Adaptive Cards
Getting Started with Serverless WebAssembly
There's a link in the post to play around with the project but if you try to fork it you'll get an error.

To get around this you have to create an account[0] first and then return to the project.[1] Then you can fork/copy and re-run it.

[0] https://www.dominodatalab.com/try

[1] https://try.dominodatalab.com/u/domino-johnjoo/Deep-Reinforc...
Look forward to Louis Rossmann's response to this news

Keeping an eye out: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl2mFZoRqjw_ELax4Yisf6w
I've found over the past 6 years that anything nice about Perl is negated by how hard it is to think of the right way to do something from among the 30 different ways. And it makes it difficult to write maintainable code because there are no good ways to constrain the input domain of functions.

I also don't think it's a good thing that the language has idioms. In a human language idiomatic expressions are a barrier to learners, and it's the same with Perl. The context-sensitivity of expressions is also a huge barrier to maintainability because it's impossible to know from looking at the code what the acceptable contexts are for a variable. You basically have to keep track of the state of a variable separately if you want to avoid usage errors.

Finally, the fact that Perl users consider the arcane-ness of Perl to be a good thing is the last nail in the coffin for me.
I feel like this is an end-run attempt to avoid right-to-repair legislation.

While I hope for the best from this program, it seems to little to late and in direct opposition of prior arguments they’ve made concerning third-party repairs and parts distribution.

I feel like this will just end up being used in court to support their side of the right-to-repair debate.
> Well established? It's simply not proven, period. You should only teach kids what you are 100% sure about

Forget teaching science at all, then. That's not how scientific knowledge works.

Evolution is not "proven". No empirical science theories are ever "proven". But evolution as a theory is pretty much as good as it gets. Yes, some details get reworked from time to time, but the fundamentals are our best bet.

> Gravity, electricity, etc.. are things you can prove

No. How do you "prove" gravity or electricity?

> not the evolution of an ape into a human

Other people have told you multiple times no-one believes apes evolved into humans, so please stop arguing against this strawman. Modern apes and humans share a common ancestor which was neither ape nor human, and the evidence for this is pretty strong.
I'd love to understand why you think that.
I doubt there's a significant number of those though.

In my family, we keep cars until they cost more to fix than they're worth, which is usually around 200-250k miles. At ~10k miles/year, that's 20-25 years, which seems about in line with the 12-year old average age. Growing up, we had two family cars (not counting my dad's commuter or teenager cars) before I moved out, the first was definitely over 20 years when we junked it and the second is around 20 and is still being driven today by my sister.

I currently drive a ~12 year old car with ~120k miles, and I expect to get a few more years out of it. I'll probably sell it since we want a larger car, but I'd have no problem driving it for several more years. In looking for cars, I tend to look at cars in the 3-7yo range and expect 10+ years of life with minimal issues. I just don't see a reason to spend more on a car that necessary, and cars tend to work well up to 200k miles or so these days.
I don't believe everything was strictly wine in the modern sense. Some were just "strong" or "intoxicating" drinks that were referred to as "wine" from a clunky translation
Title should be updated to say what is happening: Apple launches Independent Repair Provider program
A difference here is that flight also evolved and re-evolved over and over. General intelligence of the scale and sort that humans feature just once (that we know of and very likely in history).
My mistake, I read "they could not have" rather than "they could have not"
Wow, this is up there with that hilariously tone-deaf Google blog post about cookies and privacy [1]. People want full control over their devices, both software and hardware. This thinly veiled propaganda isn't fooling anyone.

[1] https://www.blog.google/products/chrome/building-a-more-priv...
I don't think that's the same. We're not trying to reverse engineer flight. We're trying to reverse engineer how we reverse engineered flight.
Ask HN: Does your company have an interview “bar raiser” program?
Curious to learn more about companies with "bar raiser" program, or something equivalent. Have you found it to have positive/negative/neutral impact on the quality of the hiring process?
IronPerl was a .Net implementation of Perl so one could compile to IL. Afair, adoption was sparse.
but why can't that product be open source?
> I’m talking about a software company with dozens or even hundreds of engineers, with large amounts of technical debt, that has a giant, monolithic codebase that’s highly-coupled and poorly tested, a release process that is slow and brittle.

I think you may have a flawed view of large software organizations. While I'm sure some companies exist that match the above description, I've more typically seen numerous siloed teams, with their own codebases, with both loose and tight coupling to other teams, with a variety of processes, and therefore a variety of quality around the teams.

So it is not as simple as just picking a universal pain point and transitioning to a new process. It is about understanding the drivers and history that got each team to where they are, picking apart which of those drivers is still relevant, and looking for shared pain points between teams that are now open to change due to changes in the business since things were set up.

Because of this, I'd focus less on the technical side, and more on communications and business, as those are the rabbit holes you'll need to go down to build consensus from multiple teams to mutually move to a better place.
And you think there would be no extra qualifications required for the platoon heads?
Well, Brave started from nothing and seems to be growing. I use it now on all my devices and really like it as a daily driver.

Had Brendan been able to try these ideas with the firefox userbase it could've advanced the privacy conversation much further...
> benign

For the computers running on renewable power (Costa Rica, maybe?), it would truly be benign and not just stealthy. Long live green PoW!
> Python has CPython 2.0, CPython 3.0, and Jython at least. Probably a few others.

...and IronPython, Cython, PyPy, PythonNet, MicroPython, probably plenty more I'm forgetting.
So we could reduce something that accounts for just 3.4% of global emissions by 75%?
Ask yourself the number of ways packages might get installed on a given system
(apt, chocolatey, homebrew, pip, pacman, nix, guix), and recalibrate how
smart you want humble emacs to be.
That’s because some settings are commonly changed, whereas others rarely. Cramming every single thing that can be construed as a “setting” into a single page results in a mess.

Also, like anything else in the app, settings are context-dependent. Some are system-wise, whereas others might be user-specific. Therefore, it makes sense to segregate them, IMHO.
Automatically Detecting the Cause of Crashes on Linux
It could be, but it also seems to be a satisfactory compromise from all sides. Customers get independent repair services with genuine parts, repair services don't need to jump through as many hoops to be considered first-class, and Apple avoids getting attacked as much over right-to-repair laws.
This isn't a sign that one architecture is better than the other. It only indicates that the tools are more mature for debugging monoliths than distributed architectures (including event-driven) for tracing causality and data flow through the whole system.

The fact that there's great advantages to distributed architectures, yet they're harder to work with, is a signal that there's a market opportunity for better tooling around working with them.
I don't see how poly bags offer any weight advantage over an envelope. The advantage they have is durability: paper envelopes get easily ripped open, whereas poly bags are nearly indestructible for about the same weight and size. I've also noticed that many shippers now print their mailing/customs label directly onto the poly bags, so that probably makes the shipping process faster and more automated.
I doubt it.

"Raku is an interesting new language with some neat features..." will be met with "Oh, you mean Perl 6? lol."

If Perl is dead, renaming the last version isn't going to change anything.
Either way, they are what the OP is about. I think?

They are tooltips in the plain language meaning of the word, they are tips about tools. But I agree the term "tooltip" initially made me think they were talking about the appear-on-hover kind.

"feature flag" also means something very different in software discussions, I wouldn't try to re-use it for these. Words are hard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feature_toggle

I might call them "feature disclosure callouts" or "feature announcement callouts" or something like that, but that's a mouthful. "callout" is one graphic design term for that bubble with a pointer annotating the the thing pointed to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callout
Corona and Handwell did not engage in reverse engineering. They copied BIOS source code that IBM released publicly (but not under a license than permitted them to do that). I'm not familiar with Eagle software.

VTech did their reverse engineering properly and the courts sided with them. You might be thinking of Franklin Computer which directly copied Apple's software and did lose in court.
So... they were expecting to end up on the wrong side of congress.
>Taking that long for a single version update in a language is not reasonable.

PeRl 6 Is NoT aN uPgRaDe Of PeRl 5. It'S a SePaRaTe LaNgUaGe.
> Personally for me spacemacs is bit slower in startup for my liking

I have see this many times and never understood how startup time could be an issue.
I startup Spacemacs at the beginning of the day, and close it when I leave. 10 second of startup time is nothing.
My experience is that Perl scripts other people wrote are impossible to understand. It made me never want to touch it again. I was handed several unmaintained ten year old Perl scripts to update and in every case I just rewrote it in python just because Perl gave me a migraine looking at it.
My personal experience as someone who started with vim and than switched to emacs:

If you intend to do a lot of customization to your editor, or expect IDE-like features, I feel that emacs is the superior choice.

elisp is a OK scripting language. Rather quickly I could read and understand the internals of emacs packages (and of some of the emacs internals itself!), despite having basically no experience with lisp. Self-documentation and explorability is truly incredible.

I never really looked into VimL, but my understanding is that it is really not as good.

I still prefer vim bindings, so I use evil-mode on my "vanilla" emacs and vim bindings in spacemacs (well, "hybrid" bindings to be exact).

So my personal take:

- vim for sysadmin, being able to run a fast minimal editor behaving the same on multiple machines

- emacs for development, where having a "tailor-made" editor with lot of config/customization is important
Windows Subsystem for Linux
Sure, but most people don't know or care. They just type "python" and Python happens. If they need to find another implementation, it's possible, but there's no question about what the default implementation is.
Here's an example in Golang:

https://blog.kowalczyk.info/article/n/fuzzing-markdown-parse...

The short version is that you strip down the interesting main loop of your program to accept an item of input, process it, and exit, and then the fuzzer takes over.
Is he jumping out of the ship before it sinks?

I made a proposal for making mozilla sustainable:
https://github.com/servo/servo/issues/24026

BTW does anyone know why 2018 is the first year from Mozilla where finance results were not published?
Is there anyway to know how much less money they make than in 2017 (500 millions$)
Teardown of my $1k MRR business (10 min video)
I think it comes down to taking debugging, monitoring, and alerting seriously. I doubt any team would be better off with a distributed system if they don't spend a serious amount of time setting up logging, monitoring, tracing, making it easy to debug, having automated alerts, etc. Its what separates a great coder from a good engineer and if you don't have the latter on hand, you should steer far away from building systems like this.
Perl6 is not “a single version update” of perl5. It’s an entirely new language.
Don't you mean the "P" in "Princess"?
Show HN: I created an alternative to Crowdfunding for devs, programmers etc.
Target is also really into surveillance capitalism. I don't know how Walmart compares, but Target definitely does its best to do creepytracking of every customer.
Just another gimmick bullshit to show when opposing right the repair. Few weeks ago Apple started blocking battery replacements in iPhones, even original ones swapped from another original iphone.
> No chance of quickly writing a script to automate something in the editor, because it takes so much time that it's not worth it for quick editor code snippets.

Take a look at Atom[0]: you can almost think it's a bit underpowered Emacs that uses CoffeeScript(JS) instead of Elisp.

It uses the same mental model as Emacs; the init file is a CoffeeScript file, not a JSON file with packages (like VSCode).

[0] atom.io
I suggest and use the opposite rule of thumb, "always use references". It tends to simplify things. Python writes the same rule into the language itself.
Yes. We've seen where this trend of people building and promoting useful free utilities, waiting until they build up a large audience and lots of trust, and then turning them into adware ends - it happened before with freeware on Windows. That's reached the point where the older well-known, formerly trustworthy utilities for tracking down the software spamming you with ads are now obnoxious adware themselves. The entire ecosystem is so poisoned that Apple created a hugely successful series of ad campaigns around the fact that their platform wasn't like that and technical people direct their friends elsewhere.
This is a great idea. If Perl 6 got a new name, some new branding, and Perl 5 added a few new features and polish, the language would suddenly awaken from its 20 year nightmare.
I don't see any future for Perl5. Through a type of Osborne Effect - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect - the development of Perl 6 has also killed Perl 5. Few or none will reach for Perl5 these days for new development - Python or Node.js have obliterated Perl as contender in the space it used to dominate and I don't see Perl5 ever muscling it's way back. Fairly or unfairly, Perl5 is viewed as a legacy tool these days.
> That’s because some settings are commonly changed, whereas others rarely. Cramming every single thing that can be construed as a “setting” into a single page results in a mess.

^apple's iOS
Most likely, but as a Hail Mary last-ditch effort, it seems reasonable and probably better than nothing. "Raku" sounds at least 1% more interesting for a dev to look into trying than "Perl 6".