skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In my experience, it took essentially zero time to understand and be able to write simple CoffeeScript. Yeah, it will take some minor effort, but I see it as as parallel to templating languages in terms of your argument. It is faster and cleaner to write, and makes my life easier. I have hardly (I think never) needed to look at the output for debugging, but when I have looked out of curiosity it seemed reasonable, just with strange variable names.

Does anybody have examples of some CS code that only differs from JS in terms of syntax (eg. not defining a class or something) but compiles to something weird?
Assembler is hard. JavaScript is not. It's a layer of abstraction that makes no sense to me either, particularly when there's a community of JavaScript enthusiasts already out there. If I was looking for open source project commits I know which I'd use.
Yup. JET is delivering much than NIF, in terms of reaching the goal of maximizing Q.

NIF has a program cost (1997-2013) on the order of $8B USD to reach this unimpressive number. (Based on $450m/yr not including fixed/one-time costs.)

JET is in for about $20B USD ($15B €). [0]

JET might be around thrice as costly, but the results speak for themselves.

[0] http://www.efda.org/fusion/why-should-society-invest-in-fusi...
I agree and I can't help but think that all the concerns about source maps and being unable to read the output comes from people who saw the transpilation aspect to the language and freaked out, and never actually tried to use it to get something done. The only time I had to look at the source was when there were bugs in the compiler. (This was years ago, and I submitted patches.)
> Like the USA, the Indian foreign service needs to use modern security techniques.

Absolutely, but as another HN user already replied to you:

> Your comment is good. "Apu Fuck-knuckles" is not. You should change it while you can still edit. It completely occludes your otherwise decent comment.

And please stop with the pointless arguments that "India isn't a race or even an ethnicity" (it isn't, but that's irrelevant) to somehow prove your original comment wasn't racist. By that logic, no one can ever be racist to Indians, because, hey, Indians don't have a race!
Thanks for linking, I hadn't heard of this program before. It's even better that this sort of plan has precedent inside the US!

I'm fairly certain no other form of campaign finance can work. You can require lobbyists and politicians to jump through higher and higher hoops but at the end of the day politicians will still need to fund their campaigns, most people still won't want to spend their money on politics, and lobbyists will still be willing to do what is necessary to net a few 100-1000x ROI wins for their employers. The hoops will be jumped and the asymmetric bribery will continue until regular people get in on the game, and the only way to get regular people in on the game is to pay them to do so since, unlike their wealthier counterparts, they can't count on the occasional 100-1000x ROI win to incentivize their donations.
Kaufen oder mieten
Kostenlose kleinanzeigen
Kaufen Oder Mieten Kostenlose Kleinanzeigen Österreich – Wien , Kaufen Oder Mieten Kostenlose Kleinanzeigen Österreich – Wien , Kaufen Oder Mieten Kostenlose Kleinanzeigen Österreich – Wien , Kaufen Oder Mieten Kostenlose Kleinanzeigen Österreich - Wien
Tell HN: When using Notepad (Windows), press F5 to print current date and time.
Thanks!

This should have been the post...
Agreed completely. My only issue w/coffeescript is that, uh, I like clojurescript better. But clojurescript is all the things coffeescript is, just more---further from javascript, more concise, less compatible with standard js tools.
> in the real world we'll never see one.

Not from Apple, maybe. I know there is at least one in the works for the server market.

> And in any case: there's another reasonably well-known company out there with an even cruftier ISA making 4+GHz 6-wide superscalar cores with backwards 32 (and 16!) bit compatibility modes. Instruction decode is the sort of thing programmers understand, so we tend to get hung up on it when talking about CPUs.

You absolutely can implement a fast core out of almost any ISA (just look at IBM System z!) if you have sufficient resources. The point is that A64 is amenable to being made into a fast CPU without Intel-scale design effort.
Sir-trevor.js - block based rich content editing
//How are they gonna transmit data//
Pigeons of course!
If I'm a least-common-denominator web developer and I copy and paste some PHP code into a project from a google search, and I copy and paste some Ruby code of similar origin, what are the odds that each has a inobvious flaw?

Or much worse what are the odds that if I'm an average developer and am picking a random feature from each language's standard library, making care to read the docs before using it in my application that I've still introduced a bug? (Consider that maybe I'm dealing with things that were considered strange and new when most of PHP is still from - like character encodings - particularly character encodings that differ from the system I'm running in).

Most languages can be CGI-style executed by an httpd with shared-nothing, but can also start up and be a long-lived stateful daemon. I don't have to decide between putting a square peg in a round hole or throwing my code away to learn something entirely new if I realize I need the latter part way through a project.

PHP comes with a excessively large (but strangely CGI/HTTP/HTML/SQL-obsessed) standard library littered with footguns, and for most of its life has not had a common pattern for reusable modules, and has not had a good bundler for shipping reusable modules or making working with C extensions easy - and as such few people bother reimplementing functionality from core outside of what's been provided there (which is all set in hard clay), and when they are forced to tend to do so in (plain-ole-interpreted) PHP and don't generally package it up for reuse outside their own projects - a practice much more common outside PHP-land.

Case in point (goddamn strlen, even): https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/includes%21unicode.inc/fun...

Some of that is changing in recent history (as in well after other languages figured these problems out) with PSR (design for reuse) and Composer (bundler) but it's slow moving and the latter still won't compile C extensions yet: https://github.com/composer/composer/pull/498

Plenty of this could be solved in PHP, some of it already is if you have the luxury to work with a tiny subset of PHP projects, but the practice in PHP seems to still mostly be to have it piss in your face and believe that it's raining. People are in a rut of tradition or simply don't expect their tools or libraries to be good - and I've spent the last 6 years working with PHP (several products, several teams) and wondering where I can get some of the Koolaid that my colleagues are drinking.
I can read it but it's a struggle. Much like reading Ruby, for someone who comes from Python. The syntax doesn't quite make sense to me and its usage varies between authors—a bunch of things are optional and used unpredictably (parenthesis, lambdas, indent-alignment).

Despite the Pythonish indent-based blocks, CoffeeScript is very much Ruby-like in syntax and culture. From my experience, fluent Ruby readers enjoy CoffeeScript much more.

Regardless, the point is that CoffeeScript != JavaScript. Doing things like answering JavaScript questions in CoffeeScript is simply inconsiderate and not very useful—much like answering Python questions in Ruby.

It's true—I could go ahead and learn CoffeeScript and become more fluent at it if I wanted to, but I don't. I actually like JavaScript as it is, especially the newer specifications. Same way I choose to continue using Python rather than learn Ruby more thoroughly so that I can benefit from random Ruby answers to my Python questions.
Swedish snus in packets doesn't involve any spitting. It is totally discrete, even more than nasal snuff.
Simple solution to such requests: tell them to fork.
open in qgis, select countries, export as svg.
YouTube does have an automated monitoring system called ContenpID, but it doesn't send C&D notices like Lessig claims he received, so that's on the label. As far as I know, YouTube itself just blocks the video.
The thing that saddens me about QNX is that it had a real good chance of adoption by nerds at the moment when they opened it up. Neutrino was free (not opensource) at some point. Business reasons dictated otherwise I guess.

Back to micro, if you've ever looked at L4, I'd love to read your opinion of it. That project seems to have splintered off as in several direction, and even though it's apparently successfully used for embedded stuff, all the open research stuff seems to have stalled (edit: apparently not stalled, but active into very specific niches).
Looks like that.
My biggest problem with CS is it's a space sensitive language that comnpiles to a space insensitive language.

Given that you'll typically interact with wild west JS that adheres to no spacing conventions, having to juggle strict spacing vs arbitrary spacing seems looks a headache.
[TUTORLAL] Installing Ubuntu Desktop on a Netbook
I think we need to look at the reasons why patents were formed in the first place in order to determine how to modify patent law going forward.

Part of the reason patents came about was to prevent permanent monopolies, the idea being that you make your innovation public in exchange for a short term monopoly or what I will call "short term money." This is just one reason but it will let me illustrate an example that makes my point.

The problem with the exchange of knowledge for short term money is that the amount of time you are protected doesn't scale to the degree of innovativeness of your idea; the short term money now seems like way too much money for many patents, essentially creating the long term monopolies that patents were meant to prevent. Rather, certain things are patentable for a certain length of time, and that's that, regardless of the degree of innovativeness. To further compound the problem, the degree of innovation of idea x diminishes as we move into the future.

Consider idea x, selling images using the internet. Simple, right? This may have been considered innovative from 1980 until 1990 (this is hypothetical, please don't nit pick), because at that time not everyone has a computer, the internet, or a way to pay for things online, and maybe you have ideas for how to solve all that. But if you were to come up with that idea in 1990 it might only be truly innovative for 5 years. And if someone were to try to patent this today, assuming the USPTO worked flawlessly, we would laugh at them. It wouldn't be considered innovative for any amount of time because everyone has a computer, a way to pay for things online, and fast internet.

Yet the USPTO may grant this patent today anyway (again, hypothetical), causing companies to endure years of headaches and fork over thousands or millions in attorney fees. What's the solution to that? I don't know, but I do know there's something wrong with the incarnation we have now, because patent law is creating something it is meant to prevent (monopolies).

The point is, to modify patent law, we must first go back and look at the founding reasons of why patents were created in order to determine (a) whether we still agree with those reasons, and (b) how to modify law that nurtures those reasons going forward. It's only then that we'll be able to correct things because the situation has gone too awry for minor adjustments. I like the direction the FTC is taking, however, and I see this as a fact finding mission which must come before everything else.
I think making analogies about this is hard. Programmers are used to thinking about languages as Big Things that change the way you think. This is not that.

I would encourage you to dedicate a block of about 30 minutes to port a single piece of non-trivial JavaScript code to CoffeeScript. You'll almost certainly neutralize any hangups you have in this short period.
Assembly for XML, imperative XML modification language
For one of my projects, I've created an Assembly-like imperative language for XML manipulations. It is much simpler than XSLT and XQuery, but does almost the same when simple changes are required. At the moment it is implemented in Java only, but if there is an interest I can port it to other platforms.
Very solid points. As someone that also enjoys JS as-is, it really frustrates me when people use CoffeeScript in JS answers and tutorials.
As an aside, during the Cold War, Soviet embassies abroad used manual typewriters for all sensitive information due to the various ways in which electronic typewriters could be bugged.

For an example of the sophistication of such attacks, see the Project GUNMAN document on the NSA's history subsite:

http://www.nsa.gov/about/cryptologic_heritage/center_crypt_h...

For seven years the Soviets had bugged IBM Selectric typewriters in the US embassy in Moscow. The bugging device was remarkable, keying-off the magnetic flux of the machine's operation and transmitting this data by burst radio transmission.
Molecules are mathematical formulas. Machines are just simple physical devices governed by math. What matters is the R&D and protecting the R&D and incentive to do the research.
"Doing things like answering JavaScript questions in CoffeeScript is simply inconsiderate and not very useful"

Fuck me, right?
> The first time I saw CoffeeScript I immediately realized, oh, fuck yes, this is obviously better, and switched over to it immediately. I was productive with it instantly.

Which is fine for you. But I tried it for a project then ditched it, because it didn't justify the extra tooling required in my development pipeline, and because there are ambiguities and inconsistencies in the syntax and the language, and yes, occasionally it's actually worse than Javascript.

Which is only to say that not everyone fits into a "doesn't know CoffeeScript"/"loves CoffeeScript" dichotomy.
This is a pain when I teach kids HTML using notepad. I instruct them to ctrl+s to save, alt+tab over to their browser and F5 to refresh.

Inevitable they forget the middle part and we end up with webpages filled with timestamps.
for f#: https://github.com/rneatherway/fsharpbinding/blob/master/ema...
I can't seem to find Chris Granger's Aurora slides. Any reason why they shouldn't be here?
How about we call it what it is. Advertising. However you frame it, it's advertising. Is it useful? Who cares. It's advertising. Order a pizza using the app and your telco gets paid. Twice. Being able to remove Apple's built in apps is besides the point. Yes, it's mildly irritating that this can't be done, but it's not the same thing. Pretending otherwise is disingenuous.
The point wasn't that everyone should use it. The point was that it was trivial to pick up and use so I'm often surprised when people complain about how difficult it is to read. If I handed you a piece of CoffeeScript and you literally had never read the docs, but are a competent programmer who knows Javascript well, it'd be surprising if you couldn't just read it as-is and know what it's doing since you know it's just an alternative syntax for javascript.
Probably because they are two different countries for all intents and purposes, and from the point of view of most of the world except for mainland China.

The fact that Taiwan citizens need a (kind of) visa to enter mainland China is also a clear message that they aren't citizens of the same country.

Any other claim is political bullshit.
Strange. I know Ruby and Python and switch between them quite frequently, but generally prefer Ruby.

I loathe CoffeeScript. My problem with CoffeeScript is it imposes extra burden—to learn the syntax, and to learn how the build tools and process works (which, once you factor into account the various different web frameworks like Rails, Django, Flask and whatever brand of crazy syrup the Node people are currently drinking can be quite substantial)—but the benefit isn't there. CoffeeScript is just JavaScript but prettier.

That's not a worthwhile tradeoff for me. When Rails started doing CoffeeScript, I just opened up ~/.railsrc and popped --no-coffee in there, and my life has been a lot less painful.

CoffeeScript fixes the things about JavaScript that are least significant to me in terms of developer pain (semi-colons, curly braces and so on) but does nothing to address the things that I hate about writing JavaScript (oh, the weakly-typed type system for one thing).

If a front-ender on my team started using CoffeeScript on a project I work on, I'd take him to one side and say "it's fine to practice weird kinks in private, but compile it into JavaScript before you check it in". :)
> Patents have always struck me as a bit like a mob protection racket

Always? Seriously? Just like that? Even when a pharma company invests huge sums into R&D of a new drug and relies on patents to try and recoup this money? That's too a mob protection market for you?

The concept of the patent protection is solid. It's the execution that went astray at some point when they started issuing very generic patents. Bitch about that.
GNU 30th anniversary
In my experience Spree is better than Magento for most smbs. You are right,however, there is no replacement for WordPress and its ecosystem. Ghost looks interesting, though.
It's not a scientific theory, at best it's folk wisdom. This article is pointing out that there is no scientific basis for it.

The onus is not on anyone to disprove the theory, the onus is on the theory's proponents to prove it, they haven't done so, not to the slightest degree.
The Jones On Fire Postmortem: A Game In Five Acts
Does a bar have a right to refuse service to a gay couple? Does a restaurant have a right to refuse service to an Asian man? Does an airline have a right to refuse service to a black person?

There are sometimes quite compelling reasons to require private companies to provide services aimed at the public without discrimination.
The world’s countries’ income inequality (the U.S. ranks below Nigeria)
Developing Android Apps with Scala and Scaloid
Chicago Under The Gun
> How hard is it to form a subject line for an e-mail? It should indicate what's inside the message

Except if you're sending encrypted e-mails :)

In that regard a colleague and I now use an incrementing integer for the subject, with occasional skips in the sequence.
IBM Commits $1 Billion to Fund Linux and Open Source Innovation on Power Systems
Yes. The problem with the switch is that in Scala, 'match' actually requires you to have at least one pattern matching rule.

The closest I'd wrote in Scala to your example is something like this:

def main(args: Array[String]) = {
42 match {case i: Any => None}
println("Hello World!")
}

Ideally, the switch (42) {} should be removed as it's not doing anything.
Better than nothing I guess, but what if this ends with FTC establishing a formal criteria for "patent asserting entities" and then said entities would start working around it, say, by hiring an outsourced VB developer to become a software company? Trolls are already run by people that lack ethics, so they will just bend yet another batch of rules when they hit them.
Procedural testing isn't hard.

All that dependency crap is only a result of your AbstractTestingFrameworkMethodFactoryClassMockMethodGenerator() and similarly useless abstractions, anyway.

A simple module system can be implemented in a single function and referenced from test code as easily as:

test_requires('module1','module2');

Purely procedural tests are as easy as:

assert_equals(function_one('example_input'),'expected_output');
assert_not_equals(function_two(true),false);

Full featured test framework:

function assert_equals($a,$b) { return $a==$b; }
function assert_not_equals($a,$b) { return $a!=$b; }

(Edit: I don't believe I missed the point - 'dependency injection', a recent term in PHP, essentially means tightly coupling to an entire DI system instead of directly to a single dep as demonstrated above. Either way, loose coupling is a concept to strive for as far as reasonably possible - not an absolute requirement. If your code requires something else, then it requires something else. The solution is not to create a new AbstractPretenderOfTotalWorldVisibilityEvenThoughControlFlowIsNowAllOverTheShop() After all, if you carry that tight coupling argument further you could claim that by virtue of writing PHP at all you are tight coupling to a certain, if broad, class of processor architectures. There has to be a limit somewhere! Mostly, that's determined by legibility/maintaintability and programmer time, not by abstract measures of correctness.)
SEO Talent In High Demand — How To Hire An SEO
> CoffeeScript != JavaScript [...] Python != Ruby

I beg to differ, CoffeeScript really is JavaScript, written (literally) differently. CoffeeScript is merely a different formal language+grammar[0] that can (and is — almost) translated word for word into the same core. The semantics and underpinnings are exactly the same as with JavaScript.

Conversely, were you writing Python with a Ruby-like formal language, it would not give you things that are profoundly Ruby, like blocks or inheritance model (classes and modules, singletons, method resolution) or open classes or require. The opposite is completely true, as writing Ruby in a Python formal language would not give you decorators or (python) modules with their imports and namespaces.

CoffeeScript vs JavaScript is literally a bikeshed over the very same core.

(That said, I'm in the CS camp because I find the language requires much less overhead to keep code safe and sound, especially when dealing with not so potent developers that just can't seem to understand that yes, var is damn important)

[0]: in the mathematical sense, i.e http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_language
The Road To Continuous Delivery - Wix Guide To Continuous Delivery
AWS DynamoDB table archive and restore in JSON
Using this simple node.js command line script you can archive and restore your AWS DynamoDB in JSON format. Moreover, the script takes into account your maximum available throughput and tries to stay in its limits.
A phone whose hardware is customizable with pluggable blocks.
Clinkle
Steam is a company that should be feared by the big players.
Please read posts before replying to them.

- Nowhere in my post did I say a module system was dependency injection

- Nowhere in my post did I say angular JS modules were CommonJS.

Please don't use uppercase for emphasis, see http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Explaining in further detail: a feature of some module systems is dependency injection (yes, dependency injection can also be performed outside a module system, but the slides discusses module systems so we will too).

DI gives module systems the ability to instantiate objects using different dependencies. This is handy for things like testing, where eg, a name that would normally resolve to a network API module would instead be resolved to a stub module with pre-canned responses, so any calls to that network API module return consistent responses.

Lack of dependency injection in existing JS module systems (you can do it in AMD, but using file paths so it's kind of hacky) is cited in the angular docs as the reason Angular includes its own unique module system.

Weather people still use AMD or CommonJS or Angular modules after ES6 modules really depends on the feature set of ES6 modules. Hence asking about the feature set of ES6 modules.
Well, they have the company of the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17224846