My point is that there's no way forward without abruptly pruning several storylines. Thus, the story is basically impossible to finish in a satisfying way, and this is all we're gonna get from him.
I generally agree, but Dan and Dave fucked it up beyond all recognition. They were not the editor it needed.
As a casual js user (I build some static sites for fun and personal use), I am under the impression that JavaScript “sucks” mostly because some things really make it look like JavaScript was invented as a quick scripting tool rather than the backbone of the WWW.
I’ll bring an example that maybe helps me learning someting. Why in javasctipt “1” == 1? I know the === operator exists, but why isn’t the default behaviour the safer one? Especially when the mantra is “don’t trust the user”.
Like, I get, I am a strongly-typed guy, but I see why weakly-type languges exists, but this feel frankly moronic, and all the answers I’ve seen are " because that’s how it is". That’s just copium.
Like, you're not entirely wrong here. The == vs === is entirely just a legacy of a poor early decision in the language's development.
However, the reason that it's still there isn't just "because that's how it is", it's to maintain backwards compatibility. You could break the language and change your equality operators to something more sensible, but to do so would result in:
OR the real answer is C) devs just add linters that check your code for common mistakes. All modern javascript dev environments will include a linter that yells at you if you accidentally use the == sign, right in your IDE as you type it, making it not really a big deal, and autocomplete will automatically use ===.
And maintaining backwards compatibility for the Internet / World Wide Web, is probably the single most important place to maintain backwards compatibility, as it is effectively a continuous archive of information and publications. Putting up with === is honestly not that big of a deal in the context of all the above.
Like, I get, I am a strongly-typed guy, but I see why weakly-type languges exists,
I got my start with Java and C#, then Python, then Javascript, then Typescript / etc. etc. Trust me, I vastly prefer a good type system, which is why I use Typescript for everything I can these days. It is still technically weakly typed in that you don't get type errors at runtime, just at compile time, but it still makes coding in javascript soooo much nicer and more pleasant and more predictable, and it's quite frankly the most flexible and easy to use Type system / syntax of any language that I've used.
Also when I tried to compile a single Cordova app to play around I needed some 5GB of npm modules that totalled ~200k files! Is that how modern app development is like?
I mean, Cordova is not just a web app platform. That's including the toolchain to build a web app, but also do compile it into an Android app, or to compile it into an iOS app. You've basically got large chunks of the android and ios sdks in there.
Also, the particular webpage OP linked might be a little extreme, but modern software does suck ass, and is not user-friendly nor efficient.
Just look at mobile communication apps, like Teams. The user experience is terrible, the UI is unrespive, the battery drain is crazy and it takes 800MB of space.
Yes, because of corporate practices that prioritize feature development instead of addressing tech debt or performance. But that's not always the case. I worked at Meta for a stint as a contract developer, I've seen how they make decisions and they're not uninformed. They will run A/B testing on simulated apps to measure exactly how much of a difference performance makes, and then balance that against the effort it will take vs the effort it will take to develop new features and then they prioritize accordingly.
No where else I've worked does that. Everywhere else just hears a customer or executive yell for a new feature and then the PM just starts working on it without proper research or without giving team's time to go back and address tech debt.
Is this because it’s an electron app, or because it’s made by incompetent programmers? I don’t know, but we made incredible hardware improvements in personal computing, new software should be even more efficient and use them better, not get more and more bloaty to have the same experience on older and newer hardware
Given that VSCode is made by the same company, is also an electron app, and is generally remarkably performant, I would posit that teams is made by worse programmers since it's a less attractive product to work on, and the team is probably less user focused since users don't buy their software, the users' workplaces do.
I mean, that's entirely possible, based on the one account we have from the showrunner, it could be interpreted as the show runner is being greedy and George just wants art made right, or it could be read as George obsesses over these boring little details that no one else actually cares about and needs a better editor.
My point was just that either way, this is how it was always going to go after Dan and Dave ruined the original series by rushing it. They're lack of care and attention to detail may have been the final nail in the coffin for George ever letting people substantively edit him again, regardless of whether or not it would be beneficial.
Do you know how you make good web apps with good performance? You don't listen to people whining and bitching about a language, you go out and start coding something and find out where the actual issues are.
Javascript / Typescript is great. There are little annoyances here and there, like with literally every single language, but anyone who says it sucks overall is a quite frankly, a moron.
Our project focuses on advanced and experienced computer users. In contrast with the usual proprietary software world or many mainstream open source projects that focus more on average and non-technical end users, we think that experienced users are mostly ignored. This is particularly true for user interfaces, such as graphical environments on desktop computers, on mobile devices, and in so-called Web applications. We believe that the market of experienced users is growing continuously, with each user looking for more appropriate solutions for his/her work style.
Designing simple and elegant software is far more difficult than letting ad-hoc or over-ambitious features obscure the code over time. However one has to pay this price to achieve reliability and maintainability. Furthermore, minimalism results in reasonable and attainable goals. We strive to maintain minimalism and clarity to drive development to completion.
You now what all of this says? It says that they focus on building utilities that accomplish some small technical task and ignore their users' actual workflow needs. It's the equivalent of minimalist architects that make unlivable spaces because they're technically nice.
I don't actually know if it helps at all. Vinegar on its own also seems to work.
It doesn't need to be the driver to be a necessary component or catalyst.
The full quote:
“I will simply say, I made every effort to include George in the adaptation process. I really did. Over years and years. And we really enjoyed a mutually fruitful, I thought, really strong collaboration for a long time. But at some point, as we got deeper down the road, he just became unwilling to acknowledge the practical issues at hand in a reasonable way. And I think as a showrunner, I have to keep my practical producer hat on and my creative writer, lover-of-the-material hat on at the same time.”
Quite frankly after what Dan and Dave to ruin Game of Thrones reputation, this honestly isn't surprising whatsoever.
They cut out a character to save money and air time, and George thinks that will make the plot fall apart later.
Regardless of who's right, he's probably not going to trust a showrunner who's trying to rush things given past trauma.
That just means that the US dominates and exploits people, it doesn't mean that market economies inherently lead to that. China implemented market economies within its centrally planned system for a reason.
This is literally what I've done my whole life. I have never identified as a leftist, always as a centrist, it's not my fault other people don't understand where the center is.
You say "marketing person" or "marketing quote" as if that means nothing - reporting factual information from them is standard practice in all news. Maybe there should be literally nothing posted by any news website in the world then?
Bruh, do all the news sources you read just repost marketing statements? I don't think you realize what an own-goal that statement is.
Journalism involves reporting on true information, including determining whether or not information is true, or likely to be true, it's not just reposting corporate fluff.
In fact, why even post reviews? Obviously nobody wants marketing fluff like "phone has 12GB RAM", those damn capitalist corporations are faking that too, there's only one person in this world who's woke enough to understand that. These idiots should realise that [phone 2025] is obviously going to be better than [phone 2024]. Maybe those scrubs should realise that before writing a sham of an article.
Here's a fun fact for you: there's a fundamental difference between reposting a claim someone else made, and evaluating and testing something and making your own claim about it.
Fair enough, this is what my parents did in high school, I just kind of feel like you shouldn't have to appease people like that so I'm torn.
For me in high school, in one situation we had already been sleeping over at her house with her mom's full knowledge, so by the time we asked my parents to sleep at my house, they talked to her mom and it was pretty brief and easy.
In the other, her parents wouldn't let us be in a room alone together, so when we asked my parents about sleeping over and they said they would have to call, we stopped them, said forget about it, and just had a lot more day-time, risky, might-get-walked-in-on sex.
In neither situation did the call seem particularly productive towards anyone's goals, but on the other hand, my parents never had drama with other parents so maybe I just need to think on that more.
For an IDE.
I can configure VSCode as a full IDE for say C#/.Net development, and it performs pretty much just as well as VS which is written natively.
Ditto for configuring it as a Python IDE vs PyCharm, ditto for Java and Eclipse, ditto for basically everything else.
And I'm sorry but I have to respectfully disagree here: VIM / Neovim / any purely text based editor has never had anywhere near the same feature set as VS Code + it's extensions. They are more performant, run anywhere, and can be configured to be quite powerful, but they're still fundamentally hamstrung by using a typewriter's line by line interface rather than being able to easily draw arbitrary 2d or 3d graphics and use the power of CSS styling.
Like, just drawing out a list of items, and then being able to get more detail on one of those items, is fundamentally a pain in command line, requiring a list command and then an item detail command or a list verbose command, where is in a GUI you just list items and can then expand them or hover on them for more info.