141–150 of 344 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Polarized-but-balanced is at least as misguided as separate-but-equal.
It's better than "polarised but unbalanced".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know about you but my answer is "the ones standing next to me that I have the means and ability to help sustainably."
We can't even help the current homeless.
Everything aside, I enjoyed the "And now for something completely different" part.
I dislike it because it's kinda hard to understand (can't really say I did) specially without any context, and programming language release notes are something people should read even a hundred years afterwards.
Secondly, why does adding this section affect that even if you think that?
Everything aside, I enjoyed the "And now for something completely different" part.
I like how you get to read it in the direction you most agree with. Very politically balanced!
The reversibility trick is kind of cute - but can anyone write a legitimate Python code statement that also works in reverse? I sort of doubt it, the function declaration has to come first.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's your authority to say what should or shouldn't belong in a release you have no contribution to!
Careful not to fall into a fallacious argument... https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
Everything aside, I enjoyed the "And now for something completely different" part.
I dislike it because it's kinda hard to understand (can't really say I did) specially without any context, and programming language release notes are something people should read even a hundred years afterwards.
Ooh, seems there is a new syntax for declaring the types of kwargs [1]: from typing import TypedDict, Unpack class Movie(TypedDict): name: str year: int def foo(*kwargs: Unpack[Movie]): ... Maybe now I'll be able to actually figure out what data to send libraries without actually reading their source code. 1. https://docs.python.org/3.12/whatsnew/3.12.html#pep-692-usin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe now I'll be able to actually figure out what data to send libraries without actually reading their source code. One could hope, but any library abusing kwargs in all their methods is showing they’re willing to go through the absolute minimum to make their code usable, let alone readable and self-documenting.
It feels like we're going in cycles. C was somewhat lax with type checking, thus C++ and Java were both made more strict. Looking to escape the tyranny of static typing, the rise of Python, Ruby, or JavaScript instead left us with a desire that Rust, Go, and TypeScript now fulfill. I wonder what's the next step? LLMs are extremely broad in what they accept, but don't exactly fill the same niches.
It's a tiny hope. But a hope nonetheless. Fortran is fun.