161–170 of 324 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When reading the article, I had the feeling that prediction #6 was actually FaceBook.
Facebook already existed when this was written. HN was just around the corner and fits a lot better, imo. I figured "you and I" referred to developers and entrepeneurs, not the general public.
With threads as the complexity grows you basically re-invent the OS kernel/scheduler inside your app. You might as well use the real kernel. Multi-process is the way to go.
1. XML databases will surpass relational databases in popularity by 2011. We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. 2. Someone will make a lot of money by hosting open-source web applications. Github is cool but with all the cheapskate web devs (no offense, I am one of them) I don't think it is _that_ profitable. 3. Multi-threaded programming will fall out of favor by 2012. Not really.…
1. XML databases will surpass relational databases in popularity by 2011. We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. 2. Someone will make a lot of money by hosting open-source web applications. Github is cool but with all the cheapskate web devs (no offense, I am one of them) I don't think it is _that_ profitable. 3. Multi-threaded programming will fall out of favor by 2012. Not really.…
It happened June 29, 2007.
1. XML databases will surpass relational databases in popularity by 2011. We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. 2. Someone will make a lot of money by hosting open-source web applications. Github is cool but with all the cheapskate web devs (no offense, I am one of them) I don't think it is _that_ profitable. 3. Multi-threaded programming will fall out of favor by 2012. Not really.…
iPad.
1. XML databases will surpass relational databases in popularity by 2011. We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. 2. Someone will make a lot of money by hosting open-source web applications. Github is cool but with all the cheapskate web devs (no offense, I am one of them) I don't think it is _that_ profitable. 3. Multi-threaded programming will fall out of favor by 2012. Not really.…
Tiobe has "Lisp" ranked 13, not clear what they included as "Lisp". (Specific Lisps like Scheme, Common Lisp, and Clojure rank much lower, so must be some kind of aggregate.)
http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index....
Interestingly, the "Very Long Term History" table has Lisp going from rank 20 in 2008 to 13 in 2012. So Yegge clearly missed his top 10 prediction, but may have been on to something in regard to Lisp increasing in popularity (depending on how much credence you give Tiobe rankings, of course).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2. "hosting open-source web applications" does not really describe GitHub 3. He's not talking about using multiple cores, he's talking about using multiple threads vs (for example) multiple processes. 6. Reddit, Hacker News
2. I think github is the most notable example. 3. Gotta reread that. 6. Oh come on, facebook, youporn, whatever. As I said, too vague.
Yeah, so he didn't call out a specific "type" of socializing, or draw up the wireframe for facebook here. But he just recognized there is a huge trend of people wanting to share their lives and communicate in near real time. I think he nailed it. Facebook and twiiter are just that. Even look at his move example. These days, you watch you movie or TV show, then laugh and comment on it with your friends not in the theater, but on facebook or twitter. I'd say he NAILED that prediction.
1. XML databases will surpass relational databases in popularity by 2011. We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. 2. Someone will make a lot of money by hosting open-source web applications. Github is cool but with all the cheapskate web devs (no offense, I am one of them) I don't think it is _that_ profitable. 3. Multi-threaded programming will fall out of favor by 2012. Not really.…
> We got NoSQL (esp. JSON based ones) instead of XML. Close enough though. JSON is basically XML with 50% less bullshit. It does less but it does it so much more elegantly than XML - and has the further benefit of a syntax similar to that of structured data in such languages as Javascript (duh), Python and Ruby - that it was a shoo-in to squeeze XML out of most non-enterprise uses, at least on the data transfer forma…
The big lack is the equivalent of XQuery and XPath, in my opinion. Javascript plays this role in some systems, but I don't think there is anything for Javascript matching the power and flexibility of XQuery/XPath for querying and transforming data.
I would be happy to learn about query languages for JSON document databases that prove me wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A tautology if I ever heard one. Consider this set of programmer "skill levels" where most (80%!) are above average: {10, 10, 10, 10, 1}
If we take your very narrow definition, the chances of any programmer to be (exactly) average are zero, if we relax a little bit we're back at tautology.
On the Lisp thing, looking around the programming world in 2004, you didn't see proliferation of functional concepts like you do today. In those days, "functional" meant Lisp, at least popularly. I think the big lesson of Lisp has been disseminated, though, and that is that it is more productive to write code-that-writes-code. But I also think we learned a broader lesson that it's better to not pigeon-hole people dow…
And if you take Common Lisp as an example of a Lisp, there are still tons of interesting things that are far from being mainstream. Multiple dispatch, conditions system, macros, ...