So much of this is down to fashion.
Are programmers really bound by their typing speed? No.
The only real thing that matters with a language is "can I run this on hardware X", and "How fast does it run / how much memory". Syntax is utterly irrelevant (Unless you're into fashion).
For me, it's not really about the amount of typing I have to do. In my opinion, function is so annoying because it takes up way more horizontal space on the screen than it needs to, especially if you get a number of them together.
I don't know if it's fashion, really. A lot of web developers aren't using IDEs like WebStorm, so they're missing out on autocomplete for a lot basic tokens, like "function".
I know when I started working on Angular apps after living in my Xcode bubble for so long, the first item on my list was to find a good IDE for web development. Sublime is good, but it's not that good. I don't type very much, I hit Tab key.
It's not just fashion or typing speed- syntax affects how readable code is. Common tokens that don't have a lot of meaning intrinsic to the program being written should be smaller or you get mired in bureaucracy when trying to read it.
Which of the following is clearer?
plus(new vector(5, 3), scale(3, new vector(7, 3)))
new vector(5, 3).plus(new vector(7, 3).scale(3))
<5, 3> + 3 * <7, 3>
Probably the second one, but they all look basically the same to me. Perhaps programmers should get better at reading code.
The last one is least readable IMHO. It's like a regexp. It's the most ambiguous and has the most potential for errors also.
It's hard to typo "function" and have a program still compile/run. It's a lot easier to typo "fn" and still have the program compile/run. Smaller tokens mean more potential errors.
That's like asking an author if he writes using the alphabet or ascii.
Programming language debates are like asking Charles Dickens why he wrote in English rather than Russian. Would his books have been any different in Russian? No - it's irrelevant.
Language in literature is certainly not irrelevant.
Any translator (or even bilingual person) will tell you that some concepts are very hard to translate, because the target language was shaped by a different culture.
And in scientific and other non-fictions texts - which are closer to programs than literature - this was doubly so, as the number of important scientists and philosophers writing in non-native languages shows.
UK: It's illegal to sell washed eggs
US: It's illegal to sell unwashed Eggs
Spoiler: In the UK, we keep eggs outside the fridge, and with the natural protection on the eggs (Removed when washed), they tend to keep for weeks. In the US, they tend to keep eggs in the fridge.
Also a lot to do with how the chickens are kept. If you're not allowed to wash eggs (UK), it's more likely the chickens will be kept in sanitary, good conditions.
OTOH, It's cheaper for the producer to keep chickens in worse conditions, wash the eggs removing the protection and make consumers keep eggs in the fridge!
It has almost nothing to do with the breeding conditions. Factory farming techniques are pretty much identical across the globe. The reason is salmonella.
USDA mandates egg washing to combat salmonella. But the washing process also destroys the egg's outer most protective layer, the cuticle. Thus American eggs must be refrigerated, unlike almost everywhere else in the world.
In the UK, all chickens are already vaccinated against salmonella so their eggs don't need to be washed, nor refrigerated. This has a couple of benefits:
1. The cuticle remains intact, thus the egg is naturally protected against contamination during transport and storage.
2. Refrigerated eggs undergo temperature swings during transport, causing moistures to collect, which could lead to harmful bacterial growth.
3. A botched washing job leads to excess moisture and thus bacteria growth, and is worst than no washing job at all.
That's why it's actually illegal for the farm to wash the eggs in the UK.
That's true, and I'd forgotten the point about salmonella.
I'm sure a lot of it does have to do with conditions though. If you have to wash the eggs anyway, you can keep them in factory conditions, and wash off all the shit. If you're not allowed to wash the eggs, then you tend to be a bit more careful, and keep them in better conditions.
In this case, you're wrong. This team is easily the highest IQ concentration in Bitcoin history.
No other group comes close; in fact, I would have said their only possible weakness was that they might have been too nerdy to raise a round. Luckily, I don't know shit about their fundraising skills. This is easily the most bullish news Bitcoin has had in years, in my opinion. Great team, fantastic tech and theoretical track record, and a technology that will build Bitcoin value and usefulness. What's not to like?
I don't know why you're being downvoted. It's true. If you want community, don't live in a city. Live in a small town or village where everyone knows everyone else.
I think It's because someone thought I was dragging things off topic a bit. I probably was. Having lived there it has almost exclusively negative connotations for me. I didn't live in a great area though.
I lived in London for a year. It was the most lonely isolated place I've lived. Also it's not really part of the UK anymore. It's a "world" city - which makes the feeling of loneliness even worse.
Yeah well, that's pretty much all big cities when you arrive on your own, especially after student age. It's also very expensive to move around, and at this it's one of the worst places.
London is cheaper to move around by public transport than many other British cities.
A bus or tram journey is £1.45 regardless of distance, but in Manchester a tram journey is over £3, in Birmingham over £2, in Edinburgh £1.50.
London's tickets are also much better integrated -- only a couple of express train services to airports have special fares, and they all have non-express, cheaper alternatives.
There may be worse places in the UK, I honestly haven't compared that much with medium-sized cities like Manchester or Birmingham.
Among international big capitals (which is what you can really compare London to) it has to be the worst. The fact that going to other cities in the UK is prohibitive makes it even worse (it's cheaper to fly to many places in Europe than going to most other UK cities by any means of transportation). If you want to move medium distances within London in reasonable time, it's tube/Overground/DLR and it's prohibitive. Using the Oyster card it's better but still rubbish really.
The example is stupid and sensationalist, those stations are the two closest at 260 metres apart, or about two train lengths.
Like many European cities, paying by cash is being phased out. It's annoying for visitors, but London is ahead here: Oyster cards are refundable, let the user go overdrawn (into the deposit), and contactless credit/debit cards are accepted.
The actual Zone 1 fare is £2.20. A central zone Berlin ticket is €2.60. Copenhagen ~£2.60. Munich €2.60.
So much of this is down to fashion. Are programmers really bound by their typing speed? No.
The only real thing that matters with a language is "can I run this on hardware X", and "How fast does it run / how much memory". Syntax is utterly irrelevant (Unless you're into fashion).
Lisp is just basic with a different syntax...