I don't understand this view (although I hear it often enough): isn't it commonly accepted that the brain and its resulting mind is extremy modular, with all components (trying to) play together?
Some people will call BS on books like that until every detail down to getting their own AIneko cat, and start again when the Wunch start eating their uploaded thought space via man-in-the-middle exploits that the protocol spec in the book was inaccurate
> Gosling: For me as a language designer, which I don't really count myself as these days, what "simple" really ended up meaning was could I expect J. Random Developer to hold the spec in his head. That definition says that, for instance, Java isn't -- and in fact a lot of these languages end up with a lot of corner cases, things that nobody really understands. Quiz any C developer about unsigned, and pretty soon you discover that almost no C developers actually understand what goes on with unsigned, what unsigned arithmetic is. Things like that made C complex. The language part of Java is, I think, pretty simple. The libraries you have to look up.
Java creators tried to avoid giving developers any sharp edges. Interactions between signed and unsigned integers can be surprising, so they disallowed unsigned integers.
Of course, not having access to unsigned quantities makes interaction with other programs difficult :(
The one that annoys me is that people think implicit type conversions are dangerous for some reason, so they also disallowed `char a = 10; short b = a;` without writing a cast even though this makes no sense.
It feels like "sharp edges" often means "I once had a horrible bug due to accidentally misusing this". But if you cut features based on that definition, you'd soon have an empty programming language.
The signedness of `char` is implementation-defined, it is signed on x86 but unsigned on ARM. So assigning a plain char to a wider integer type is suspicious, did the programmer expect sign-extension or zero-extension?
It's not implementation-defined in Java because there aren't any unsigned types.
Personally I think explicit typecasts are even more suspicious, because introducing explicit semantics is worse than implicit semantics if the explicit ones are wrong.
Look up James Gosling and get back to us. I'd especially be interested in hearing how your undoubtedly superior experience would result in a more successful language. I'm sure you can vibe code something up.
Had to learn FreeCAD last week, and yes, what an embarrassment. For my current work (cnc) you can't really get anywhere without the third-party lib OCL, which they just... fully interface with, but you still have to integrate/install manually? I generally agree with the observation that the developers care too little for quality or usability, considering e.g. the logs constantly throw python errors in your face.
Edit: oh, it was even worse before? I hope they keep going in this direction then
1. I think it should be mandatory to have your webcam and microphone on 24/7 for, uh, your safety, especially your children's safety (you never know when a pedophile will hide under your bed!). physical workarounds or disabling them is a TOS violation and will turn your machine off and unable to start again until hardware is restored (again, for your safety). Of course you also agree that all data collected this way can be used to enhance your experience with the help of our partners.
2. You need to watch 30s of an ad before you can login, youtube style. This is to get you in a good mood for the day, because it will only be products we determined you like!
3. Disable customisation: Your UI and desktop background will take the color of today's sponsor, including a small logo in every window's frame next to the close button. Window frame will increase over the years until we can show full video ads in it.
4. We will read through all your private files and sends them unencrypted to our servers. (this is for better speed! High speed is essential for this) AI will then analyse your files and write you recommendations, especially what you could buy to enhance or alleviate your current experience. Also you get clippy back, this time on the desktop, and it is a TOS violation to disable it.
5. Offers to buy items should always be accompanied by an instant-spending [buy] button, but rejecting and closing the offer requires you to type "Sorry, I don't want to buy this right now, can you please ask me for this same product again tomorrow?". This is the only way. Any typo is agreement to buy the product, because you are clearly not fully against it?
6. Because of the added online security for your personal files, you now have to pay a subscription of just $49.99/month or your device will irrecoverably encrypt all your data to keep it safe. (This update will come at a later time when you have created enough files worth protecting)
7. That Office splash screen sure takes a lot of time and is basically a lot of open white space. Better use that for more Enhanced Experiences.
8. Each login costs you 99 Windows Points, ad-free experience costs you 399 for a month. we sell you packages of 380 wp for $3.99, 800 wp for $9.99, 2000 wp for $29.99, 12,000 wp for $249.99 and our Never Worry Again Package with 50,000 wp for just $4999.99! (yes I did the math) Automatic Updates (during work ours only) require you to login again, obviously. Minor patches will somehow become more popular. For Security, your children, emotional stability, the environment, and affirmation of your identity. We are here for you!
What a mess. Eric, I think you will have some explaining and negotiating to do. You might feel like you don't have the time, but this could soon turn existential for your project. For now I keep my order up, I'm sure there's a way for both of you to reach an agreement that doesn't devalue one or the other party.
For those immediately jumping ship: have some patience and observe. You heard one side of the story that yes, someone was frustrated enough to drag all of this public, but that cannot possibly tell the whole story. Please stop escalating the problem by throwing it all away and instead seek to reach out and steer this around instead.
I dunno how you can represent this any other way. The Rebble people more or less say they did nothing but give stuff away and want to talk. Eric/Core seem to be taking and taking, and giving nothing back.
For what it's worth he IS contributing to libpebble3 at least, but yes most of it is closed
I do get the idea, he wants to build hardware and thus needs to be able to do whatever he wants to the code and not wait for merges but it sucks he seems to probably take it too far, for example not using the Rebble mobile app and instead making his own around the library, that's also closed source
I mean, it’s not that I necessarily blame him for taking stuff that is open source, but giving the impression that you will not sideline the others entirely and then doing so anyway feels icky.
I wouldn’t want to deal with a random open source project while running a company either, but I wouldn’t try to pretend to either, I hope.
I'm at the absolute opposite end: Teams was Good Enough when it launched, but declined ever since: you can no longer fullscreen screen share, fat empty margins everywhere in the UI and it nags you about addons and AI stuff.
