we've all learned about things, not understood them, and thought "wow, these people must be idiots. why would they have made this complicated thing? makes no sense whatsoever. I can't believe these people, idiots, never thought this through like I have."
Most of us, fortunately, don't post these thoughts to the internet for anybody to read.
Very cool! I recently wrote an XSLT 2 transpiler for js (https://github.com/egh/xjslt) - it's nice to see some options out there! Writing the xpath engine is probably the hard part (I relied on fontoxpath). I'm going to be looking into what you have done for inspiration!
I developed xjslt, an XSLT 2.0 (https://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/) compiler for JavaScript. XSLT is still the best way to transform XML content into other XML or HTML content, and there is only one generally available 2.0 or later version, Saxon. Saxon is an excellent piece of software, but SaxonJS is not open source and I thought it might be good to have another option.
There is a simple command line interface as well as the ability to compile to a standalone JavaScript file for loading in a browser and to a JavaScript file that can be used in NodeJS and other JavaScript runtimes. This means you can run your XSLT transforms on the server or in a cloud function.
The majority of functionality is in place and it has worked with many XSLT files I have tried. There are a number of incomplete and/or broken features. The speed is very reasonable.
Incoherent argument. Non-profits pay sales taxes, income taxes for employee salaries, and, in many cases, property taxes. The only thing they aren't ever paying taxes on is profits, because... they are non-profits. They don't pay out profits to owners.
Some non-profits are exempt from property taxes and other taxes (e.g. universities) and abuse this by becoming huge landowners. This should probably be reined in.
Bicycles are not a physics 101 problem. In practice this just doesn't happen. See the links I provided. You can also read more about this in the "Bicycling Science" book.
It's my firm opinion, and that of many people who've looked at it, that flipping over the bars is caused by the rider not bracing themselves as they use the very powerful front brakes.
If most cyclists don't use the front brake, that is their loss. Most advanced cyclists, in my experience, rely heavily on the more powerful front brake.
You'll find that in 2022 over half of new apartment units had 1 bedroom or less. I guess you live in a very different state that is not reflective of overall trends across the US.
It's a pretty simple design, and it's based on the ARC format (https://archive.org/web/researcher/ArcFileFormat.php) which is even simpler. In response to your questions, here's my take (as somebody who used to work on web archiving).
1. Two reasons: First, many files are harder to manage. WARC files might contain hundreds or thousands of files. It's easier to manage big groups of files that are roughly the same size. Both for humans, and, at least in the past, for the file systems themselves. Second, once you break them up into files, what do you name the files? If you give them a name unrelated to the URL that was fetched, what is the advantage? If you name them based on the URL, suddenly you have a problem of mapping a URL to a legal file name, which can vary based on the file system. This would be a huge headache.
2. Yes, it predates SQLite, but also, why would you use sqlite? That's adding a huge amount of complexity. Is SQLite even good at storing big binary blobs?
Additionally, because of the clever way that WARC files are gzipped, each piece of the WARC file is gzipped individually, which allows random access into the file for reading enclosed content in a compressed file without needing to read the entire WARC file.
lol. I've been developing code with emacs for 25 years and I'm fine with this and would be annoyed if I needed to figure out how to install every language server for every language I use.
Let your conscience guide you, but in my opinion you should look to the union to see what they are asking you to do. A boycott of a struck company is not necessarily what the union wants you to do. One can imagine, for instance, that consumers continue to demand a company's product, demand that strengthens the union's bargaining power. When in doubt you can always check the union's web site or social media to see what you can do to support them.
> UK regulators also fast-tracked approvals for drone testing, which made the country an ideal testbed for drone flights and paved the way for Amazon to gain regulatory approval elsewhere.
The great contempt that computer people have for the skills that every human brings to the jobs that the do is always on display here. We haven't automated driving; we haven't automated picking tomatoes; we haven't automated bricklaying; we can't automate cooking a fucking hamburger. But they are completely convinced that it's just around the corner, because they are full of contempt for the skill and intelligence of ordinary people.
Frank Bardacke in his book, _Trampling out the Vintage_ describes the great skill that agriculture workers bring to the job that they do, from knowing whether something is ripe enough to pick to the dexterity required to pick it without destroying the fragile fruit or vegetable. Some jobs have been automated, but many more have not and most likely never will be.
Please, learn some humility and try to understand the skills that every human possesses and that they bring to their work.
This is a great comment because while it's completely wrong empirically, it also completely misses the point of the good question about free silver.
Like the question of what was the US civil war about (slavery) the question of what silver v gold was about has been completely obscured by interested parties seeking to complicate the issue in such a way that nobody understands it any more.
There are complications, which I don't really understand, but all you need to know is that silver vs gold was about inflation vs deflation. The free silver people were farmers (who are always debtors) and they supported inflation, because inflation is good for debtors. The supporters of gold were creditors, and the supported deflation, because creditors like deflation.
It's that simple. The author of the above comment apparently thinks the populist farmers were completely wrong and they should have been against inflation. This may be true (it's not, but let's stipulate) but the commenter prefers to obfuscate the issue rather than confront the clear fact that free silver populists supported it BECAUSE it was inflationary.
Most of us, fortunately, don't post these thoughts to the internet for anybody to read.