tom-lord

There's no such thing as a performance measurement "on all workloads".

It's written in the article?

10 lat temudiscuss

That was the whole point in theory, yes. But in reality, almost all new gTLD registrations are being made as brand protection, and redirecting to the company's existing .com domain. Only a very small minority of websites are trying to build a brand on a new gTLD domain name.

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

Why does there even need to be such thing as a TLD? :P

I'm guessing the idea is similar to .London, .NYC, .Amsterdam, ... i.e. it would be used for a geographic indicator/market.

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

> Restricted gTLDs should have only been for trademarked company names, like .google or .microsoft

Unfortunately however, there are a lot of grey areas... To name a few:

* Amazon have been in a long dispute with the Brazilian government, over the right to operate a .amazon TLD - as the Brazilians claim it should instead be related to the rainforest.

* On the other hand, Amazon have secured TLDs such as .prime, which could also be disputed. Apple have won .apple, Sky have won .sky, ... the list goes on.

* Sometimes, the conflicts can even be with foreign languages. For example, Ferrero are now the registry operator for .kinder - but as this is the German word for "children", it's been the cause for similar debate.

Also, with regards to your concern that there is a lack of variety in available unrestricted TLDs - I disagree; if anything, there are far too many (there's hundreds!!).

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

Shell/batch scripting can often be useful in the devops world, where you have no guarantee that any additional tools (python, ruby, perl, powershell, whatever) wil be available.

Shell scripts are guaranteed to be runnable on all machines.

Unfortunately the shell "language" sucks, but still...

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

> If the POSIX standard is going to require backreferences, then it should also require a non-backtracking implementation for regular expressions without backreferences

At least in some regexp engines, this is possible. There is a concept of possessive (as opposed to reluctant, or as it's often called, "non-greedy") quantifiers. Given the string "abb", consider the following regexes:

/[ab]+b/ -- matches "abb"

/[ab]+?b/ -- matches "ab"

/[ab]++b/ -- DOES NOT MATCH!! (Because there is no back-tracking.)

More info: http://www.regular-expressions.info/possessive.html

One regexp engine which implements this (see section 4): https://raw.githubusercontent.com/k-takata/Onigmo/master/doc... -- this is the engine used by modern Ruby versions.

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

No one really knows for sure, but....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

Yes, however that was 3 and a half months ago -- and as far as I can tell, there's been no movement towards doing so.

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

Funny how the conclusion is basically "Don't use `var`, use `let` instead" - even though almost all documentation/examples exclusively use the `var` keyword!

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

> Designers suck at code. Coders suck at design. Keep that shit separate.

I currently work in a small-ish company, where I am the ONLY person designing/developing multiple systems. (I do get some input now and then, but it's mostly all down to me.)

I like this idea in principle, but you don't always have the resources to achieve this!

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

    [1] pry(main)> 10..100
    => 10..100
    [2] pry(main)> (10..100).class
    => Range
    [3] pry(main)> (10..100).to_a
    => [10, 11, 12, 13, 14, ..., 99, 100]

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

Yes, you can. Ordering has been guaranteed since ruby v1.9, very much intentionally.

The implementation of a ruby hash is now as a doubly linked list [0]. This has inevitably caused a slight performance hit, but the benefits far outweigh the cost IMO.

[0] https://www.igvita.com/2009/02/04/ruby-19-internals-ordered-...

tom-lord

10 lat temudiscuss

* No comparison with other time periods, and their respective tuition fees.

* No comparison with other countries, and their respective policies.

* No data on where these students graduate from, or in which subjects, or with which grades, or what their average salary is X years later, or whether they'll actually be able to pay back the loan.

It's missing a huge amount of important information; you really can't justify the conclusion "tuition fees are good" from this alone.

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

> this would never pass a code review, the expectation of "foo?" is that it returns true/false.

95% of the time, yes. However, the "official" rule is simply that such methods must return a value that can be EVALUATED as true/false. There are plenty of methods in the ruby core/standard library which end in a "?" but do not return true/false, such as:

* File#size (http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.2.3/File.html#method-c-size-3F) returns Integer or nil.

* Integer#nonzero? (http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.2.0/Numeric.html#method-i-nonzero...) returns self or nil.

This misunderstanding of what "?" methods are allowed to return is an ongoing problem in the community, e.g. https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/20110

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

> According to his numbers, the mode is precisely 0.

I was referring to the fact that the graphs - e.g. https://theoverspill.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/screenshot-... - are using using mode = 0.5

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

I'm confused... How can the mode number of searches be 0.5?!

"More people perform half a search every day, than any other amount." -- What?!

I guess maybe that's more like "the mode over 30 days, divided by 30"?

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

> Fingerprints are usernames, not passwords, even if some people use them as passwords.

This doesn't make sense. You cannot "use a username as a password".

Fingerprints, retina scans, DNA samples, etc are biometric passwords. They are unique identifiers to your identification, and cannot be changed for obvious reasons.

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

It's also worth noting that (at least in the UK) such notice periods are not legally binding.

You can only be forced to give a notice period up to your payroll pay frequency. So for example, if you get paid monthly then you cannot be sued for failing to give > 1 month's notice!

... But of course, most people will still honour their company's "3 month notice" (or whatever) period out of good faith, as it's generally a good idea not to burn bridges.

tom-lord

11 lat temudiscuss

> the claim that [...]

What are you talking about? The comment I replied to didn't make any such claims!

> passwords must be changeable

Not necessarily. What about fingerprints?

> usernames need not be changeable

Not necessarily. What about National Insurance / Social Security numbers?

Submissions

Missy Elliott's Reciprocal Cipher, and Perfect Oscillating Sequences

Missy Elliot encryption algorithm

How to reverse engineer regular expressions in Ruby

comments