Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | LukaD's commentslogin

All the JangaFX products (such as EmberGen) are written in Odin.


Thank you, my bad - I wasn't aware.

I still think what drives languages to continuously make changes is the focus on developer UX, or at least the intent to make it better. So, PLs with more developers will always keep evolving.


Unlikely, given that hello world takes 20 minutes to run.


I think you may be looking at the wrong column. Hello World runs in 0.020s, per the benchmarks.


bfcpp[1] seems to be the most performant.

[1] https://github.com/Haruno19/bfcpp


> [...] use (shell scripts, make, just, doit, mage, whatever) as long as it is proper, maintainable code

I fully agree with the recommendation to use maintainable code. But that effectively rules out shell scripts in my oppinion. CI shell scripts tend to become big ball of mud rather quickly as you run into the limitations of bash. I think most devs only have superficial knowledge of shell scripts, so do yourself a favor and skip them and go straight to whatever language your team is comfortable with.


Maybe people should get better at shell, instead. Read the bash / zsh manual. Use ShellCheck.


Shellcode is just a horrible PL, period. Not only it's weird and unlike anything else out there, there's way too many footguns.

One can learn to use it to the point where it's usable to do advanced automation... but why, when there are so many better options available?


Because it’s never going away, and it’s always going to be there. It is the lowest common denominator. Also, a shell script generally doesn’t have any other dependencies (modulo writing one that calls jq or something). No risk of solver hell.


> get it working as quick as I can

That’s certainly what it looks like. When I first tried the game, before getting a refund shortly after, my first thought was “wtf, did they accidentally ship an old build?”. The UI feels so u finished, lacking feedback and visual clarity.


Polarity might be the most well known Bitwig user. Check out his identically named youtube channel where he often shows interesting Bitwig techiques.


OH! :-D


What do you mean? “Sora is here” is not enough?

Sorry for the sarcasm but I’m just tired of this fuck Germany attitude by certain companies.


Yes, that was the joke.



> Try to avoid the bespoke features of psql in favor of generic SQL unless cornered by circumstances into doing so, methinks.

Why? To make migration to another database easier? I've never had the need to migrate any application away from postgres. I usually take full advantage of what the database can do.


I’m a proponent of vendor lock in is not a big deal - you’re not going to switch from AWS to Azure on a whim and if you do, the fact that you’re using ecs instead of k8s isn’t going to slow you down.

But data ownership is the one place I get iffy. What if your db does a rug pull and changes licenses? There’s certainly precedent in this space for that.


This video goes into depth about ASCII rendering as a post processing effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg40RWiaHRY


IMHO in this video the end result doesn't qualify as ASCII art - square letters in particular are a deal breaker to me.

It is still a cool shader that turns input into text, even if it doesn't have the ascii art vibe.


ASCII just refers to the 7bit standard, so if we are pedantic ASCII art is just art using the printable characters of the 128 code points defined in it. Font size doesn't have anything to do with it. But ASCII art is used as an umbrella term, encompassing a variety of different standards, character sets and fonts. There are a bunch of square ASCII, like PETSCII, ATASCII and even PC ASCII can be rendered with a 8x8 cp437 font. We don't need to gatekeep what "qualifies" as ASCII art.


> There are a bunch of square ASCII, like PETSCII

Note that e.g. PETSCII, while internally 8x8, would be displayed using non-square pixels[1] - also not resulting in square letters.

[1]: https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/a/13871


“goes into depth”

I see what you did there

(without intending to do it)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: