I didn't read it, because it might present outdated knowledge.

But... you don't have to use any of this

(in fact, I can't even use Wayland at all, even if I wanted to [because of Nvidia])

I was actively interested in this topic when I was younger and had much time to sleep and practice, but after I got my job and life problems kicked in, suddenly I realized that the only thing I require from a dream is to get a good night sleep so I will have strength to face problems during the day. A little bit sad but true.

But, during my lucid dreaming endeavors I realized the technique itself is incredibly powerful. Especially for people who have tendencies for daydreaming. One easy technique used during learning is to create a habit of looking at the watch and asking oneself if this is a dream or not. Doing it for a few times during a day will eventually create a habit, and will eventually increase the chances of unintentionally doing it during the actual dream. Then, the question "is this a dream?" will have a chance of recalling that we have consciousness, while still being inside the dream. It will be a lucid dream.

Maintaining lucid state of a lucid dream is another topic. Sometimes a few seconds after starting to be in a lucid dream, we forget about the state and we go right back to a normal, non-lucid dream. There are techniques for prolonging the state, but require training (like everything I guess).

Because later if you want to reuse parts of the code in a continuous environment (e.g. a daemon), then you will be surprised that you have memory leaks all over the place (or worse, someone else will discover it by accident).

I don't have a problem with the end-of-process-releases-all-memory optimization. But I had the impression that the author uses let's-worry-about-leaks-later-because-OS-takes-care-of-it-for-free-(in-my-use-case).

Best approach to take would be to create a memory pool with fast allocation (e.g. TLAB allocation in Java, or how computer games do it), in order to have control over how the memory is freed or when.

The fact that someone does it wrong doesn't mean that we should do it wrong as well ;(

I don't think I like this approach. It may work now, but will probably seriously limit the possibilities in the future.

...at least that's what everyone on this site would like to think. In reality, it's just a digg.com clone, before it started to suck ;)

(even name is a reference to digg, 'wykop' means 'a dig site', or 'to dig')

I don't think it's fair to say it like this. Scala's implicits can mean different things, depending on where they're used. Scala 3 even divides 'implicit' to multiple keywords.

(kind of 'static' in C++ I guess, only more complicated)

Standard use case is to use sbt (well, or mill, since we're in lihaoyi's thread :D). Sbt starts up slow, but with bloop, or sbtn (native client of sbt), the compilation is really fast (much faster than C++ for example):

    $ time sbtc compile                                                                          
    [info] entering *experimental* thin client - BEEP WHIRR
    [info] terminate the server with `shutdown`
    > compile
    [info] compiling 1 Scala source to /home/.../target/scala-2.13/classes ...
    [info] compile completed
    [success] Total time: 0 s, completed Feb 11, 2021 4:21:51 PM
    sbtc compile  0,08s user 0,02s system 21% cpu 0,492 total

Hilarious.

I mean, I fully agree with the author on that. But since the author is not tied to a Windows ecosystem, he doesn't know that a full-screen start menu actually happened on Windows 8, and it was nearly boycotted by Windows userbase because of the fact that it occupies full screen space. Users demanded to have a Windows95-style start menu, and MS had to redesign it.

Why it's so important for Windows users to have a Windows95-style menu, is beyond me.

There you have it :D

I hear this argument pretty often.

A book is not a binary thing: there is a book, and there isn't. It's not about the "book", it's about the contents of the book.

So in other words the author has gathered some knowledge and he didn't make much money off of it. Therefore, the knowledge you will gather will not allow you to earn any money. Does that make sense? I don't think so.

I will probably be downvoted, but maybe more important thing is the subject of the book, than the actual book itself?

Disclaimer: I did not write a book. I did write a chapter to a book, and I got some money off of it. I'm not rich because of it, but I see the potential.

(it's possible in CSS to detect if the user is using dark mode, and adjust the colors automatically)