Points: 2

# Comments: 0

If yes, then the answer is: sometimes, depending on the other factors.

Several times, people do very interesting personal projects, but fail to perform at the same level at work. That gives a clue that it may have been an unsuitable work environment that impeded their performance. It could also be a difference pertaining to their orientation to structured vs. unstructured working conditions. It could be related to explicit objectives with tight deadlines vs. exploratory development with open deadlines. And, more.

Knowing what my work environment is, I usually could understand their medium-to-long term fitness.

Hope this clarifies what I meant.

I am curious to know why you think so. What would you say about repeatably observable causality, in that case?

This exists in every domain, and is - perhaps - inevitable. Look at what SEO has done to web search.

- Linux + GNU: My servers would never have been the same without them.

- Emacs: So many varied use cases over the years. I can type in Telugu (my mother tongue) and Devanagari so seamlessly ... bliss!

- LaTeX: From papers to books to presentations.

- Helix: A very recent discovery that replaced Vim for me in just a week!

- Kitty terminal: I no longer use GNU screen or tmux locally.

- Go, Ruby, Python: They have been paying my bills for so long.

- KDE: The other half of the Linux spirit!

- ffmpeg: Such a boon!

- Homebrew: So convenient.

Have you also included:

  - storage costs (equivalent of EBS, S3 and Glacier) and
  - cost of analytics pipelines (equivalent of EMR, Athena, SageMaker, ...)

Would you have some insights there? Thanks.

Secondly, someone "truly wanting" something does not always make that "something" good or correct. When I was an adolescent myself, there were several things that I "truly wanted", which would have led me down paths of ruin.

Thirdly, engaging the adolescent / young adult in productive ways - that don't necessarily need computers - is one thing that I have seen to be demonstrably beneficial. This involves a certain degree of interaction with them and doing things together.

All the best!

2. The WHERE condition typically uses `>` or `<`, so it doesn't fail even when that record is deleted before the next client request referring to it.

It is quite simple to implement pagination in the application layer using a unique record identifier (primary key or ULID or ...) as an anchor for the navigation. From that unique ID, we can then fetch the previous `n` or the next `n` records, depending on the direction of the navigation.

This way, the server remains stateless, since the anchor (possibly sent as an encoded / obfuscated token, which can include some other parameters such as page size) is supplied by the client with each pagination request.

Unless I am missing something in your argument.

I proposed it as a compromise between full monomorphisation and runtime code generation.

[1] http://oneofmanyworlds.blogspot.com/2011/11/draft-2-of-propo...

I do not negate your point that marketing has a strong component of creating a need where there isn't one. But, its success in doing so relies on a strong combination of cultural, economic and political backgrounds.

The only difference is: instead of brittle hierarchies, we get ossified compositions (depending on how much nominal vs structural typing happens).

We, of course, agree that we are quite some distance from having advanced type systems brought to day-to-day industrial programming.

Points: 3

# Comments: 2

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

I frequently research historical topics on India, and I get no results or single digit number of results.