"size" - what?

"some of the external tools" - duh? But what on earth are using using "external tools" integrated to Excel for?

Array spreading: already existed, array_merge

Variadic functions: are probably better implemented as a function accepting an array, especially now that there's a proper array syntax instead of a pseudo-function. Also already existed, func_get_args.

Argument unpacking: already existed, call_user_func_array

Arrow functions: are not any shorter, and are less clear, than anonymous functions.

Literally the only item on your list that was any good for the language is the null coalescing operator. The rest are just re-implementing something that PHP already had, in yet another incompatible (and often unclear) way.

Hell, good luck coming across '??' and trying to find any documentation on what it does. Searching Google for 'php ??' returns results for 'php', searching php.net for '??' returns seemingly random functions, going to php.net/?? gives you the homepage.

How, exactly, is that better than using a common cert? What threat do you propose that applies to HTTPS with a shared cert, and not to HTTP?

dosbox is your equivalent.

Plenty of Uber/Lyft competitors have tried and failed. Heck, a few different companies tried here in Austin once we grew a spine and banned Uber/Lyft, only to die as soon as they came back to town.

gcc does this. It appears to be why /proc files don't work. gcc sees that stat calls it a 'regular file' and 0 bytes long, and actually performs a read() syscall with a length of 0.

> 3) Furthermore, it might check whether the file is a regular file. If not, it is almost certainly not what the programmer had in mind.

gcc probably does this. (It would explain why /dev/stdin works)

You can also call something to read from stdin in your Makefile, or read from stdin in your executable.

> But is it equally obvious that the compiler also needs to be sandboxed?

Yes. Why wouldn't it be sandboxed?!

> I even found one service that ... showed me the hash of the root password.

Wow. That's bad. Of course, that's not a compiler issue, but rather a system administration issue. /etc/shadow should not be world-readable.

> This effectively means this service is running compile tasks as root.

That's quite a leap from 'I can read /etc/shadow' to 'I am root'.

> Interestingly, including pseudo-files from /proc does not work. It seems gcc treats them like empty files.

More accurately, it seems the system treats them like empty files. gcc does a stat on the file, which returns 'regular file' and 'size=0'. gcc therefore calls read() with a length of 0 bytes.

For someone who already knows Kotlin.

It is, however, hard to get drivers and customers FOR your ride sharing app.

Yes, using the wrong status codes is a problem, you're right, that's the entire point of the thread you're responding to.

Sure, but people don't.

Okay, great. You had one of the most powerful phones at the time. How was the experience for people with a "feature phone" in 2008? (I'll tell you from experience, it was terrible).

How would the experience be today, with your iPhone from 2008? Terrible. Why? Is the web more powerful as a result? Can you do more things? Nah, it just looks flashier.

It does, but it also means that RAM and storage isn't available to be used for other things. Think about what you could if you had current hardware back in the XP days...