Because you're supposed to use a single connection with HTTP Pipelining for all your ressources [1]
When index.html loads 4 CSS and 5 JS : 10 ressources in HTTP 1.0 needed 10 connections, with 10 TLS negociations (unless one ressource loaded fast and you could reuse it's released connection)
With HTTP1.1 Pipelining you open only one connection, including a single TLS nego, and ask 10 ressources.
Why not only 1 per domain so ? IIRC it's because the 1st ressource index.html may take a lot of Time to complete and well race conditions suggest you use another one that the 'main thread' more or less. So basically 2 are sufficient.
We often don't solve technical problems or write algorithm. We're here to understand a client who doesn't know what he wants. Good luck for the general purpose AI to solve this [1] "If Architects had to work like Programmers"
It's astonishing to me that even with all the niceties added to ES7+, JS still needs to resort to a hack like this for a simple range generator. At least give iterators support for forEach(), reduce(), and map(), so we can use `Array(100).keys()` without having to wrap it with the spread operator.
Also, can't help but snark that apparently the "average" FP is so preoccupied with showing off their one-liners that they fail the problem requirements (should be `Array(100).fill(0).forEach((_,i)=>console.log(fizzbuzz(i+1)))`).
...It absolutely is a shortcoming. Python is the second-most popular language out there, despite its awful performance, largely because of its comprehensive stdlib. (First is JS, because web).
And I don't understand how you can't see the irony of praising a "lean" stdlib immediately after saying every "actual" developer has to add the bloat of importing lodash.
You can have theoretical disagreements with this, but you didn't invent the most popular programming in the world.
As for Python, not interested, it's mostly a "performance doesn't matter, being able to do this without expertise, time or even necessarily intellect does" niche.
JS has been slow to roll in core functionality, but is has made great strides by being highly conservative, not generating the kind of bloat that PHP has.
>you didn't invent the most popular programming in the world.
This is such a weird ad hominin (especially from a two-week-old account).
Regardless, the absolute, overwhelming popularity of jquery pre-ES6 goes to show that practically every developer was of the opinion that JS's weak stdlib was a bug, and the community did their best to patch it. ES7+ is leagues better for it, but it still has room for improvement.
A documented, opiniated, non-hype biased post about AIs. I've lived the 80's AI hype wave and the fall that followed. AFAICT we're on the same train here.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (Arthur C Clarke) and we're waiting for the masses to recognize what magic sparkles are : dust (ok, weighted barycenters of a huge database)
Side note : I often wonder how *GPT can deal with self-reference, like "What would you think of you if you were me ?" or "tell me something you were not programmed to think is plausible"
> I've lived the 80's AI hype wave and the fall that followed. AFAICT we're on the same train here.
Really? In the 80s they were trying to teach software to recognize handwritten numbers. Today, corporations are tightly controlling public access to large language models so they aren't used to manipulate elections and unhinge society.
That doesn't quite seem comparable to me. If anything, models like ChatGPT are underhyped because tech journalists mostly focus on stupid mistakes those models make in some situations.
- No linkedin, no instagram, no fb, and afaic not even a google account (yes android works, rooted)
When my employer asks me to "publish", "have a presence" or "shine for the company" in any way I find the NDA, security rules and legalese I've signed and reply
1. This is against cybersecurity rules, can you sign me a paper stating you want me to break rule #37 and rule #61
2. Then I ask him to accept all the end-user agreements in the company name or its own personal name, and send me back the login+password so I can contribute daily BS - oh and buy me a company owned phone if such interactions involve using a MobileApp(tm), no way I'm mixing personal and work on my phone
The discussion stopped here, never got a reply, did this to 3 employers already
If you would have just said "sorry I'm not really into social media" then perhaps you could have ended the conversation in 2 minutes and wouldn't have had to repeat it to further 2 employers shortly later.
Perhaps I didn't explain it well. Those employers kept me ! and I didn't have to repeat it to other potential employers "shortly" later.
It just ended the conversation there. The crucial part being I'm not against publishing as a part of my job, but no way you're making it a personal requirement / on my behalf.
The outcome being "let's stay good friends", not "you're fired"/"don't get the job", I did get it. As such, not ending the conversation in 2 mins but letting them reviewing their argument is crucial : the constraints are yours, and you don't have anything to blame me for ..
I still think your "sorry I'm not really into social media" would have most likely ended it as well and would have come off a lot more polite. Could have escalated it if needed from there
I don’t want to interrupt your “stuck it to the man” story but I’m just curious whether it was HR telling you to participate with a clear message you’d otherwise be fired, or whether it was just over enthusiastic marketing folk?
Over-enthusiastic marketing. Sometimes it was HR promoting participating in social networks "for the company". Nobody ever threatened me, they were just really pushy, until the pushback
awfully sorry, I wanted to 1. underline that it's a shared opinion and 2. notice others that the "Current Events" portal was commented here.
I posted the exact same comment in all 4 positions talking about Wikipedia - if anyone feels offended or spammed just ler me know and I'll delete this superflous cross-reference
Bare with me - I may have had the same. Countless hours debugging. I had to copy Assembly (68000) in my early days.
Copy-paste is a life saver. Don't type this very long parameter if you can copy its name from the definition file.