What if you are depending on a library written by someone not as fscking brilliant as yourself? If that library has a bug and throws an exception you will have to deal with it. You may even have to propagate the exception up to be handled by someone else. That may require some cleanup.
Besides, bugs are not the only conditions to trigger exceptions. Unusual but possible events can do it as well. Out of disk or memory conditions are such examples. Some idiot/rogue user may delete a needed file from the command line and so forth.
There's a project called InfoLeg Trying to do exactly this... I'm not sure if they've been able to keep up, but they have a lot of content browsable in a way that resembles revision control a lot.
As an example you have here our copyright law passed in 1933. The three links there can show you the original text, the most recent text applying all updates (i.e. "HEAD"
That's more or less what you were looking for? I know people who were close to the project in the past, I can get you a couple of names if you're really interested...
Microsoft has told skydivers that they don't recommend using parachutes, because a parachute adds to their weight.
This (as the advice stated by microsoft) is based on strictly true facts (greater attack area) but it is also strictly useless advice...
A lot of developers I've known had made their first game during Pyweek contests. Pyweek is a free and open game creation contest, using python. It has a very friendly and open community, so even if it is a contest there is a lot of people around wanting to help newbies and provide advice.
But the best thing of participating in the contest is that the rules help you to FINISH a game. Starting work on a game is easy, but it's too tempting to fall into scope creep and start adding characters, places, game mechanisms, enemy behaviour ad infinitum, and you are always starting new stuff but never getting to have something finished.
Try it. Most of the people I known to go into the contest have had a lot of fun.
They imagined 2.5 megawatt turbines crisscrossing the terrestrial globe, excluding 'areas classified as forested, areas occupied by permanent snow or ice, areas covered by water, and areas identified as either developed or urban,'
I hope the power is enough to make all the food replicators work. Otherwise I don't know what we will eat when we cover every arable field (read: the places where we grow most food now, which are not forested, with ice, water, nor urban) with wind turbines.
I'm going to review your physics.
If you installation produced 45 KWH of ENERGY during a 5 hour period (being conservative here), it's average output POWER was 9KW. Let's say 10KW to simplify the math.
Now, you will need 11000 times as many panels to reach 110MW. The total number of panels per mile you need is 48*11000/116=4551. That is one panel every 14 inches (if i got the units right, not used to imperial).
Feasible? I would say it still is, but not as much as your calculations suggested
110 MW per train sounds like too much. The typical power output for a locomotive seems to be roughly 5000 HP (http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/05/23/ges-4500-hp-locomotive/). Even if we double that number, since it a high speed train, 10 000 HP = 7 456 998 watts. It is only 7.5 MW. You could power more than 10 of these suckers with 110MW
"All the people are so happy now, their heads are caving in. I'm glad they are a snowman with protective rubber skin" -- They Might Be Giants