That depends on the language and the library.
That depends on the language and the library.
So they claim... I've seen perfectly mundane software that's more than 100x larger than older software that still somehow manages to do less than older versions.
That is, equal or lesser complexity, dramatically larger size, unimaginably worse performance.
I blame the attention paid to "do everything" libraries and frameworks used because they're popular, not because they add value. The defense is always "don't reinvent the wheel" and "if we want to add this or that someday" or some variation of the two. If we didn't reinvent the wheel, we'd all be driving Flintstone mobiles. As for the defense against the future defense, it's not going to happen. That never happens. It never happens because the added unnecessary complexity is guaranteed to make your software less, not more, flexible. Stop doing that!
Stick with small, special purpose, libraries. Your users will thank you.
Not quite. I'm not generally afraid of imaginary things, nor am I concerned with their ethical implications.
I'm also not worried about alien invasions, evil AI, or careless time travelers.
When I see silly science fiction doomsday proclamations that call for my attention or action, I look at it the same way you might look at a Chick tract.
You, in contrast, seem genuinely worried about these sorts of things. I wonder if you've called your insurance company to have 'mad robot damage' added to your homeowners policy, in anticipation of the telephone switching networking becoming self-aware and turning your appliances against you.
I'm sorry that you think that eugenics through direct genetic manipulation is not a bad thing.
This is something I feel I need to correct. I'm against eugenics in all forms. Though I'm not exactly worried about eugenics through direct genetic manipulation as it's a silly fiction, unlikely to be realized.
In no more than 15 years we will probably be fixing genetic diseases.
That's rough... 20 years ago, that was only 10 years out.
It won't be much longer than that before we "fix" other things.
We're running out of time to find the dusty VHS tapes of the '700 Club' warning us about the horrors of "designer babies" before they degrade. They could save humanity!
Seriously, this is like hearing about the imminent danger posed by AI from the Kurzweil nuts. It's science fiction, old science science fiction, that's got you worried. Relax. There are real monsters, like greed and lust for power, that are far more likely to cause you harm in the immediate future than imaginary doomsday scenarios ripped straight from the bargain rack at the local used bookstore.
It works just fine, if you use the entity instead of the character: "only lead acid are recommended to be used/work in < 0"
That is, to produce a '<' character, type <
It's not a bad idea in principle, but have you ever had the displeasure of actually using a site developed in Wix?
It's not that it's bloated so much as it is obese. I once saw a Wix site take more than a minute to load. I'm amazed they're still in business.
Call the local high school and hire one of the kids to snap a small business site together for you. Everyone wins.
Same here. Our 2100TN is still running like new. I don't know that I'd be able to find a newer model as reliable.
Not all extensions are going to be ported. Period.
That's right. I never claimed otherwise. The popular extensions, and the ones mentioned by the OP, however, will be ported. The OP's favorite add-ons will continue to work. This change affects him in no way.
You know, the add-ons that people actually use. UBlock Origin, NoScript, etc. are being ported. Hence, this change will affect almost no one.
For those (very few) devs posting nonsense about how this comes as a total shock, they've had almost two full years to prepare, and they still have the remainder of this year! They've even had ample opportunity to work with Mozilla to shape the new API.
So, no, not every add-on will be ported. Of course, considering the incredibly long time they've had to make the change, I don't think users are missing much by losing what are very likely to be low-quality add-ons with little to no support.
WebExtensions announcement was made not two months after. "Demotivating" doesn't quite cover it
Someone wasn't paying attention
But don't let facts get in the way of your meaningless hate-fest.
I'm sorry that reality is so difficult for you to accept.
There will be some extensions that don't work, but that was also true with any update as the api wasn't stable due to how add-ons work. Again, add-on developers have always had to deal with api changes.
UBlock Origin will continue to work, as will NoScript. You know, the big ones.
The OP mentioned FlagFox, which is still under active development, having received an update this year. There is no reason to suspect that it will stop working, given how simple it is.
As for DownThemAll, I don't know what they'll do. They updated their add-on to work with e10s, after all, and have dealt with countless api changes over the years already. Of course, they could always abandon it and let it die, allowing the countless competitors take over their spot. They've had, and continue to have, plenty of time to get their add-on ready for a change they knew was coming ages ago.
Yeah, he posted a stupid rant, but it's devoid of anything I can meaningfully check. Not a single technical point that can be addressed. That should tell you something.
It doesn't mean that.
Ultimately, this will affect almost no one. Planning for this change has been happening for a long time now. Your favorite add-ons will continue to work.
This will also benefit users and developers moving forward. The way add-ons worked in the past is what caused the 'shifting-sands' api developers just dealt with for years. This might be a larger change, but it'll leave devs with a much more stable system.
As for users, we'll start to see some of the benefits from projects like Servo. If you haven't seen that yet, the performance is astonishing.
What do you hope to accomplish? Just cause needless conflict while contributing nothing?
Trust me, I can twist your words around better than you could ever straighten them, I've learned from the best
So... You're proud of the fact that you argue more effectively with empty rhetoric than with substance?
Good to know...
Considering that you refused to respond to my first repudiation and instead choose to focus on a different issue, I don't thing you're interested in doing anything other than argue meaninglessly.
I've not said anything controversial. This is feminism 101. You'll find everything you're asking me for in a few seconds with a simple search. You're continued refusal to do so tells me that you want to remain ignorant.
If you're as capable as you believe yourself to be, do some reading, and post your sources, quotes, and rebuttal here. It'll be interesting to see if your reading comprehension has improved in the last few hours. (You'll recall that you had a bit of a problem with that earlier!)
"The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in times of moral crisis, preserved their neutrality." -- Dante