Using map, fold etc. is not the hard part of functional programming. The hard part is managing effects (via monads, monad transformers, or effects). Trying to convert a procedural inner mutating algorithm to say Haskell is challenging.
Never used monads with Clojure (the only Lisp I've done "serious" work in). Haskell introduced them to me, but I've never done anything large with Haskell (no jobs!). Scala, however, has monads via the cats or (more recently) the ZIO library and they work just fine there.
The main problem with Monads is you're almost always the only programmer on a team who even knows what a Monad is.
The Vision Pro, and despite being pretty good they were kind of a flop. Like I said elsewhere I think VR and AR are niche products tech companies and investors keep trying to make go mainstream because they showed up in a lot of sci-fi. I don't think many people want them.
If the Vision Pro was indistinguishable from a regular pair of glasses and didn't cost over $1000 it would take over the world. I don't think it's a case that people don't want them, it's more that people want what's in sci-fi you spoke of and not this early iteration.
Yeah (at least maybe). If AR were in a fashionable pair of glasses that you could effortlessly switch into a Google Lens mode for example or call up a Wikipedia article that starts getting interesting. But that's a long way off.
Meta is having some success with the Meta Quest, but it is in the gaming sector where they have cultural problems. [1] The notable thing is that the Meta Quest consumer is price sensitive: when the MQ3 came out and they dropped the price of the MQ2, MQ2 sales surged. Next year they came out with the MQ3S which has the brains of an MQ3 in the body of an MQ2, so it is a cost-reduced device that can run MQ3 software.
The AVP, on the other other hand, was just too expensive. At that price it could go with a seat of [2] (been a high end enterprise play) but no way was it going to compete with buying a big ass TV and a home theater system, which you can enjoy with other people. Worse than that, Apple rejected the immersive world experiences that are big fun on the MQ3 -- if a device is that expensive it has to do it all.
The "something huge that would push the whole industry to the mainstream" seems to be the missing piece here.
I'm sure the Vision Pro will get some follow up, but as someone who wears glasses I don't see the glasses/headset version of AR/XR ever catching on in the mainstream.
There used to be a YouTube subscription called Premium Lite which was just ad-free YouTube. I happily paid for that until they shut it down and tried to force the much bigger
subscription on me (nothing else in premium is relevant to me).
Now I use smarttube which is not only ad-free but also has tons of nice features which YouTube will never deliver. However, should premium lite comeback I would pay for it but keep using smarttube.
> A lot of chips contain animal based flavor enhancers.
I think this is mainly as a response to people using plant based fats for deep frying. Traditionally they were fried in beef tallow, no need for any flavour enhancers if you fry them in beef fat.
The first facebook issue that you mention is unrelated to the App Store, it’s an OS restriction. Side loading won’t affect this.
Apple can clearly make the OS secure/privacy friendly if they want to. The only layer of security that you may lose is the dubious “review” process, which clearly doesn’t do anything considering the amount of scam apps on the store.
>The first facebook issue that you mention is unrelated to the App Store, it’s an OS restriction. Side loading won’t affect this.
Your sentences above are a prime example of a technology mindset being so familiar with the underlying technology that it actually handicaps the analysis of how people might use the tech in ways you don't expect.
The way the sideloaded app gets around the os-level restriction is that they would force users to give permission to the ad-tracking. Otherwise, the sideloaded app has crippled functionality.
That scenario can't happen on Apple's offical App Store because their policies don't allow apps to have crippled functionality when users opt-out of ad tracking.
The theme is that the side-loaded apps can exercise way more freedom with clever psychological dark patterns that bypasses os-level settings.
> That scenario can't happen on Apple's offical App Store because their policies don't allow apps to have crippled functionality when users opt-out of ad tracking.
There is a simple solution for Apple: disable ad tracking on iOS. The DMA doesn't require gatekeepers permit ad tracking. It only requires gatekeepers provide the same functionality they provide themselves. Apple is still perfectly able to provide a safe and secure OS under the legislation.
Sweden had a lower or same excess death rates than almost all other European countries [1]. The large death spikes early on in the pandemic can be mostly explained by the fact that Sweden had a much lower death rate among its elderly population in the years preceding the pandemic (if I recall correctly).
I looked into using Graal one time. Many of the dependencies I used were not compatible. I also encounter weird bugs with any of the OpenJ* alternatives. In Go, everything just works.
The JVM proponents are usually being dishonest when they compare Java/Kotlin AOT compilation to Go. They know very well that a large number of popular libraries either outright don't work or have severe restrictions when using AOT. It's also common to run into bugs since Graal is relatively new and only a miniscule percentage of the Java community uses it. It's not even remotely close to Go where everything can be assumed to work.
Finally, if you are using a modern Android phone, an AOT compiler is in the box since Android 5, and it was modified into a mixed JIT with AOT compilation on rest since Android 7.
GraalVM happens to be the evolution of MaximeVM, and certainly not the only game in town.
I was just reading that Spring 6 introduces Ahead-Of-Time compilation, enabling first-class support for GraalVM native images with Spring Boot 3. So hopefully the situation is improving.
So they're missing the niche of "being native", by suggesting... using an AOT (= native) JVM compiler? Meaning making essentially every JVM language native?
It's not my burden of proof. If you think something like compiling kotlin instead of running a JVM is akin to compiling with go tooling, then at this point anything that somehow compiles to native (and beyond) is in the "go niche".
You're the one asserting that it's unsuitable. So it very much is.
> If you think something like compiling kotlin instead of running a JVM is akin to compiling with go tooling, then at this point anything that somehow compiles to native (and beyond) is in the "go niche".
I don't know about the other commenters, but that's literally the only criteria you've deigned offer so far, aside from some sort of conspiratorial implications.
So if I say <any language> is in go's niche, it's your burden to disprove it?
Look, this is getting ridiculous. Go offers easy+fast tooling out of the box. Any JVM language, compiled or not, will never be anywhere NEAR go's tooling in those terms. The extra compilation layer just makes it actually much worse.
C# may fit your needs, depending on what you consider a simple language and easy concurrency. The language doesn’t feature any hard to understand concepts. Concurrency is very good, but only async has built in syntax sugar (I believe go has syntax sugar for channels or something?).
The executables may be a bit larger (I’m guessing).
C# is far from simple. It used to be be but lately (in that last ~5 year) they have been adding a lot to a point it has become hard to follow the changes, and hard to read modern C#.
When I was C# developer I welcome the addition of FP like feature, but now imho the lang have become very cluttered. GO lang is in another level of simplicity and it is not comparable with C#.
> Just wait when Go gets 20 years of existence and enterprise use beyond devops.
C# is really reliable language, great tooling and documentation but it does not change the fact that is cluttered and no longer simple (which was the point of my comment).
Also I can't see golang going to the same direction, by design go is a lot simpler.
I had my share of reviewing and working with C#. There are certainly ways where developers can be "clever" with it and it becomes confusing and unworkable mess. Haven't seen that with Go.
