I’m not a huge fan.

I think there is something to be said for keeping a language simple, though. The basic semantics of a language should be comprehensible to everyone, let the standard library have all the wacky stuff someone wanted decades ago. (macros - the lisp kind, not the C kind - make this easier)

Async has been stable for a long time. Coroutines are just syntax sugar AFAIK.

What do you mean by “abstract away”, and what about it is exclusive to headers?

Eg most languages have something like a trait or interface wherein you can put a list of definitions (optionally with a default aka “inline” implementation) which are then actually implemented elsewhere. This is considered useful by everyone because it allows multiple implementations to be associated with 1 name. They are generally not desired in cases where only 1 implementation will ever be written.

AFAIK the only use case where headers accomplish the same is if they’re treated as documentation for an API that could be implemented by any library.

Admittedly certain programming styles benefit immensely from headers, despite the drawbacks to “design as you go” programming.

It’s common for those “other stores” to just be the dev’s own store or a store which takes a smaller cut than Valve.

To me, anyways, it seems perfectly expected for a business to want to pass on Valve’s charges to the customer. Whether this is harmful depends on whether you focus on the player or developer, and whether the developer responds by making the game cheaper everywhere or more expensive everywhere.

I’m not in favor of these practices by Valve either. It seems like the group you’re describing are interpreting this as Valve wont let anyone rip off their customers so you can be sure you’re getting it at the best price there, rather than Valve wont let anyone change the narrative that you’re getting it at the best price there and should buy everything there.

I’ve got 99 problems and 99 problems is at least one of them.

I would (probably not literally) wager that by “this” they meant *looks around at entire world*…

this

It tells you how to exit if you press ctrl+C, which is many people’s first instinct.

I know what you meant

I’m not trying to toy with you, please reciprocate. Because you didn’t say what about quantum mechanics causes reality to appear non self consistent I tried to connect the dots in my head: what I know about relativity fits the bill a hell of a lot better than QM.

QM does predict some weird probability distributions where the interpretation of causality is unclear. Just like mfed1122’s argument of understanding calculus, just because you or I don’t know what it means doesn’t indicate that it’s meaningless. Regardless of how confusing it is, QM describes everything objectively and so it doesn’t say the universe is inconsistent. Like with my example about GPS, quantum computers wouldn’t be possible if QM didn’t describe a uniform, self-consistent reality.

Unless, you know how to resolve the interpretation of QM, then by all means go ahead and take that nobel prize

This is unrelated to both your point and the original commenter’s discussion, per mfed1122’s argument.

If you want to continue this discussion in a meaningful way could you outline the elements of quantum mechanics that indicate a non self-consistent reality?

Quantum says otherwise

It doesn’t.

I meant that GR better fits the vague description you gave.

Thanks for the conversation.

I believe you’re speaking about General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics refers to “quantum” aka discrete, non-smooth things like the energy levels of electrons.

General Relativity indicates that the temporal ordering of events may appear different to different observers, although there is a way to objectively switch between perspectives.

In all cases, the theories point to a uniform, self consistant reality, as that is in fact their very purpose. If they didn’t work as expected, your GPS wouldn’t be a thing.

https://xkcd.com/1251/ (there is always an xkcd about it)

The first one is incorrect, the limit doesn’t exist unless you specify whether you’re coming from the left or right.

On another note, I think their student has invented a new symbol for “Does Not Exist”.