I am not a big fan of the first example. If all that a function is doing is pasting its argument into a template string, then I'd rather see that pattern expressed explicitly in a single line of code than have to mentally infer this pattern myself by reading two separately expressed cases in six lines of code.
(It's not that big of a deal, but when reading through a lot of code to figure out what is going on, these little extra mental exertions start to really add up.)
I don’t see any other solution to the “exponentially growing power consumption” problem.
In the U.S., at least, power generation has been roughly flat for the last 20 years, not growing exponentially:
I prefer RAID -1, which is like RAID 0 except that you routinely yank one of the drives so that only the fittest of the bits survive, greatly improving the quality of your data!
Sure, but in fairness I think that the intent of that saying is not to say that husbands should not be happy but to counterbalance the trend that used to be more historically prevalent in marriages for the wife to be treated as an appendage of the husband and taken for granted. If you view your partner as co-equal then arguably this saying simply does not apply to you at all.
This will finally be the year of the Wayland desktop!
Which, in turn, is a consequence of the spin-statistics theorem.
As for why the spin-statistics theorem is true, the answer is that, in a sense, we do not really know. This is because, although we have rigorous mathematical proofs that it is true, they rely on arguments that are very technical in nature, so they provide no real intuitive insight into why the theorem is true. (This theorem is actually really notorious for this; people have been trying for a long time to improve on the situation, but have yet to succeed in coming up with a satisfactory elementary proof of it.)
I am sure he did, brother; I am sure he did!
Did you actually read the article? They have clearly been putting a lot of thought and care into this project.
Yeah, I really enjoyed the central conceit of that movie, which is that it is really fun to watch Tom Cruise die over and over again.
Quantum states evolve unitarily.
These particular characters have deliberately been given stereotypical mannerisms that lead the reader to think that they are the kind of people who would act in such a way. The joke then ends up being on the reader because it turns out that they could not have read these characters and their intentions any more wrong, and illustrates the folly of stereotypes.
If your culture does not have this particular stereotype then I can see how this was lost on you.