Yeah, I had been willing to give the author the benefit of the doubt that this was all part of a big joke, until I saw that the rest of their blog postings are also just like this one.
bitcrafter
joined 1 year ago
It makes the code icky and hard to debug, and you can simply return new immutable objects for every state change.
What happens if you use an out of range array subscript a[n]? Does that always return an option type?
I think that you would be surprised by the amount you would learn if you spent five minutes actually trying to answer your own questions, instead of treating them as proof that you just made a relevant point merely by asking them.
I am really confused by what is going on here. Was Neo4j the original author of the code? Because if so, then they can license their own code however they like. The potential sticking point would be if they represented the license as being AGPL3 when it is not because this would be fundamentally misleading, and it sounds like the court agrees that this is a valid concern because it awarded a partial summary judgement that, "The court did affirm that a license created by combining the AGPL with other non-open-source terms cannot be called 'free and open source.'"
It is noteworthy that apparently the Free Software Foundation did not think that this legal case was worth intervening in.
One does not have to trust the CDC; there are plenty of other sources one can get information from. To conclude that vaccines cause autism, one actually has to be extremely selective about ones sources. Put another way: the problem is not that people are not trustful enough, but that they are too trustful.
You seem to be very critical of my supposed mocking, but I have not mocked anyone for not trusting the CDC, so perhaps a little less projection is in order.
A lot of these operators are things like
+=and-=, though, which should not be too hard to remember if you are familiar with C-flavored languages.