that’s the first time i see anyone equating Java with “theoretical elegance”.

Says much about his knowledge of Java/theory

I moved from pandas.

that’s it, there is no polars. Its been great !

the answer is a resounding “no”

let’s be honest here, he actually means 0.01 core performance

You re not stupid, python’s packaging & versionning is PITA. as long as you write it for yourself, you re good. As soon as you want to share it, you have a problem

I would say Redox is miles ahead of Minix, am I wrong?

Don’t write “if” in your tests! It makes very, very little sense: how is that, you test your application and you are unsure what is the resulting outcome of a call? Is it depending on arguments? Then fix the argument, and expect 1 specific result. Is it depending on environment? Fix/mock the environment.

No “ifs” in the tests!

Okey that definitely explains it

Banned for being linked to Russian state, or for being Russian? Lol those are very very different

I am mostly complaining about his writing style. Obviously the subject itself is interesting (to some people)

I wouldn’t bet my eye on it, but who knows!.. Maybe he was a better teacher before!

Again, Knuth himself said in a preface that Volumes 2 through 5 are independent.

That sounds interesting, will take a look. I am not against theoretical computer science, i just think Knuth doesn’t reads like a good teacher…

Because volume 1 is not available in the library

Edit: but also the volumes aren’t not dependent on each other. They treat very different topics, i doubt reading Volume 1 will help with Volume 4.

I don’t understand why this is called a “subset”, while clearly containing new syntax

A subset would be understood by older compilers, this is a superset

Absolutely not a replacement to VBA. Not even close. As usual, Microsoft hypes something everyone wants, and then implements something nobody asked

I feel offended by you somehow equalizing perl and lisp

This a much better done meme

The other one before makes zero sense

2100 parameters is a documented ODBC limitation( which applies on all statements in a batch)

This means that a

“insert into (c1, c2) values (?,?), (?,?)…” can only have 2100 bound parameters, and has nothing to do with code, and even less that surrounding code is “spaghetti”

The tables ARE normalised, the fact that there are 50 colums is because underlying market - data calibration functions expects dozens of parameters, and returns back dozens of other results, such as volatility, implied durations, forward duration and more

The amount of immaturity, inexperience, and ignorance coming from 2 people here is astounding

Blocked

You should take a break from trolling