good morning #wednesdaywisdom

good morning [cw Stalin, Microsoft, notch]

good morning, this is my panda plant 🐼🌱

Good morning, can anyone confirm that shrink-wrapped bread is unique to America? Why do this? [cw food]

good morning, I found this guide to using `tar` very helpful [cw screaming Arnold Schwarzenegger face]

good morning to the profound absurdity and existential horror I found on my way out the door of my apartment building this morning [cw ec]

no one should ever look that relaxed – it's computer-generated happiness and I reject it.

good morning, the horror van is parked outside again [cw ec]

good morning

good morning, ever heard of a roomba?

better *ahem* sci-fi shows have roombas, why didn't tng

good morning, let's check in on how the normies are doing... [cw pol]

good morning. props to Java developers for having such a good sense of humour about their, quite frankly, horrifying language

@ashfurrow double-wrapping helps protect against potential punctures in the outer bag letting air in and spoiling the bread. Also, the inner wrap is slightly more structurally hard which aids in squish-protection. That’s my guess.

@Archimage makes sense! I never saw it in Canada or The Netherlands.

@ashfurrow It's to introduce another step between you and toast.

Credit - Mitch Hedberg

@ashfurrow I have never seen bread come any other way and I also have no fuckin clue why it's done

Maybe it's because people like food to be SUPER DUPER SEALED here

Not totally sure tho

@ashfurrow fear of bugs? *we are weevils and we are here for the grain product*

@ashfurrow It keeps all those delicious alpha and beta particles in the loaf until you unwrap it. ☢️

@ashfurrow
I've always wondered this myself. And it's always the good stuff. Maybe it's cause we're all fat and they're trying to slow is down by wrapping it twice. :P

@Montesboogie apparently it exists in other countries, but usually on not-fresh breads.

@ashfurrow
Also, thank you for mastodon.technology here's some monkey love for ya' 🙊❤️

@ashfurrow I can't cope with that.

@ashfurrow
A restful, happy face. A face of contentment knowing you did a good job. A good job murdering that family. Off to sleepy time, sleepy head.

@ashfurrow
Now I want to rent that truck and park it in front of my enemy's houses in the morning

@Sturmflut now THIS is certainly a mood, aye!

@ashfurrow There's even more advanced shows: https://youtu.be/AUe9pFmh0JA

@ashfurrow
Farscape also had the highest Muppet quotient of any on air sf show. Clearly the choice of the connoisseur.

@protean @ashfurrow I believe you're forgetting Pigs in Space, the only segment of The Muppet Show worth watching.

@ashfurrow What's that?

@gudenau what’s what? The mueller report, or normies?

@ashfurrow The Mueller report.

@ashfurrow In the first one, you can overload visit() all three times and polymorphism will work fine.

Most of the time, the only problem with Java is uneducated kids and consultants using it badly.

@mdhughes I have a difficult time judging people for not yet having internalized such a bizarre thing as a “programming language.”

@ashfurrow The problem is a kid's learned one hammer so that's all they apply to every problem. And the industry hires young inexperienced kids because they're cheap. And then none of our software works worth a shit.

Consultants are worse, because they should know better, but don't bother.

@mdhughes it makes me feel weird to see you call junior developers “kids” – and in any case, it was just a meme. I haven’t even written Java in nine years.

@ashfurrow I do call everyone under 30 "kids". It's very hard to distinguish them from this far side of the event horizon.

I mostly quit Java in 2008, but still maintain a few tools and it keeps those circuits active in my memory.

@mdhughes Aren't your interactions with junior developers then constrained by looking at them as children?

I learn a lot from the juniors I work with, and even in areas where I _am_ an expert, I consider newcomers to be peers.

@ashfurrow If they've specialized in something new, they might have had time to develop one useful skill, but generally the "kids" are literally where I was 2-3 decades ago.

I'm OK with teaching them, as long as I have time, but wouldn't trust their checkins without review.

I also don't have to collaborate a lot, just solve customer problems (often created and left behind by juniors) or work on my own things. If I had to be in a giant corporate machine again that'd be a different social problem.

@ashfurrow The language is simple enough. The ecosystem and API ("standard library") are pure insanity.

Every so often a new solution comes along that has everyone jump on a bandwagon and sing hallelujah! But it hides the fact that at its base language design level, java makes O.O.P. really, really hard and cumbersome.

@aeveltstra that's an interesting perspective. If I may ask, isn't that the goal of the JVM as a compile target? So that languages like Scala and Clojure can take advantage of Java's popularity without having to use the actual syntax?

(Not that Scala isn't a difficult language, too!)

@ashfurrow Yes, it is. And then these other JVM-targeting languages have to build their own API, via which they show, that they hadn't planned for that, and just wind up making a big mess.

It's like how creating a new language is fun. But the ecosystem around it, to male that language practical to use? That's hard work.

@aeveltstra gotcha, that makes sense. Do you think this is why we (I) hear more success stories with languages compiling to the .Net CLR than compiling to the JVM? Because it was designed to be agnostic to languages from the start? (Not that it doesn't have to be hacky about adding support for new constructs, too.)

@ashfurrow I have on-hands experience with several .Net languages. Yes: the CLR does not appear to suffer the exact same issues. It suffers whole other ones.
Inside Powershell for instance, we can mix paradigms in the same script: functional, o.o., procedural, and maybe event-driven too (legacy VB was event-driven and moved from procedural to o.o. over time) - 1/2

@ashfurrow

But depending of the version of your script engine and the source version of an invoked library, Powershell may force us to employ a different, unwanted paradigm. And apart from finding a different library to invoke, there's literally nothing we can do.

That is not Powershell's fault, as far as I could determine, but the CLR. - 2/2

@aeveltstra interesting – I hadn't realized the different paradigms targeting the same runtime would add such complexity!

@ashfurrow Make. I meant make.

@aeveltstra I read it that way – I make the same typo all the time 😭

@ashfurrow This is horrifying.

@gudenau but in a kind of beautiful way, like a train wreck

@ashfurrow oh holy crap that’s terrifying.

@ashfurrow pfft! 🧐 only four! Common Lisp has five ways of doing it. http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/m_tpcase.htm

On one hand, limiting restricts the user. On the other hand, having many ways to do something makes the need for conventions greater, and that isn't nice either.

@ashfurrow Oh, crud, I tried to write out a DynamicDispatchFunction implementation as a fifth alternative and realized I couldn't do dependent type parameters between the keys and values of a map easily, so I'd probably have to do unchecked casts instead and hmmmmm. (What I want is something like <S> Map<<C> Class<C extends S>, Function<C, R>> if that existed.)

(I bet the real version would be an appropriate response, it's just beyond my silliness attention quota right now)