1.  

    clubs considered GOOD, but when you open it up, it’s clubs you hit somebody with.

    1.  

      But the lesson I would take is that system design is a balance. You can consider two worlds…

      That’s valid, but I think that Lisps (and JS) demonstrate you can have the best of both worlds with a tagged pointer representation. If you can cram numbers into tagged pointers, then you can still have a uniform representation but your number handling gets way better. Basically your object model can stay the same, the inner guts of it just become more complicated in the name of performance. Whether it’s worth that complexity is, of course, a matter of opinion, but there’s plenty of languages out there that demonstrate you can do it and they work pretty well.

      …But then I suppose you do end up with a distinction between value and reference types which permeates your whole language, and can come with its own pitfalls.

      1.  

        You must have a very difficult time of it in life because interaction with any person or company implies (some degree of) trust. This doesn’t mean you don’t verify occasionally, but you should probably not visit any site you don’t trust. And if you worry about some dev counting mouse move events in your browser, I don’t see how you get anything done…

        1.  

          I’m just sad they beat python to match expressions. I want match in my daily driver. :(

          1.  

            “Help, I know javascript, this other stuff is useless, right?”

            Then puts tags in JSON format.

            XML gets verbose when implemented in JSON!

            1.  

              That’s a false dichotomy for sure, but thanks for your opinion

              1.  

                Purity tests are awesome and the world definitely needs more of them.

                1.  
                  1.  

                    You replied to my comment about a site whose entries don’t appear on the assortment of existing .club sites by saying that it would only be the Alexa top 1000 on there.

                    1.  

                      …says somebody in the gopherverse.

                      1.  

                        That’s not my argument.

                        1.  

                          I reject the argument that there is no middle ground between “big bad web” and these circle jerk sites

                          1.  

                            Unless the site’s text changed, there’s nothing there about abolishing Javascript.

                            But I think I can make a case for it. If I enable JavaScript, I’m giving you the ability to do almost anything with the computing power of my laptop. You can mine bitcoin, track my cursor, and try to exploit whatever security holes Doubleclick has left (or built) in my browser.

                            Maybe you won’t, but I have to trust that you won’t. And I can’t, because we’re strangers. If you were truly trustworthy, would you ask for this kind of access? Especially if your site does nothing that requires it?

                            1.  

                              Data belongs to the user. Therefore, the user should be allowed to name their data whatever they like. The mundane nonsense of a \0 terminated string bubbling up and interfering with a user’s ownership of their own information is an insulting failure of abstraction.

                              1.  

                                How do I join that club?

                                1.  

                                  Oh yes, certainly. I’d bet it’s over 1 by a bit. It’s basically just a form of load testing. That’s definitely still targeted though haha! I suppose a non-targeted variety could be some kid got his hands on a LOIC and decided to just DDoS some random person. Also it could also maybe be considered apathetic or nihilistic rather than malicious in that case.

                                  1.  

                                    I‘ve never hoped more for a blog article to turn into a sales pitch…

                                    1.  

                                      Wouldn’t that just be the Alexa top 1000 list?

                                      1.  

                                        As endorsed by Groucho Marx!

                                        1. 7

                                          I’m pretty prejudiced against Javascript, but even I think this is going a little far. I want to make sure that my websites all work without Javascript, and I test with Javascript disabled in my browser, but I don’t think it’s wrong to add some features with progressive enhancement. Minimal and optional Javascript is great, Javascript abolition is unnecessary.