AMD Ryzen: new low cost quad-core Zen 2 CPUs from $99 - <AUTHOR> https://www.anandtech.com/show/15736/amd-ryzen-3-3300x-and-ryzen-3-3100-new-low-cost-quadcore-zen-2-processors-from-99 <comment><USER2> I really really want to see this (with a embedded 10G NIC) in a new generation of NASes. It's embarrassing how much that space has stagnated in the prosumer space, and this looks like a nice replacement for the celery or atom processors.

<comment><AUTHOR> Aren't NAS's IO-constrained? The added memory in relation to Atom's may be an advantage, but, unless you use a lot of very fast storage with real time block-level deduplication and compression, the processor will be extremely bored inside its box.

<comment><USER3> A number of people seem to do real time transcoding on them.

<comment><AUTHOR> I couldn't find anything on using Intel or AMD GPU cores with ffmpeg, but some ARM boards seem well supported.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Honestly, since I've not been keeping track of the actual technology and details of the various AMD CPUs / APUs, except for all the news about how AMD Ryzen is actually equivalent to or even better than Intel CPUs, all these AMD CPU models and choices are a bit confusing!

There's Ryzen 3, 5, 7, 9. Server, desktop and Mobile models. And among each various choices. And now even more choices ...

I am rooting for AMD but I sure hope they know what they are doing and improve their marketing so that consumers don't get overwhelmed and confused ... :/

<comment><USER5> Intel CPUs are even worse in that regard having dozens and dozens of them across categories, so...

If you are an average user, you only need to remember: buy the 3600.

<comment><USER6> Heck even if you're building a gaming PC the 3600 is fine. I bought a 2080ti for 4k gaming, then looked at the 3600-3900x as options and realized I'd get negligible benefits from more cores. So my $1200 video card is paired with the CPU I got on sale for $150.

<comment><USER7> Te 3600 is also the one that has the highest L3 cache per thread. Despite that being "non uniform", that's still a big fat cache that helps a lot with performance.

Waiting for Zen 3 to bring unified L3 back into the table!

<comment><USER8> Is that a possibility? Also, with a NUMA aware OS what kind of performance increases would one likely see on a UMA cpu vs a NUMA one?

<comment><USER7> I think Windows and Linux both have NUMA capabilities in their kernel. Long story short, you don't have to think too much -- get one of these and try it yourself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I usually go to PassMark CPU charts and sort by value:

[https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html)

Or visit their high-end CPU chart and scroll until I see a price I'm willing to pay.

<comment><USER10> I wish they had sort-by-value based on single-threaded scores. (That whole list is full of Intel Xeons that generally have poor single-threaded performance. Single-thread benchmark scores are probably what impact regular desktop users most.) And maybe also a filter to exclude CPUs that are older than N years. And maybe an option to set a minimum core count (like filter out all CPUs with less than 4 physical cores). Then it'd be perfect.

Or maybe some needs to build an automatic UI generator that takes in a database schema, and lets you filter/sort/etc by stuff. It'd be like one of those SQL GUI desktop apps, except we'd have an embeddable client-side React component + a server-side library, instead.

<comment><USER11> You can sort by single-thread performance if you look only at those cpus, which are still on the market: [https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html#single...](https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html#single- thread)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Super happy to see this; having more low-price desktop processor options is great for anyone looking to build a desktop. Also excited for the B550 platform; it's been a while since they updated the mid range motherboard options.

</comment><comment><USER13> Anyone know if these have ECC support? I need to build a few (3) really cheap x86 boxes but need ECC support.

<comment><USER14> I built a small home server a few months back using a Supermicro board (M11SDV-8CT-LN4F) which has ECC support and an Epyc 3201.

<comment><USER13> Aye. I've been trying to price out what's better essentially three tiny machines, a threadripper, or dual 7302s (until the higher core count ones drop in price).

The threadripper seems strangely more practical the more I think about any of them... but is also not as cheap and small as something like the 3300Xs and doesn't have quite the I/O available for really long-term usage like something outta the Epyc lineup. It is damn good for the now though...

I'll probably hold off buying anything until these come out just in case some righteous sales show up on them and some mini-itx motherboards.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> For the price, 1600AF is probably the better option... if these were in the sub-$70 range, it'd be a good option.

<comment><USER16> The 1600AF is not a product. It's AMD clearing inventory. Infact the rumors are you can't find the 1600AF anymore but the 1200AF is popping up.

<comment><USER15> 1600AF seems to be a lifecycle replacement for the 1600, probably for contractual obligations.

Seems to have plenty of inventory on Amazon.

[https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07XTQZJ28/](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07XTQZJ28/)

<comment><USER12> While the 1600AF is great(basically a 2600 under the name of the 1600 for anyone who's confused), the different ways one can buy one aren't the clearest about whether it's actually the AF.

At least personally, I'd be wary about sending someone I was helping to pick one up on the off chance that it wasn't actually the AF.

<comment><USER15> It's in the model number on the product page... YD1600BB_AF_BOX

There's an ever decreasing chance you _might_ get an older version, but that's less and less likely as old inventory has pretty much cycled out from amazon & newegg.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I really like what AMD is doing. AMD's Zen and going with TSMC's 7nm..etc. at the very least, AMD going to force Intel to stop fcking around. how many 14nm+++++++++ can Intel squeeze?

</comment><comment><USER18> I wonder it would be possible to underclock/undervolt these cpus to make it consume less power.

Sometimes you just don't need pure raw speed.

<comment><USER19> it's generally preferable to complete the task faster at high clock/voltage and then go completely idle then it is to run for longer at lower clock/voltage

the total power draw is lower when the task is completed faster

<comment><USER20> The general term for this is "race to sleep", if you want to find more information on it.

<comment><USER18> thank, I'll look that up!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I like the pricing, but would like to point out that going from 4 cores to 6 cores literally doubles the price for much less in the way of perf increase.

Although, I can't fault AMD. It looks like they are just matching their competitors pricing minus a few percent and raking it in, rather than undercutting them by a lot and trying to own the market and likely running out of supply.

At some point though (likely with A76+ cores) there will be some nice ARM SBC's with 4+ cores, on a board for < $100 that will eat these things for lunch as far as price/perf is concerned. Hopefully they are prepared.

<comment><USER22> Well you not only get 50% increase Core Count, you also get 50% increase in L2 Cache _per_ core, Double the total L3 Cache, along with 5% boost clock.

I think it isn't the value for 6 core were not good, it is AMD priced the Quad Core a little too low. I was expecting it to be $129 / $149 range. At $99 it offers insane value.

<comment><USER21> vs $122 list for

[https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?pro...](https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=134870)

I wouldn't call that "insane" if you get any kind of discount on the intel part. Competitive, yes, especially if you can use the pcie gen4.

(edit fix link for 9100 vs 9100T) (edit2, for example the 9100F also lists for $122 is selling for $78 on amazon right now)

<comment><USER23> Err, that page says $192 for me.

<comment><USER21> Location problem? It says "Recommended Customer Price: $122" in the 8th line down, and matches a couple other part/list/guides I see.

as well as random google hit:

[https://technical.city/en/cpu/Core-i3-9100](https://technical.city/en/cpu/Core-i3-9100)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> What's a good place to see CPU benchmarks? I want to know how much more perf I can get from upgrading my 2012 i7-3770.

<comment><USER25> [https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/](https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/)

<comment><USER26> Userbenchmark has been waging a one man war against AMD's high benchmarks. That isn't a really good source.

<comment><USER12> For anyone looking for some elaboration on why Userbenchmark isn't great, I'd check out this reddit thread [0]. Even if you don't agree that they outright shouldn't be used, other reviewers and benchmarkers definitely do a much better job of showing the nuance in CPU comparisons.

[0] [https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/g2x49q/userbenchm...](https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/g2x49q/userbenchmark_should_be_banned/)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The 3x and 1 problem - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3x_%2B_1_problem <comment><USER2> _Far_ more commonly known as the Collatz conjecture.

Several prominent mathematicians have said something along the lines of "we would need a much different math to solve this".

And this is despite it being simpler than every problem being actively worked on in mathematics (e.g. Riemann hypothesis).

</comment><comment><USER3> Where do you use it and what do you use it for? For example?

<comment><USER4> It's a proper pure math problem - it doesn't have to have a use, it doesn't have to have an application. Like Fermat's Last Theorem (FLT), in and of itself it's probably of no value.

However, there will be an answer. It might be that every number returns to 1, it might be that there is a loop, it might be that some sequence goes off without bound, and it might be that the answer is unprovable within the usual axioms of mathematics.

But currently we don't know. And as with FLT, it might be that while the problem itself is of no use, the techniques developed in the attempts to solve it might prove to be amazingly useful.

Currently, no one knows.

There are lots of people who just don't care about something unless it has immediate and obvious uses, and that's fair enough. There are others for whom the interest and excitement is in the chase, and that makes it worthwhile.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there a random chat site (like omegle) that isn't taken over by bots? - <AUTHOR> I remember when omegle could actually yield some interesting conversations, although there were always a fair share of bots and ne'er-do-wells. Is there anywhere to have random conversations with mostly real, well-meaning humans?<p>I suppose it's a pretty hard problem to make such an app, since it needs to be popular enough to have active users, which means the bots are going to try. You could use some quasi-real-life identity (like Facebook), but many people probably want anonymity and wouldn't trust that. <comment><USER2> Chatspin hasn't yet been taken over by bots, but fair warning, it's completely overrun by explicit content, but there _is_ an option to switch off the video and have a text chat.</comment>


Ask HN: What books/activities do you recommended for being more charismatic? - <AUTHOR> One of my big goals for 2019 is to become more charming and charismatic. What resources have helped you guys?<p>One that helped me a lot personally was this book "never split the difference" <comment><USER3> I am by nature not the most charming person in the world, but with effort I can be extremely charming and even charismatic.

The approach I use is to really listen to people talking and work out what they are trying to say and mirror it back to them in a more eloquent manner. The result is they think the two of us have totally "clicked". I rarely use this approach as it is mentally very taxing and I don't need to charm many people, but it is very effective.

Another strategy that works well for creating friendships is to build a thicket of small favours. Ask for some small favour and then let the other person ask you for something small in return. Repeat.

It is always best to be in favour debt with other people (you owe them) than the reverse. There is no better way of creating a true enemy than really helping someone and not letting them return the favour.

<comment><USER4> This is an interesting piece of advice and I will try it. I have a peculiar nature where I go out of my way to help others but resist favours and help. It is not received very well and have always been confused by it.

Can you expand on 'there is no better way of creating a true enemy than ...'

<comment><USER3> It appear that people are not very good at carrying the psychology burden caused by not being able to return help. They need to find some way of unloading this debt and if they can't help you back, the best solution seems to be to turn it into hate.

The people who hate me the most in the world are not those that I have wronged, but those I really helped.

Make sure that if you help someone that you ask them for some help back - <USER2> doesn't need to be anything big, but the sooner you unload the debt the happier the person will be towards you. If there is nothing you need help with just make something up and then say thank you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> What always strikes me when people talk about their interactions with charismatic people, is that they often say that the charismatic person seems genuinely interested in the person they're talking to, and that they make them feel like the most important person in the room.

So I'm starting to think that maybe that's an important key to charisma: being genuinely interested in the person you're talking with, and making them feel important, loved and understood.

I haven't applied it myself, though.

<comment><USER6> Politics aside, I'm fascinated by the personal recollections of people who have met Bill Clinton [1]. Bill Clinton is legendary for making people who shake his hand feel like they are the most important person in the room.

A book I read (believe it was something like 'What got you here win't Get you there') said something that has stuck with me. Paraphrased: "Everyone can be as charismatic as Bill Clinton. You do it on a job interview or on a first date. The secret is... he does it all the time"

"Clinton had this huge charisma. He was wearing a pair of black trousers and a blue checked shirt with his sleeves rolled up. His presence made everyone around him so comfortable. He had this extraordinary ability to make us feel very special. He took time out to speak to each one of us asking about our family, where we were raised and educated, what were the things in our life that we hold important." [2]

[1] [http://www.bing.com/search?q=meeting+bill+clinton+%2B+charis...](http://www.bing.com/search?q=meeting+bill+clinton+%2B+charisma&go=&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=meeting+bill+clinton+%2B+charisma&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=)

[2] [https://m.telegraphindia.com/states/west-bengal/meet- billary...](https://m.telegraphindia.com/states/west-bengal/meet-billary-his- charisma-and-her-composure/cid/1282133)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The Charisma Myth by Olivia Fox-Cabane is pretty solid, but actually implementing the concepts in practice versus simply understanding them in theory is always the hard part. I used a combination of Anki flashcards and Readwise [0] to decent success. I also worked with an incredible communication coach in SF.

The Charisma Myth, FYI, is that you're naturally born with charisma. The reality is that charisma can be nurtured.

[0]: [https://readwise.io](https://readwise.io) (full disclosure I am one of the creators)

<comment><USER8> > I also worked with an incredible communication coach in SF

reference?

<comment><USER7> Fonta Hadley (Eloquence Studios)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Be yourself, have a strong belief in something, be courageous. Most real charismatic people have lived a rich life with lots of experience in success and failures; They always have strong fundamental beliefs, an ethos about the world that they try to carry out. There is no "risk free charisma for dummies" kinda thing. Instead of trying to chase a mythical charisma, try to find out what you really believe in, what kind of dreams you have based on those beliefs, and try to gain experience by doing things.

</comment><comment><USER10> 1/ Get a full night's sleep so you'll be at your most alert and aware.

2/ Have strong opinions that are loosely held but be open to having your mind changed

3/ Listen. No, really listen. Shut up, stop just waiting to respond to what someone said and listen to them as if you made the first contact with an alien species that was giving you the keys to the universe. Don't interrupt, don't rush to spout out an answer. Don't let your mind wander

4/ Make solid eye contact.

5/ Smile as much as you can. Note: Don't force a fake smile if you're not feeling it.

6/ Don't be overly negative or critical. Don't be an asshole.

7/ Give honest and genuine compliments.

Also, I have a specific playlist of music that gets me in an active mood that I listen to before any social events, speaking to a group or going out on dates. It's made a world of a difference for me.

</comment><comment><USER11> You can't learn this in a book. You need to put yourself out there (in social settings) and learn through trial and effort. Much like reading books about weight lifting won't make your body grow muscle, you need to actually get inside a gym and put in the work.

</comment><comment><USER12> "It's Charisma, Stupid" by Paul Garaham.

[http://www.paulgraham.com/charisma.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/charisma.html)

</comment><comment><USER13> I'd highly recommend learning some improvisational theatre. It requires a lot of the same skills that being charismatic does. Taking an improv class in college was a revelatory experience to me because it showed me exactly how I had been sabotaging my own social interactions. If you can't take a class or a workshop, try to read "Improv Wisdom".

</comment><comment><USER14> There is a quote that says:

"Next to being witty, the best thing is being able to quote another's wit."

I would point out another important quote I live by:

"It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read a book of quotations."

So I guess you could say I'm uneducated. But I believe I am a bit more charming and charismatic because I can quote others appropriately at the right times.

</comment><comment><USER15> How to make friends and influence people

</comment><comment><USER16> Re: _What books /activities do you recommended for being more charismatic?_

Try alcohol. It may not work for everybody, but experimentation is part of science.

</comment><comment><USER17> Be happy, charisma will come naturally if you are happy

<comment><USER18> But "how to be happy" is an even harder question.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The charisma Myth

</comment><comment><USER20> twitch.tv/mang0</comment>


What to do When a Tech Giant Decides to Eat Your Lunch - <AUTHOR> http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2011/06/13/what-to-do-when-a-tech-giant-decides-to-eat-your-lunch/?awesm=bothsid.es_CMb&utm_content=awesm-publisher&utm_medium=bothsid.es-twitter&utm_source=twitter.com

<comment><USER2> Duplicated: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2651951>

There is no discussion there yet, I add this imply to ensure that if any comments are made, they don't get split between the two submissions.

And yes, I've set each to point to the other.</comment>


Show HN: My current App Store Featured Game was written entirely in Scheme - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cloud-breaker/id721767500?mt=8 <comment><USER2> After reading the story I just have to recall stories from the guys who flew and serviced F4s, they joked they could fly without either wing simply because it was just a rocket sled.

We had one guy knicknamed Major Cablecutter as he "clipped" the guidelines of a radio tower one time. He also had come back more than once with branches stuck to his F4. Being that they were only "Recon" they tended to be aggressive during war games and this game guy over stressed his airframe turning into some F18s trying to tag him.

So many military planes have such high thrust to weight ratios I do not doubt that wings merely become the means to stable flight

<comment><USER3> This comment made me think this game must have some incredible unseen angle not shown in the screenshots on the App Store. Brilliant!

<comment><USER4> I wondered what Scheme dialect was F4. Epic!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm the author. I wrote the game and engine using the wonderful, and fast, Gambit Scheme ([http://gambitscheme.org/](http://gambitscheme.org/)).

I needed a lisp to manipulate the puzzles, because they aren't based in a strict grid. It ended up being way more natural to program the block structures as lists rather than traditional matrices.

Gambit compiles the Scheme code down to C, which I can then link to Objective-C for iOS, or port to Android or any other platform that Gambit supports.

<comment><USER5> Thanks for posting this, but the link is rather anemic for this audience; any possibility of a writeup (even a quick and short one) of _how_ you did it? I've been looking at cross-platform solutions for apps, and the best I've come up with so far is Kivy ([http://kivy.org](http://kivy.org)) and haXe ([http://haxe.org](http://haxe.org)), which both still require a machine running OSX to package for iOS.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, that's a good point. I am definitely planning on writing up everything I learned in the process. It just launched a few days ago so I'm still focused on handling that at the moment.

If you like I can e-mail you in the future when the article is out. There's contact info on my website: [http://asivitz.com/cloudbreaker/](http://asivitz.com/cloudbreaker/)

<comment><USER5> Eh, no pressure; I'll keep an eye on your website and HN, but I'd be curious if anyone here has found ways to do cross-platform (Android, iOS, Linux, OSX, Win, etc) apps from the environment of their choosing. I'm not looking to monetize, so arguments of "investing" into platforms I don't already have are moot; this is mostly a hobby/side "what could I do if . . . " sort of thing right now, and just having scheme as another option is awesome :)

<comment><USER6> I've recently spend quite some time trying to figure out what's the best way to use a Lisp in order to write multi platform games. I'm still in the researching phase, but if you need to support more than iOS & Android, then ClojureScript on top of a Javascript Game Engine (possibly with native extensions) is the best bet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Awesome work! I'm continually blown away that people still reference my old work on porting Gambit Scheme for iOS.

Almost makes me want to play around with it again. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes! So glad you saw this!

I had trouble getting the server based repl working, so here's the in-game repl I ended up implementing as a Quake-type dev console: [http://imgur.com/J6ozzT6](http://imgur.com/J6ozzT6)

(Obviously disabled in the App Store version.)

I may be getting ahead of myself, but I think it's a GREAT language for writing games, and is going to take off at some point.

<comment><USER7> Very cool! Hooking up the internal gambit REPL was finicky because it never got much love. I think Marc polished it up somewhere though. Still, a quick in-game REPL like that goes a long way.

The cool thing about having a real Gambit REPL was that you could use the Gambit debugger in real-time. So if an error ever occurred, the debugger REPL would pop up and you could step around. You also get all the builtin stuff for inspecting cooperative threads and such.

Anyway, it would be a great minimalistic environment if it was fleshed out more. Part of my mission in the JavaScript world is to bring these concepts to more people, and hopefully lead them to Clojure/Scheme/etc.

Did you use a module system? Last I remember Black Hole was getting really advanced. Did that ever take off within Gambit?

<comment><USER8> I would love to hear more about what you're working on to bring these concepts to the Javascript world, since we at famo.us are interested in the same.

<comment><USER7> You can see a few things on my blog: [http://jlongster.com/](http://jlongster.com/). Recently I've been helping out with the sweet.js project ([http://sweetjs.org/](http://sweetjs.org/)) to implement macros in JS. People really need to understand how macros transform a language. It's going really well so far.

I'm also working on the idea of live evaluation. Most devs are used to writing code and refreshing the page. There are tools that help with live evaluation, but they all suck. I am working on something that will give you a better connection with your code, and fully support the idea of incrementally coding up an app.

I'm not focusing on specific Lisp/Scheme features, but more about the philosophy behind them. Any project I do I try to expose the good stuff that I learned from Scheme.

<comment><USER9> Interesting. How much of the JS infrastructure do you need for this stuff to work?

I'm in the middle of creating a JS port for embedded systems (yes, I know about Espruino. It made some fundamental decisions about object implementation that I find unacceptable) and it would be nice to be able to lean into something like this to avoid implementing huge chunks of the more advanced language bits.

Side note: I'm the person who did the first Nintendo DS port of Gambit so its interesting to see how all this comes full circle.

<comment><USER7> I remember hearing about the Nintendo DS work. Great stuff!

What I'm working on relies on a full JS implementation. Performance is a critical feature so I need to implement as _little_ as possible. I basically implemented a very small VM that controls JS code using exceptions. What I've done lets you run JS code with a 3-4x perf hit, but you get full stepping and debugging abilities in user-land. I'm going to release it in a few weeks!

It sounds like it's not quite what you're looking for though. You're project sounds cool!

<comment><USER8> Is this project already public on github?

Outlet and Outlet-Machine look like what you're describing but the docs on those say they are deprecated/frozen and the last commits are 1-2 years ago.

<comment><USER7> No, not yet. I was exploring this indeed with outlet but discovered that wasn't the right way to do it. My technique came together very recently and I plan on releasing it soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The Gambit interpreter (REPL) itself also runs on the iPhone

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gambit- repl/id434534076?mt=8](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gambit- repl/id434534076?mt=8)

and on the Android platform (updating it with the latest version of Gambit is on my todo list):

[http://apps.keithflower.org/?page_id=152](http://apps.keithflower.org/?page_id=152)

[http://apps.keithflower.org/?p=223](http://apps.keithflower.org/?p=223)

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.keithflowe...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.keithflower.gambit)

Note that this is just the interpreter itself - not a very good way of writing games for Android.

<comment><USER11> If you could update it so you could make the scripts edit fields full screen that would be awesome! it is really hard editing then in the tiny boxes they are at the minute.

<comment><USER10> Thanks for the feedback. The intent in that version was to mimic Marc's (Gambit author Marc Feeley) past iOS version as closely as possible (via webview) - I'll see what he's doing with his latest iOS version and also try to include a full screen option.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Well done! Gameplay video link: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T11wl70wjc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T11wl70wjc)

</comment><comment><USER13> Good stuff. Interestingly, the very first programming language offered in introductory CS class at my college was Scheme at the time (2000). The power of 'car' and 'cdr' still resonates in my head. At times, the parenthesis used to give me dyslexia but good old days of doing stuff like:

        (car(cdr(car(cdr(cdr a)))))

<comment><USER14> Get a copy of this for the kids!

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Little-Schemer-4th- Edition/dp/0262...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Little-Schemer-4th- Edition/dp/0262560992/)

<comment><USER15> One of the best CS classes I took in college was an introduction to scheme that used 'The Little Schemer' as its text book. Having only worked in imperative languages it really opened my head up!

<comment><USER16> The MIT course on youtube from the 80s using SCIP and Scheme was the single best time investment I've made since learning programming. It still blows my mind how much it changed my perspective on programming.

<comment><USER14> From the 80's? You have a link to which one you mean?

<comment><USER16> 1986 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Op3QLzMgSY&list=PLF4E3E1B72...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Op3QLzMgSY&list=PLF4E3E1B72A58B492)

A year before I was born :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Great work! :) Congratulations! For those who want to try developing in Scheme, I'm working on a project that could help you get started. Currently only Android is available, but as soon as possible iOS will be as well. [http://schemespheres.org](http://schemespheres.org)

</comment><comment><USER18> I thought "non-Objective C" languages weren't allowed in the App store, or something like that.

<comment><USER19> That was in the rules and quickly abandoned. What they care about is that you don't load new code from the Internet. Ostensibly, the reason is security, but the real reason is they don't want you to make an app store.

JavaScript in webviews is excepted because you couldn't show a website without that.

If you don't get new code from the Internet (for example, someone types it in) that's ok. It's even ok to copy and paste it from the Internet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I love the originality on display with this game mechanic. Too many "samesies" games out there for my tastes.

This developer has another puzzler in the App Store as well: Button Brigade, also quite original, but more of an adventure style puzzle game.

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/button- brigade/id542991688?m...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/button- brigade/id542991688?mt=8)

[http://asivitz.com/button_brigade/index](http://asivitz.com/button_brigade/index)

</comment><comment><USER21> Dear rrradical,

Tried your game, was not disappointed. :-) It's almost spooky that your post came at this time, for I have read a lot about Scheme->C systems this week. This PDF made a great impression on me of the gambit scheme system. [http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/Gambit-inside- out.pdf](http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/Gambit-inside-out.pdf)

I have a few questions for you:

1\. I installed Gambit-Scheme via Brew and compiling any scheme file results in a clang segfault. How did you get around this? For now I use gcc instead. :-/

2\. Why Gambit-Scheme and not Chicken-Scheme? I can't really decide which is the better choice for writing a game.

3\. Do you use continuations to make coroutines in your game?

<comment><AUTHOR> 1\. I think the segfault is explored in this thread: [http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.scheme.gambit/7068/match...](http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.scheme.gambit/7068/match=xcode+5)

Basically, the problem is with the version of llvm/clang that Apple uses in Xcode 5.

Some of the newer Xcode betas might fix it. I personally use the Xcode 4 compiler. You could probably also build your own clang from their SVN.

For more info you could probably ask the mailing list.

2\. I definitely looked at chicken, and I can't remember my exact reason for going with gambit, but it was a practical one. I don't think I could get chicken up and running on the iphone for some reason. Chicken did seem to be better documented with better libraries. Gambit may be faster though.

(I started working on this about a year ago. The situation may be completely different now.)

My game isn't too complex, compared to, say, a first person shooter. I'm not sure if the GC implementation would start to matter in that circumstance. I recommend trying one and then if you're happy with it, great. If not, most of the code will be portable.

3\. No. I don't have much experience with them (besides learning the basics in school). I did use a lot of closures, anonymous lambdas, and lambda builder functions.

Glad you're enjoying the game!

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Somewhere, deep in Lindley Hall at Indiana University, is an old professor exclaiming, "I told them people used it!"

I wonder if I'd have taken more to Scheme if I were learning it now. At the time, I was double majoring CS and Telecom, but the world of open source hadn't been as friendly to Mac as it is now, and Macs were a prereq for TCom. Getting Scheme running on my old iBook was a pain in the ass, let alone the assignments (which still didn't match the untouchable stability of our automated grading system). I conceptually understood why I needed to learn it, and even grasped many of the concepts of what I was learning, but it wasn't the language for me.

</comment><comment><USER23> I play around with this a bit, a few things I learned is that XCode 5.0's llvm crashes when compiling Gambit-C 4.7.0's generated C code. The beta for 5.1 has a fix. Here are a few demos that might help a few people:

scheme REPL over TCP using chibi scheme: [https://github.com/clarkeaa/Scheme_iOS_REPL](https://github.com/clarkeaa/Scheme_iOS_REPL)

calling in and out of Gambit-C: [https://github.com/clarkeaa/HelloGambit](https://github.com/clarkeaa/HelloGambit)

You can grab a precompiled Gambit-C library from the later project if you want.

</comment><comment><USER24> I just downloaded the game. Very cool! I wish I has written it... oh wait... given that I wrote Gambit, in a sense I wrote most of the game! It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling!

Your in game REPL is neat. For developing games, where there's a need to explore variations quickly, it is a powerful tool. I'm currently working on a remote REPL for Gambit-JS, so that you can remotely debug Scheme code (possibly games) running in the browser.

</comment><comment><USER25> It's truly inspiring to see a project like this completed. I've been wanting to combine mobile (specifically Android) and some sort of Lisp dialect for a while.

Am I interpreting correctly from some of the other components that doing the programming in a language-once-removed (ie Scheme instead of Obj-C) opens an easier path to compiling for both iOS and Android?

<comment><AUTHOR> That was part of my motivation for using Scheme, yes. Many indie developers are using the Unity engine which can compile to many different targets. (But that uses C# as far as I know.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I am so jealous and incredibly happy that you shipped - nice work. I wish I could do that as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! No time like the present to start. Just do your best and then keep redefining what your best is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Very cool! I always like seeing when something is built using a typically non- traditional language for the environment. I downloaded the game to see how well it performed, and I gotta say, it's a lot of fun. Great job!

</comment><comment><USER28> Just downloaded and tried the app. Simple and elegant, very good work!

</comment><comment><USER29> Wow, I've been thinking about this a lot lately. I would pay for a good series of tutorials or an ebook on this topic maybe implementing something well known like Tetris etc.

</comment><comment><USER30> It shows how spoiled I am that I expected a github link.

</comment><comment><USER31> Nice work! I think I played ultimate with you this past summer, and we talked about this on the way to a game.

<comment><USER32> OT but what is ultimate?

<comment><USER33> a frisbee based game:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_(sport)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_\(sport\))

my college football team played it as a spring sport during "optional" workouts and it was brutal. Like rugby, only with a forward pass.

<comment><USER20> FWIW, OP has also made an Ultimate Frisbee game for iOS, sponsored by Major League Ultimate, the biggest professional Ultimate Frisbee league going:

[http://asivitz.com/champ_ultimate/index](http://asivitz.com/champ_ultimate/index)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> great work :) congrats

<comment><AUTHOR> thank you!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: About choosing a job - <AUTHOR>

Hi, I'm currently looking for a job that suits me. My goal is to be a startup founder but I've some difficulties right now:
1) I don't have friends who want to do the same. 2) I'm a inexperienced programmer(actually learning Python/Django). 3) I don't know people with the same interests.
So I think a good job for me will be the one that helps me with the difficulties I've right now. I'm looking for Python/Django jr developers but in Buenos Aires there aren't too much places using the Python programming language.
Now I'm looking for an alternative. I don't know if a job in which I'll have to program in another language like Java, PHP, C# could help me in my goal. <comment><USER2> So you're an inexperienced (but learning) programmer. Clearly you're interested in programming, and want to improve.

What skills do you already have? What training do you have? What are you interesting in? If an employer had an opening, what could you do for them? Describe the ideal job, not in terms of what it can teach you, but in terms of how it will make best use of your current skills and abilities.

Unless you offer something, no one will buy. If I were an employer, what could you do for me? If you answer that you might be able to find someone who will employ you, and provide an opportunity for you to learn and grow.

</comment><comment><USER3> "2) I'm a inexperienced programmer(actually learning Python/Django)"

and

"that helps me with the difficulties I've right now"

I think a job is to help the company with difficulties they have and not difficulties YOU have.

Or for what do they pay you?

<comment> daniel-cussen Well, you clearly have to drag your weight in any job, but I think what would be best for him is a job that offers learning and a community as part of the range of benefits that any job provides.</comment></comment>


Chrome plugin that adds a laugh track to all videos - <AUTHOR> https://labs.earthpeople.se/2019/02/make-all-videos-fun-to-watch/ <comment><USER2> Is there an inverse mode where it removes the laugh track?

<comment><USER3> For the big bang theory?

<comment><USER4> Not really an improvement. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKS3MGriZcs)

<comment><USER3> Hahaha, cool. But I guess the cringe would be less if they didn't wait for the inaudible laughing to be over...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Awesome hack! Thank you for arranging the stupid hackathon edition in Sweden (participated the first time).

<comment><USER6> I really want to organize one of these where I live, but I'm afraid nobody would come. This is the sort of stuff that I love doing, and this really is a great hack.

<comment><AUTHOR> developer/organizer here. hi! arranging a stupid hackathon is almost too easy, and loads of fun. attendees are usually very forgiving and happy, and if something fails it is stupid and therefor on brand. i make them annually in sweden, and this was year no3. fantastic experience.

<comment><USER6> Thanks for the info! Unfortunately the tech community where I am has shrunk to almost nothing due to the recession, so I don't think there would be enough people joining :(

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Laugh tracks are a clear sign to me that humanity is not as evolved as we think we are. Add butt implants to that.

<comment><USER8> I think the opposite. The effectiveness of laugh tracks make it very clear how social we are. Even when we are doing something in isolation (like watching tv), we want to be part of a group.

I'm with you on butt implants though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> For me this is pure torture.

<comment><USER10> This is my nightmare. Laugh tracks are one of the most obnoxious sound additions to any piece of media, to me. If the situation is supposed to be funny, it should be self evident, and should no require some additional cue. Conversely, if something is not funny, the laugh track sounds forced, and it creates a really unpleasant viewing experience for me.

<comment><USER11> In fairness, often "laugh tracks" are actually live studio audiences (eg Big Bang Theory) and much like how live concert recordings (where you can hear the crowd) are sometimes great when it's a good concert, hearing the studio audience _can_ improve you're experience of a genuinely funny TV show. The problem is when it's artificially added or you hear it on a show you don't find funny; then it goes from being a subtle improvement to a massively jarring distraction.

However given how jarring it is when you don't find something funny compared with how little it adds to the overall comedy, I can totally understand why people often hate hearing laughter in shows.

<comment><USER10> My understanding of the live studio audiences is that they prompt the laughter. Is that correct? If so, the audience laughing at the jokes is just an illusion, even if genuine.

<comment><USER11> Depends on the show. Some do but some don't. However even ones without a laughter prompt will usually have a compere / warm up acts who will whip the audience up so they're already laughing at jokes before the main show begins recording.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I used it on the annus horribilis speech, and now I feel bad...

</comment><comment><USER13> I know it was just posted but 0 reviews and it being able to "read and change all your data on websites you visit" is a bit much

<comment><AUTHOR> hai! developer here. uploaded it this weekend during a hackathon. the permissions are absurd, but my sleepy head couldn't figure out how limit the permissions yo youtube only.

<comment><USER14> I made a chrome extension a good while back that only ran on Facebook, I assume it still works. Here's the link if it helps: [https://github.com/JamieFarrelly/zuckerberg- reactions/blob/m...](https://github.com/JamieFarrelly/zuckerberg- reactions/blob/master/manifest.json)

<comment><AUTHOR> cheers, will check!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Pretty cool, how does it work?

<comment><AUTHOR> it just listens for silence and cues some audio files in the background. it works most of the time, but could definately be improved.

</comment></comment><comment> onion-soup why? can we let laugh track die off in peace? it belongs to museum of cinematography.</comment>


Ask HN: Dual monitors, or single 4k? - <AUTHOR> I currently have a single 29" LCD monitor which I'm finding a bit cramped. More and more I find myself with multiple tiled windows, and I'm starting to feel that 1920x1080 pixels is not enough anymore.
I'm a coder by trade and hobby, don't really do any video or graphics stuff (the odd logo in Photoshop)
I'm trying to decide between getting a second 29" monitor, or a higher resolution and probably larger replacement screen. What's your setup? Which do you prefer? Is your average 4k TV good enough to work as a Desktop monitor? <comment><USER2> I think multiple monitors is still better than one no matter the resolution, I personally run 3 monitors, and when working I have the one on the right always on email/chat, the one on the left switching between terminals and firefox, and the one in the middle on emacs or intellij depending on language.

With i3 I have keyboard shortcuts to move the focus to any monitor and/or to change workspace in any of them and/or to move windows between them, this seems more usable than a single monitor no matter what the resolution of it is.

If money was no object I think the best setup would be a 40" 4k in the middle, a 27" 1440p portrait on one side, and a 27" 1440p landscape on the other side, but I would rather have 3x27" than 1x40" any day of the week (and the 27" to be 1440p not to have to deal with scaling)

<comment><USER3> With a good tiling window manager (not osx or windows) you can do that kind of spatial separation of concerns on a big 4k, (curved if you aren't doing any kind of graphics work).

<comment><USER4> Unclear from your description as to whether you would think it sufficient, but Divvy ([http://mizage.com/divvy/](http://mizage.com/divvy/)) does a good job of spatial window management on macOS.

<comment><USER5> Wondering if you had tried Moom as well? I ended up on it without much research a few years ago and feel it might be a bit lacking..

<comment><USER4> I have not, sorry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have a 4k 40" curved Samsung HDTV as my monitor, the UN40JU6700.

In terms of dimensions, it is physically less wide than the 2 24" 1080p monitors I had before while having 4 times the resolution. It's also a similar width and horizontal resolution to the 34" ultrawides that are on the market now but significantly cheaper. The DPI is similar to a 27" 1440p monitor, which might be tiny if you're coming from 29" 1080p.

I highly recommend using this DPI calculator to find a pixel size that's comfortable for you: [https://www.sven.de/dpi/](https://www.sven.de/dpi/)

My workflow has definitely improved. I normally work with 2 terminals side by side, but now I have 3 terminals or 2 terminals and a browser window. There's no bezel in the middle to ruin that center terminal.

I keep my main applications along the bottom 1300 pixels or so with email/music/monitoring along the top.

Virtual machines and laptop connections are significantly less finicky because there is only one large display to configure.

The only negative to this setup is that the Samsung is definitely a television. I need to turn it manually on whenever I wake my computer and DPMS sleep doesn't take effect immediately.

On the other hand, I got rid of my speakers and now use HDMI audio instead.

Finally, if you're getting an HDTV, make sure your computer is compatible with HDMI 2 and the television supports 4:4:4 color. You want 4k@60Hz via HDMI 2 and 4:4:4 ensures your text isn't blurry.

RTINGS is invaluable for finding a TV with the right color input and latencies: [http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc- monitor/best](http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-usage/pc-monitor/best)

<comment><USER7> What kind of input lag do you get with that setup?

<comment><USER6> It's something like 20ms after a firmware update last year.

You need a GTX1080 to render games at 60fps and even then it's a struggle for more modern ones.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For me, dual monitors are a must. Just my preference. I cannot work with a single monitor no matter what the resolution is.

One advantage of dual monitors is that if you ever have to do screen sharing, you can quickly hide anything on the other monitor that you don't want your clients to see while still being able to refer to it. Same goes if you are recording your screen/screecasting.

</comment><comment><USER5> A few data points from a text/code/web based user..

\- The most productive I've been has been using 3 monitors, 1 for messaging/research, middle screen for working, and right screen for testing/launching, etc.

Consider if you have an eyeglass prescription the amount of strain you may experience with any monitor size, pixel size, etc. The higher the prescription, astigmatism, etc, the more factors you may have to consider.

\- Currently use 27" Asus at 1440p for the past few years. It was a big jump at the time but now I'm used to it and want more space. Tilts, pivots, so I got two to put them side by side. Not ideal, or bad either. The issue is the screen area, and how low and high you are able to look comfortably and productively.

\- Have a friend who got a Philips 40" 4K and said it was too big in terms of the area you can look at without having to pivot your head a lot. Users with a 40'\+ 4K monitor report a border of the screen around the outside that is not actively usable without for work but may be useful for other things like IM, etc.

\- Asus has come out with a 31.5" monitor at 1440p that might be interesting to you depending on your needs and eyeglass prescription.

\- Currently considering at one 33 to 38" 4K screen.

In some ways the three 19" 4:3 monitors I ran 10 years ago at 1200x1024 remain the perfect balance between size and productivity, although it only.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've used 1 27" 1440p monitor for quite a while. When combined with a laptop display, it gives me plenty of screen real estate. I typically split the 1440p display into 4 tiles (1280x720) using SizeUp.

Recently, I've been using a 27" 4K display at work. I mostly just run it in HiDPI 1440p (or one or two notches higher than 1440p). It looks prettier, but is functionally equivalent to a 27" 1440p.

I've found that displays larger than 30" require me to turn my head, which is non-optimal. Ultrawide monitors are especially bad (tried a 34" curved Samsung for a little while). Ditto for multiple 27" monitors.

<comment><USER10> Recently I switched to a single 27" 2560x1440 monitor as well.

Before that, I was using two old matching 20" 4:3 monitors, one in 1600x1200 configuration, and the secondary one in portrait 1200x1600.

Sometimes I miss being able to easily throw something over onto the second monitor, and the total screen real estate is a little less overall, but generally windows-key + arrow snapping gets the job done pretty well when I need to see two things at once.

Talking to some other devs where I work though (many of us work remotely), a lot have two or even _three_ 27" monitors. I hardly even have the desk space for that... unless I stacked them vertically maybe.

<comment><USER11> > I hardly even have the desk space for that

I'd suggest you buy monitor arms. They really save a lot of space and make your setup way more ergonomic. I use 3 of these:

[https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00358RIRC](https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B00358RIRC)

They also have dual-arms.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, I could make it work somehow if I really want to. Has anyone here tried two monitors vertically like this?

[http://i.imgur.com/TY9km4h.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/TY9km4h.jpg)

I don't look at a secondary monitor nearly as much as my primary so I feel like it could work, and I like that it's not super wide like dual widescreens, but I also know it could be terrible for your neck.

<comment><USER12> It wouldn't work that way. Bottom monitor needs to be higher for the well being of your neck and then, top monitor would be too high. I can't see this working long term.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've had 40' 4k for about 3 years, it's awesome. I had to mess around with setup because larger screen changed way I worked with stuff. But man, i can see from column A to EP and around 400 pdf pages (really small text).

[http://imgur.com/a/kPRzq](http://imgur.com/a/kPRzq) ^ eventually what i settled on, use 1920 as primary and if working on something would go on bigger.

23 Left Dell (emails, windows I'm not ready to close) 40 seiki ( excel, factset/bloomberg, chrome) 23 center hp (word, typing emails, reports) 23 right hp (xplorer2, network,file related)

<comment><USER14> Yup ive had a 39in 4k monitor for 4 yrs and its amazing. no black bar breaking up visual flow. no multiple cables going into the comp. no issues with widescreen or vertical layouts. no calibration issues between screens.

the only change i'd make is to get a curved 39in 4k monitor.

<comment><USER5> Do you find you're able to look at, and use the edges of your monitor? If you don't mind sharing the make and model of your current monitor that'd be great, thanks

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> 4k is a mistake for computers. It sounds nice in theory but was implemented wrong by the manufacturers. The typical 28" 4k monitor at native resolution ends up having on-screen elements that are just too small for daily use, and the pixel density isn't high enough to do the scaling tricks like Apple. Scaling on Windows and Linux is, at best, "enough to be annoying". And applying it to a laptop at 2x scaling causes everything to be too small.

I'm still using an Apple 27" Cinema display - it's not _4k_ but it's great having 2560x1440. I wouldn't mind the PPI being a bit higher, maybe 25" would be the sweet spot for that resolution.

I would not want dual 27" monitors, however - it's just too much sweeping your head back and forth, plus you'd need a lot of desk space. Dual 22" monitors at 1080p feels cramped vertically.

I think my ideal setup would be 3840x1440 on a 32" curved display. Small enough to be manageable on a desk, no scaling to deal with, you don't need crazy graphics hardware to push it...

<comment><USER16> 5K gives you the right resolution to scale. The Dell UP2715K [1] is supposed to be good, though expenisve. At 5120ˣ2880, you can run it at 2x, which gives you 2560ˣ1440, same as the 27''.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Dell-210-ADRZ-DELL-UltraSharp- UP2715K...](https://www.amazon.com/Dell-210-ADRZ-DELL-UltraSharp- UP2715K/dp/B00R420SU4/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm using a single 32" 4K monitor and it's perfect. Just the right size. I personally don't like using multiple displays, you want to have one centered which means the other one is too far away. Also, two widescreens is just too wide.

One benefit of having two displays is obviously having two logical displays, which can be useful sometimes. e.g. for fullscreening a video.

<comment><USER18> Also using a single 32" 4k screen and think it's perfect. I had 2 different 4k 40" over the years, seiki (thought I could get over the 30Hz, I couldn't) and a Philips (colors, ghosting, viewing angles were all wrong). I found the ~110DPI nice because it matched my previous setup 21" (rotated, 1080p) and 27" (1440p), but after I used a dell laptop at ~165dpi I considered 4k screens in the low 30" range.

Usual flow is split into 3 sections. website/documentation on the right half, emacs on the left upper, video/chat/email on the left lower.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I use dual 27" 4K monitors, which I think is the perfect compromise.

<comment><USER20> Nice! Sounds like all that compromised there, was the wallet. ;)

<comment><USER21> It's actually not that expensive to get dual 27 @4k vs. a single very large format (32+) 4k if you hunt around for deals.

I bought a two LG 27UD680-P for 350 USD each last month over a single BenQ BL3201PH 32 which was about 800 USD at the time.

<comment><USER19> I did the exact same thing. It seems reasonable to spend $700 on the major interface you have with your computer. I also expect these monitors to last about 10 years.

<comment><USER20> I totally agree, I was just yanking your chain. :)

I made a similar decision to yours last year and am currently on a 5K 27" \+ 4K 27" setup myself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I have two setups: one large single monitor, and one dual setup.

I had always thought that the multi setup was better, but have found over the years that it's only better at certain things (for me). I've found the single monitor setup better for tasks that need focus. Full screen apps (or nicely tiled sets of apps) for single task work well on one larger monitor. This fits writing, initial coding of modules, visual design, and reading dense material.

The multi monitor setup is great for tasks that require many views, especially collaboration, research, and projects with many reference materials.

I would love a desk that let me switch between the two, or windowing software that made it trivial to get to a focus mode that disabled the extra monitors when I needed extra attention. Those times where focus is important, I find the extra monitors, light, and visual noise distracting more than seems logical.

</comment><comment><USER23> 4k is awesome! But for higher picture quality, not for more screen estate. I find high DPI screens with activated scaling a lot less stressful to read on because of the smoother fonts.

4k on a > 32" screen won't have that advantage, DPI would be more or less like smaller screens but with a lot more screen estate. I personally wouldn't prefer that, as I already have found 30" screens slightly too big to work on - in the end I always looked only at small portions of the screen with my head turned in an akward way. 27" 4k works great for me. 2x 24" 4k might also be a great setup for some people. I personally prefer a single monitor for most tasks, because with 2 monitors at least one will always be badly aligned with the seating position.

</comment><comment><USER24> I'm running a curved 48" 4k TV and absolutely love it. I have enough room to fit all of my windows, and the text isn't microscopic.

If you get a TV make sure it will do 4:4:4 chroma and 60hz over its interface (HDMI 2.0). You'll probably also need a DP to HDMI 2.0 dongle as well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Two people have mentioned this now, great point. Something I hadn't even considered

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> For me my 34" curved display (3440 x 1440) works perfectly fine. Switched from one 29" (horizontal) and a second 24" (vertical) display.

<comment><USER26> My main display is the same resolution. I absolutely love it, and rarely feel like I'm wanting for space.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I have a 4k monitor, and it's really not much different than a 1440p monitor in terms of real estate because of the UI scaling...so I ended up getting a second 1440p monitor which I use in portrait mode. Portrait mode really is pretty amazing for reading code.

</comment><comment><USER16> Have you tried an ultrawide? I have this one [1] at work, and it's a lot like having two monitors.

(It's wasted on me, though. I like looking straight ahead, so I keep everything visually centered, and I find that putting stuff in the margins is just distracting clutter. I've never understood the appeal of tiling window managers or of filling a screen with lots of noisy background activity. It's nice if you need to display something super wide, however, like a diff or some complex log output.)

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PXYRMPE](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00PXYRMPE)

<comment><USER28> How do you like it? Also, any chance you do any photo editing on it?

On Thursday I almost bought a Dell U3417W[0] but I chickened at the last minute because I haven't been able to find much information on curved monitors and photo editing. Some people claim it's an issue, others claim that it's a fine and that it doesn't skew images.

The other one that I was looking at was the LG-34UC98-W (because Thunderbolt 2.0) but I read several reviews mentioning severe ghosting issues.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.com/Dell-FR3PK-34-Inch-Led-Lit- Monitor/dp...](https://www.amazon.com/Dell-FR3PK-34-Inch-Led-Lit- Monitor/dp/B01IOO4TIM)

[1]: [https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC98-W-34-Inch-UltraWide- Thunder...](https://www.amazon.com/LG-34UC98-W-34-Inch-UltraWide- Thunderbolt/dp/B019O78DPS)

<comment><USER16> It's a good monitor, although it's not as bright as the Apple Cinema Display (which I have at home). I occasionally find myself wanting to increase the brightness when the room itself is bright.

I don't do photo editing on it, and I doubt that the curvature (which is very slight and almost unnoticeeable) is a problem; but I imagine the lack of brightness might be.

The width provides almost no utility for development (for me); I keep windows centered and only very rarely do I put stuff in the periphery. In apps like Photoshop, Illustrator and Lightroom do I find that there's a large benefit. With Chrome it's also wide enough that you can keep the browser side by side with the dev tools, which is nice.

I'd much rather have a "Retina Display" monitor. The Dell 5K looks great.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Single monitor with as few windows open simultaneously as possible. Where some seem to find value in having multiple things visible at once, I find value in having those things hidden.

</comment><comment><USER30> Programming with or without WYSIWIG?

Before you shell out more money, are you sure the problem cannot be solved by better keybinds and/or a better UI?

A TV has lower refresh rate and higher ms thereby increasing input lag. This is especially annoying during gaming.

I use a 15,4" MBP with 2880 x 1800 resolution. Without the keybinds I use it'd be a hell though.

On work we use 3x 27" monitors. But I could easily work with two (due to WYSIWYG) or one (if no WYSIWYG).

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know if we think WYSIWYG is the same thing or not, but if working on presentation I'll have source, browser and maybe a terminal, and maybe dev console open. That's 4 windows. I don't use a WYSIWYG editor though.

Not interested in gaming, I used to be but now I have no time for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> I use Linux and a window manager with 10 virtual desktops/workspaces, keyboard shortcuts let me instantly jump to or scroll through them.

That said, I've never understood the need for multiple physical monitors. Maybe someone can explain a few advantages of using more than 1 monitor vs a single with multiple workspaces?

<comment><USER19> I can have a big IDE open will simultaneously having a terminal and web browser open to a website that helps with what I'm working on in the IDE. Can't really do that with one monitor, even with one desktop. It's worth it, absolutely, for me. Whatever works for you though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I'm using a Philips BDM4065UC at home. It's just under 40", 4K at 60hz. This gives you the same pixel density as a "normal" 27" monitor, but with far more space. I prefer it over smaller dual monitors, and feel no need for more screen space.

And yes, this is an actual monitor, not a TV.

</comment><comment><USER33> 27" 5k is the way to go

<comment><USER34> Agreed 100%. Just got a new Mac setup (MBP w/ Touchbar and 27" LG Ultrafine 5k). Single cable that carries video, power, data is epic.

You _can_ scale the UI, but the monitor just so pleasant at 1/4 effective res. Embrace cmd + tab. And tmux.

<comment><USER19> Would you prefer using two of those 5k monitors? I'm curious. I bought two nice LG 4k monitors for less than the price of one of those 5k monitors, and I'm pretty happy with my workflow now. Admittedly, it's a two-cable situation.

<comment><USER35> I've got one of the LG 5K monitors being delivered tomorrow and I'm worried I'll end up wanting a second one... guess we'll find out soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Just a different perspective - Depends on what you do. Personally I use a browser and some xterms -- that's it for the most part.

I have a 27" 1920x1080 at home and it's terrible. I usually use less than 60% of the available screen estate for displaying things. It's much too large (have to move my head from left to right inconveniently because my window manager places windows across the whole screen) and too much light is hitting my eyes from the unused areas.

At work I have a single 19" 5:4 1280x1024 LCD screen with ok colors / good contrast and I love it - just the right size. I use default keyboard shortcuts for window and workspace switching (it's mostly either browser or two vertically maximized xterms), works perfectly for me.

</comment><comment><USER37> I have a Samsung 32 inch 1440p monitor and a Dell 24 inch 1080p monitor aligned vertically. The Samsung is my main workspace, and I use a tiling WM as well. I use the vertical Dell for email and instant messaging, so they're always visible.

This setup is the most ergonomic I've found yet. I don't have as much "watching tennis" neck that you can get with dual large monitors.

[http://a.co/e30DgDl](http://a.co/e30DgDl) [http://a.co/eS1boKR](http://a.co/eS1boKR)

</comment><comment><USER38> I find a 40 inch 4k monitor perfect to code on.

4k@40" offers about the same ppi as a 27" at 1440p if scaling 1:1. So about the ideal text size imo, and obviously plenty of space to spread your code out.

Its also easy to work off completely one side while doing something unrelated in the other - atm I have a twitch stream and a browser on one side and an IDE on the other where I'm casually coding. Splitting the screens like this give you a better aspect ratio to read off than having 2 smaller monitors.

<comment><USER39> Which model do you use?

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> my setup: [https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/doupe.jpg](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/doupe.jpg)

      middle: 5K, iMac (mid 2015)
      left: 4K, 27" Dell P2715Q
      right: old Apple Cinema LED Display 27"
      mid-bottom-left: iPhone 5s, for testing
      mid-bottom-right: iPad Air, for testing, sometimes TweetDeck/HipChat with DuetDisplay

I think 5K iMac can drive 5K, plus two external 4K displays at full speed without issues

edit: also note that all the displays are 27", so they naturally fit side-by- side, that seems to be a detail, but it is quite important for seamless mouse movement (aligned virtual desktops). Even if physical pixel densities are not the same, all displays have the same virtual size: see [https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/aligned- displays....](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/559047/aligned- displays.png).

And the keyboard: [http://www.daskeyboard.com](http://www.daskeyboard.com), also highly recommended for a developer.

<comment><USER23> How would you compare the 5k screen vs the P2715? I have the latter at work and I find the picture quality (color, contrast) great. And dpi is also fairly good. Is the 5k noticably better?

PS: I personally wouldn't like that setup, too much lighting from all sides. But if it works for you it's certainly cool.

<comment><USER40> Any difference is barely noticeable to my eye. Even having them side-by-side with the same default macOS Sierra background does not feel like two different displays. Even if I try hard and focus on specific details the quality, color, contrast look the same to me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I use two 30" monitors at work and a single 27" iMac (running Linux) at home.

If work is buying then I'd get two monitors. If I'm paying then I'm fine with one, assuming it's 25+ inches and high resolution.

The extra screen space is nice, but not so much to justify the extra cost and the extra desk space. IMO a good window manger can make a single large screen almost as nice as two medium or large screens.

</comment><comment><USER42> For me it highly depends on the task - but I usually prefer 2 screens, even if the 2nd is smaller (like for example 27" \+ 12.5" laptop). But I am so used to having my IDE as big as possible (and splitting inside) with a 2nd screen for a browser, or shell) Only had one monitor at home as well for two weeks and absolutely hated it (having gotten used to 2 screens for the last.. 15? years)

</comment><comment><USER43> I have 4 monitors: laptop 14" screen plus 3 22" monitors. One of them is mounted vertically: perfect for Slack or longer pieces of code. I love this set up. You can find the monitors for cheap and it's much more flexible than just one TV. Additionally, I can rotate them so each is at a perfect angle for my eyes; can't do that with just one big TV.

</comment><comment><USER34> I have a question for those that require multiple monitors.

Is your workflow severely impaired when on a laptop alone? I.e. in a coffee shop?

<comment><USER2> I cannot do any serious coding on a laptop, it's just too small. It's fine if I am traveling and have to debug something but otherwise no way, I've always needed large screens to get things done.

Some of my coworkers code in 80x40 windows and are totally fine with a single 25" 1080p screen, I have no idea how they manage honestly: I've run dual monitors since forever (running two physical video cards, before dualhead was available) and lately I find myself more productive on 3 screens at home rather than 2 at work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> 3x1920:1200 in PLL.

I tried working with a single high res screen and went back, my mental model just fits 3 screens better.

<comment><USER5> It's too bad 4:3 or other more square ratio monitors aren't as easily available. I think I might be a 3 screen mental model guy as well.

<comment><USER45> Can still get Dell 2007FPs on eBay; I find a good set-up is 1920x1200 centre with 1600x1200s to both left and right (for linux, all driven by a single nvidia card nowadays).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> A single 27" WQHD(1440p) goes a very long way. I used to be 3 23" monitor person, but once I saw I can have all that context on one monitor without having to swivel my head around constantly I was hooked. I aim to be like the chicken in that one Mercedes commercial now.

</comment><comment><USER47> Single monitor with Pytyle (window manager) + Debian Crunchbang/BunsenLabs. This distro uses Openbox by default, but I turn off the window decorations = more usable pixels. Occasionally use Terminator and Byobu to further subdivide, depending on what I'm doing.

</comment><comment><USER48> I've got three monitors at work and one 4K TV as a monitor at home. When I switch from the work setup to the home setup, it feels a bit limiting for programming, but it's better for gaming, etc.

</comment><comment><USER49> At work I have iMac 5k and extra 4k 27" dell monitor. It works great. At home almost same setup, but 1080p 27" dell monitor. Not a huge difference. But two monitors is bare minimum for me.

</comment><comment><USER50> Hi, monitor nerd here. The two key things I keep an eye on when it comes to monitors, are to get as many full-size (1080p or "1200p") working spaces as possible, and to retain a pixel pitch (will abbreviate "pp", aka dot pitch) within roughly 0,25 to 0,27 mm. That's the pixel "size" at which I find text easy to read and UI elements easy to use, at the viewing distance I personally like to have to my monitor. It means I don't have to rely on/fiddle with the UI scaling in each OS/VM, I get no mid-pixel text AA problems, and I'm only paying for pixels that I can use and see.

As a result of this, I personally wouldn't buy a 4k monitor/TV that is smaller than 43 inches. Which is huge! And awesome, because 4k at a usable pp gets you four full-size working spaces. I can highly recommend a 43-inch monitor with 4k resolution (pp ~ 0,25 mm). It boosts productivity in a great way.

There are a new set of formats called ultra-wide, or UW. The idea is to have two full-size working spaces side-by-side in one monitor (or three narrow ones), which would be a good option too for multitasking without looking at black monitor edges. Starting with 1440p UW, I could recommend this in a 38-inch monitor if you want loads of vertical space, but there are no such products available. As for the next step down (1200p UW), this would be great but there are no products available in this category. Lastly, as for 1080p UW, I would choose two 1920x1200 displays instead to get more vertical working space.

The next step down in monitor size, while retaining my personal favourite pp, would be one of the 1440p monitors at 31,5 or 32 inches (pp ~0,27/ mm). This is a good choice if it's important with loads of vertical space, but I wouldn't expect to be able to put 720 pixels x 2 to good practical use - i.e. this wouldn't give me four usable working spaces. I know however that a lot of people like to use this screen setup with three working spaces (one large, one tall and one wide). However, for many creative tasks, a good amount of vertical space is crucial.

As for multi-monitor solutions, a popular and sensible choice (to me) is X number of 24-inch monitors at 1920x1200 (pp ~0,27 mm). With monitor arms, this can work with anything from one to six monitors (two rows of three) which can be good from a future-proof perspective. Buy one, upgrade with another on your birthday, buy a third on Black Friday, a fourth when you're sad-shopping, a fifth when happy-shopping and the last one while really drunk. Just an example.

I'd like to point out that these are my personal preferences, and roughly estimated. For instance, I could probably go with a 40" 4k monitor if I just sat a little closer. But I've actually tried this and didn't like it. I also want to point out that if you have no problems with the OS UI scaling or if you like the 0,23 mm pp more, then the above advice can be adjusted to a warm recommendation of the 34-inch 1400p UW monitors. They are great for you. But I do recommend getting terminal glasses if you're not scaling text and read on a 0,23 mm pp monitor! Additionally, if you also would like to spend some money on really smooth text, I would recommend 2X products such as 4k on 24-inch monitors as they are... really smooth. Just keep in mind that it will cost you more, require a more powerful computer and limit you in terms of the number of monitors you can setup. Note that 27" and 5k makes no sense to me, I would go with 32 inches for 5k, as it's 2X to ~0,27 mm. But again, if you like the 0,23 mm pp more, then go for it!

</comment><comment><USER51> I am soon going to upgrade to 3x 24" 4k displays in portrait mode. I used 3x22" 1650x1050 for many years.

I love hiDPI on my mobile devices, and this is a best way for desktop.

</comment><comment><USER52> Múltiples 8k monitors. And a video card from the future.</comment>


The Epic Story of Dropbox's Exodus from the Amazon Cloud Empire - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2016/03/epic-story-dropboxs-exodus-amazon-cloud-empire/?mbid=social_twitter <comment><USER2> The article says: "Transferring four petabytes of data, it turned out, took about a day."

Quite a feat - How did they manage to get 4 PB from S3 in a day, over the internet?

<comment><USER3> I honestly expect that they wouldn't have used the Internet to transfer a volume that large.

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes" and all that sort of thing.</comment></comment>


Britain's biggest crowdfunding failure is accused of misleading investors - <AUTHOR> http://uk.businessinsider.com/rebus-accused-of-misleading-investors-on-crowdcube-pitch-2016-4 <comment><USER2> I still don't know how I feel about crowdfunding. Is it a great way to give non-accredited investors access to more investment opportunities. Or is it a way to part more suckers from their money?

Would it be easier to just change the accredited investor rules?</comment>


Anders Hejlsberg and Lars Bak: TypeScript, JavaScript, and Dart - <AUTHOR> http://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Anders-Hejlsberg-and-Lars-Bak-TypeScript-JavaScript-and-Dart Lars Bak: To contrast these two languages, TypeScript is a safe bet... where Dart is trying to change some of the fundamental issues with JavaScript. I feel, from a computer science background, I still have problems that you can design applications with libraries where you can monkey patch the libraries when you get up running. I find that very, very disturbing when you are trying to write big applications. [with TypeScript] you end up in the same mess.
Anders Hejlsberg: Everything you say and more I will agree with. The question is not whether JavaScript is broken. The question is whether it is broken enough to merit being replaced by something else. <comment><AUTHOR> Lars Bak: _To contrast these two languages, TypeScript is a safe bet... where Dart is trying to change some of the fundamental issues with JavaScript. I feel, from a computer science background, I still have problems that you can design applications with libraries where you can monkey patch the libraries when you get up running. I find that very, very disturbing when you are trying to write big applications. [with TypeScript] you end up in the same mess._

Anders Hejlsberg: _Everything you say and more I will agree with. The question is not whether JavaScript is broken. The question is whether it is broken enough to merit being replaced by something else._

</comment><comment><USER2> TypeScript is what Google Closure Compiler should have been; Closure's static typing is similar but is much more tedious (you need to type 16 characters just to declare an int! [https://developers.google.com/closure/compiler/docs/js- for-c...](https://developers.google.com/closure/compiler/docs/js-for- compiler)). I'm disappointed that nobody from Google Closure has stepped up to unify TypeScript and Closure's syntax and to provide better tooling.

</comment><comment><USER3> Can anyone explain what the difference between TypeScript and ECMAScript 4 are? I know ECMAScript 4 was abandoned for some reason, but from the few examples I've seen of Typescript it looks very similar. Did the js community just need a few more years to come around to the ideas?

<comment><USER4> ECMAScript 4 was implemented in ActionScript 3[1]; a very nice language to work with IMHO. The members of the ECMAScript steering group launched into a public fracas on their respective blogs[2] which eventually ended in the draft being canned, despite the fact both ActionScript and Silverlight were already based on the standard... shame.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ActionScript#ActionScript_3.0>

[2] [http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2007/10/30/ecmascript-3-a...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2007/10/30/ecmascript-3-and- beyond.aspx#5788577)

<comment><USER5>
        >    The second system syndrome is that evil effect that often happens when redesign a small, working system so that it becomes a huge leviathan built by piling new features over new features.

        >    Today I was reading the overview of ECMASCript 4 from ecmascript.org, and I got this very bad feeling that maybe the fourth version of ES, is suffering of an extremely strong case of this problem.

I dont know who is that guy , but what a load of cr*p ... it's people like him that got us stuck with what is javascript today. People often complain that Flash prevented Javascript from being widely adopted , the truth is that Macromedia/Adobe tried to push a better Javascript that would have helped the language then and today.

Imagine we had ES4 and HTML5 today. Nobody would be complaining about how much javascript sucks , and there would be no need for typescript, coffeescript ,etc ...

<comment><USER6> actually, it's my words[0] :)

I wrote it many years ago, but if you think it's wrong I'd be happy to understand why.

I have never been against Flash nor ActionScript(which I don't know enough to criticize) but my understanding was that ES4 was vastly more complex than even AS ever was, rather than being an incremental change as ES6 is.

And please note I wrote

""" ECMAScript 4 seems cool, I want to use a lot of those things (yay for multi method dispatch!), but maybe it is changing the language a little bit too much . """

And I wish I could influence what the dev world does, but I believe it is unlikely.

[0] [http://www.riffraff.info/2007/10/25/ecmascript-4-the- fourth-...](http://www.riffraff.info/2007/10/25/ecmascript-4-the-fourth- system-syndrome)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I feel like Dart's emphasis on a fast but chrome-only vm has hindered it's adoption. I understand their goal, unlike most compile-to-js languages, was a language more amenable to fast implementation. However, I think the initial community reaction would have been more positive if Dart was positioned first as a language that compiled to js, with the added benefit that it runs significantly faster on Chrome.

<comment><USER8> > I feel like Dart's emphasis on a fast but chrome-only vm has hindered it's > adoption.

Dart's VM isn't Chrome-only, its open source, and available both standalone and bundled into Chromium.

> However, I think the initial community reaction would have been more > positive if Dart was positioned first as a language that compiled to js, > with the added benefit that it runs significantly faster on Chrome.

Reaction might have been more positive in the short run if it was sold as a on-top-of-JS language rather than part of a long-term plan to build something to replace (or complement) JS as a language for which browsers would have a a built-in, language-specific VM. However, I think that even if initial reaction might have been better with such a response, Google clearly did the right thing by being up front about their vision.

<comment><USER7> > Dart's VM isn't Chrome-only

I meant that dart is chrome-only in practice. I don't know of any other browser vendor that bundles the dart vm, including the few browsers based on chromium like rockmelt or 360.

> However, I think that even if initial reaction might have been better with > such a response, Google clearly did the right thing by being up front about > their vision.

I can appreciate Google's directness regarding Dart's intention. However, from a web developer's perspective, Dart's multiple backends is very unappealing. I hesitate to adopt even a language like clojurescript or coffeescript because of debugging barriers and potential bugs in the language's crevices (though these problems are diminishing with things like source map support).

<comment><USER9> Dart is Google's Silverlight.

<comment><AUTHOR> ActionScript/Flash and .NET/SilverLight require a plugin, with Dart the "plugin" is optional.

<comment><USER9> It's called the Dart Runtime which is not included in non Google browsers.

<comment><USER8> Except: 1\. The Dart VM isn't included in Google's generally-released browsers, either (it's included in Dartium, the special version of Chromium bundled with the Dart SDK). 2\. The Dart VM isn't a plug-in. 3\. As Dart compiles to JS, you don't need the Dart VM to run code developed with Dart, you just need a browser that supports JS.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Dart is great and I like how they are focusing on making it fast and creating a special VM for it (dartium, although it compiles to javascript, too). It's tempting to target a compiler to generate dart code, too, instead of javascript. But there is one deal breaker for me - dart can't compile locally in the browser (even a dartium one). It requires a server or else compiling off-line (same issue with Closure Compiler, too). You can't code a dart app on a chromebook, for example (unless you use remote desktop or install ubuntu on it). The future to me is doing all development work in the browser, and only connecting to the server for the server components or version control, like with c9.io and other browser-based IDEs. Even Eclipse has a browser-based version now - Orion.

It's not a huge deal - there are over a hundred alternative languages that compile to javascript out there now, many of which do support compiling in the browser: [https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of- lang...](https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-languages- that-compile-to-JS)

<comment><USER11> > dart can't compile locally in the browser

dart2js is written in Dart. There's some small amount of work needed to self- host it and run the result in a browser, mainly swapping out the file IO API with something that works on the web. I think multiple people on the team have slapped together working examples of this, so it's not a lot of work.

It isn't a high priority for the dart2js team right now, though, and they are very careful to avoid taking on responsibility for features or use cases that don't have solid tests. I think before too long, we will have a reliably self- hosted Dart->JS compiler that runs in a browser, we're just focused on other stuff for the moment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> It's a pretty smart move that Microsoft did with TypeScript, making it a proper superset of JavaScript. Google seems to be stuck in the past, bringing out its own VM that is a complete non-starter, and making another class-based, Java-like language. I guess Google is going down the road that Microsoft did years ago with flinging feces on the wall and see what sticks.

I have nothing against Dart. I played with it a year and a half ago when the Eclipse beta came out. It's nice tooling, but brings absolutely nothing interesting to the table.

<comment><USER13> Yesterday, I rewrote one of my JS modules into Dart, and it ended up being about 10 lines of code with only two modules imported. Then I compiled it to JS, and it was over 120k. I tried for about an hour to get that down to a reasonable size with Closure Compiler/Uglify, but the names were too wonky.

I'm sure that, given enough time, they'll solve these problems, but as for right now... it isn't ready for primetime. Not by a longshot.

<comment><AUTHOR> You don't say if you used the 'dart2js --minify' setting, but Closure Compiler should do well. The --minify flag leaves alot more room for additional minification. You say you used two modules. The result really depends on the modules. For example, the Dart/JS interop module adds about 140K un-minified. Tree shaking is always on, so the 140K is after stripping unused code. I initially jumped into Dart because I was interested in doing packaged apps that run locally, so the size over the wire didn't concern me as much. I recently converted an ActionScript app to Dart and the post-minify Dart was around the same size as the compiled .swf file (for comparison, same functionality)

Seth Ladd has a couple of posts about Tree Shaking and Minification if you're interested [http://blog.sethladd.com/2013/01/minification-is-not- enough-...](http://blog.sethladd.com/2013/01/minification-is-not-enough-you- need.html) [http://blog.sethladd.com/2013/03/i-shrunk-my-dart-to-js- code...](http://blog.sethladd.com/2013/03/i-shrunk-my-dart-to-js-code- by-11x-and.html)

<comment><USER13> > You don't say if you used the 'dart2js --minify' setting

I did. I'm no stranger to Closure Compiler, and even after fiddling around with ADVANCED_OPTIMIZATIONS for an hour, those ridiculous $variables persisted. What was even weirder was, just as a test, I imported a module I wasn't even using at all, and for some reason, Closure Compiler still refused to remove its code...

<comment><AUTHOR> Just for grins, I compiled the Dart app I'm working on now with --minify. It went from 530K to 240K. Then I cleared the --minify flag and used the Closure Compiler but it failed with errors. Not sure what is going on yet, but I don't think this is necessary or advisable -- I've never read of anyone using the Closure Compiler with Dart. Here is a sample few lines from --minify. It's fairly minimal.

function I(){} init() var $=I.p var $$={}

<comment><USER13> Okay, but um, why did minify not get rid of the module i wasn't even using?

<comment><AUTHOR> Just to be clear, here is what I did.

      Dart source -> dart2js -> JavaScript (530K)
      Dart source -> dart2js -> JavaScript (530K) -> Closure Compiler -> *error*
      Dart source -> dart2js --minify -> JavaScript (240K)

If I import a module and don't use it, such as 'dart:utf', the resulting JavaScript output size does not go up. If I call a function in dart:utf the JavaScript size goes up. If I stop calling the function, the size goes down. If I create a function but don't call it, the size stays the same. If I call it, the size goes up. Everything seems to be working. They just release a new version a few days ago and I'm on the latest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Haxe anyone ? full HTML5 api support , dead-code elimination, loads of libraries and frameworks , easy integration with third party libraries ,multi- target (C++,Flash,JS,...) and open source...

<comment><USER14> Stop trying to make Haxe happen, it's not going to happen.

<comment><USER15> I've been wondering whether I should start using this language for a project, and almost every time there's a good reason not too, but I'm still thinking one day there won't and i will. I'm curious to know what makes you think it will never happen, though.

<comment><USER14> It tries to be too many things to too many people, can't do a good enough job on any of it. Not really worth the investment.

<comment><USER5> haxe has flaws , but haxe is not backed by windows nor google. The team is 3/4 developers and they did a great work. Haxe will grow in the future. All it needs is a better "PR" and a bit of hype. A lot of successfull projects have been made with haxe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> To me this interview underlines the accomplishment of CoffeeScript.

No committees. No marketing team. No developer evangelists. No PR team. No corporate interests. No budget.

Just code.

<comment><USER17> Also nobody with the sense of history to design proper lexical scoping of variables.

<comment><USER18> To achieve that CS would have had to put everything with a new variable inside a new function scope, having a major impact on performance and readability of the generated code.

<comment><USER19> Parenscript gets lexical scoping by renaming variables (but only where necessary). It works fine. The original variable name is used as a prefix, so the generated code remains readable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Transcript?

<comment><AUTHOR> Doesn't appear to be one. The quotes I lifted start at 11:23</comment></comment>


Top five regrets of the dying - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/feb/01/top-five-regrets-of-the-dying <comment><USER2> "Many developed illnesses relating to the bitterness and resentment they carried as a result"

Is it scientifically possible to develop disease as a result of resentment? Because this phrase gives me a bit of doubt about the rest of the article. Maybe this is really what someone thought dying people should regret.

<comment><USER3> There is definitely a relationship between stress and health. Resentment, especially carried over a lifetime, can be pretty mentally taxing and stressful.</comment></comment>