Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | icebraining's comments login

There are plenty when it comes to hard number crunching.

Not exactly relevant for a text editor, though.

You'd be surprised. All editors written in scripting languages I've suffer get to their knees for larger files (sometimes even 10MB or so, even more so for really large ones), as stuff like highlighting, parsing etc gets CPU bound soon.

You need look no further than Atom: a "hackable" text editor that brings mighty computers to their knees in order to display a text file.

That's not acceptable to me, even though it would be nice to have a hackable to the core editor. But we already have emacs for that, I suppose...

To be fair, only very large text files trouble Atom. And when does any dev ever actually open massive text files in text editors. I'm a Vim guy and have only briefly tried Atom, but I still wouldn't dream of opening a huge text file in Vim, even though it would cope a lot better than Atom. If it's a log file or something I'm going to be using tail/grep etc. to deal with it.

Yeah exactly emacs is hackable if you want to write lisp, which has a very small audience. So sure there is absolutely a desire for an editor written in a 'nice', hackable language like Python or JS (forgive me JS haters) to prosper.

Depends on your definition of huge. On my computer, vim takes about a second to load a 100MB text file, 1.4 million lines - not as fast as less (although less's search feature is slower). Vy's slower but it appears to load the file asynchronously, so at least you can start browsing while it's doing that. But 100MB is fifty times the sibling comment's 2MB for Atom...

For the record, while Python's pure interpreter is always going to be slow at this type of thing, JS's overhead factor compared to C is small enough that it's certainly possible to write an editor in it that feels just as fast as vim - maybe faster in some cases, e.g. since JavaScript engines JIT compile regexes and C regex libraries generally don't, or by making relatively slow operations asynchronous/multithreaded (while vim is highly synchronous). Atom seems to be just badly designed.

>Atom seems to be just badly designed.

I think the problem with Atom speed is using the DOM / web stack, not Javascript itself.

Atom's filesize limit is 2MB, so it's not really 'massive.' When I was using it, I ran into that limit more often than I would have expected. Mostly when taking a peak at a db dump, or misc files from the odd CTF challenge.

"Throwing out" doesn't mean "destroy". There are plenty of people who could use socks in decent condition, so it's not a waste.

Well, you can check with your foreign intelligence agencies to see if the person is suspected of any malicious behaviour or connections, and if the person has acquaintances already in the US, you can ask them questions.

Yet, the "spherical cow in a vacuum" expression came from a hard science. Einstein didn't exactly develop his relativity theories by making measurements and drawing statistical conclusions either.

Pure theory has its place in science, as long as one is honest about its limitations.

Relativity theory fits well into this description. It (the special relativity) was derived from a formal attempt to unify classical mechanics and Maxwell electrodynamics, which was only possible if you ditch the Galilean relativity. Both classical mechanics and electrodynamics, in turn, came from a huge body of experimental data.

General relativity is a different thing, it was a pure hypothesis, an extrapolation of the simplest possible generalisation of the special relativity [1]. And it held this hypothesis status up until it was sufficiently confirmed by the incoming experimental data. Before that, a multitude of alternative hypotheses existed which had the same numerical predictions covering the available experimental data (e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Logunov#Relativistic_t...).

So, yes, it's important to distinguish theory from a hypothesis.

[1] this "simplest possible generalisation" method works most of the time, but not always, so it's mostly valid to do so in the hard sciences, and should never be used as a justification for hand waving in the social sciences.

The fact that some people use astrology to play the markets, and seem to get results that are as good as those of economic theory, says a lot about both.

So meteorology isn't a real science either, I assume? Having a perfect model doesn't mean you can predict the behaviour of a system; conversely, not being able to predict the behaviour doesn't mean the model is flawed, or non-scientific.

That said, I do agree that economics is taken way too seriously for its incipient state.

> That said, I do agree that economics is taken way too seriously for its incipient state.

I think this is the most spot on statement on economics I've read.

Does Slack accept images with data URIs instead of URLs? Seems like it'd give you the best of both worlds.

"why study if you have no interest for the subject?"

Generally, in my experience, to pass the exams to get the degree that'll help them get a better (or any!) job. Interest in the course is a luxury that most students I knew didn't have.

IANAL, but in some jurisdictions, there's something called promissory estoppel - essentially, if you promise something that is expect to lead people to act in a certain way, you can't then sue them later for doing so. Microsoft themselves have successfully used that defense against Motorola Mobility (though that case was relative to the price of the licenses, not whether they could use it at all).

Yet eBay has Buy It Now, because sometimes it's better for both the buyer and the seller to agree on a potentially lower/higher price than having to wait for the end of the auction.

Why do we want efficient transactions? If it's for the benefit of the buyers and sellers, why shouldn't they be given the choice? It's as if we were saying that the stock market is for less sophisticated users than eBay!

On the market you buy a fungible asset, so the auction can be batched up between multiple buyers and sellers. On eBay you can't batch the things sellers are selling because a key part of what buyers are supposed to be doing is things like checking an individual seller's feedback and weighing whether he low price is worth risking it, or carefully reading the description to make sure you aren't buying a cardboard cutout picture of the product, a product box, or a car that was sawed in half and photographed so that it could be sold to two people instead of one. Plus a lot of the products are used and have one-off descriptions of flaws.

EBay doesn't have the same kind of clearing houses and broker-dealer regulations that would make sold items be anything like stock shares, even if they were all brand new and retail packaged.

Same for nginx, using the gzip_static module: http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_gzip_static_module.ht...

Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact