IvarTJ

A motivation for reimplementing System.out.println might be to have it reliably display Unicode characters in Windows terminals, using WriteConsoleW.

I've found a debugger particularly useful when trying to understand details about other people's code, when changing the source code is not necessarily an option. They can quickly give me answer to how the call stack looks like when a function is called, and let me inspect variables in different frames of the stack.

I've encountered a code written in the 12factor style of using environment variables for configuration, and in that particular case there was no validation nor documentation of the configuration options. Is this typical?

For onboarding new members, I would have thought it preferable to have a JSON configuration, where both documentation and validation of configuration options are provided by a JSON Schema file.

xmllint also supports XPath queries.

I personally don't see having the version in the package address particularly more nasty than specifying it in the project file, as in Maven, which I have been dealing with lately. One problem I imagine is that when migrating to a new version of a library, the address has to be updated in each file the library is used in, with potentially catastrophic consequences if any one file is forgotten. A grep seems wise in that case.

Would you argue that there are more robust solutions in the Haskell ecosystem? What scheme do you prefer?

In this timeline, Common Lisp first appears when it was standardized. It should probably also mention its predecessor MACLISP.

Could someone comment on what instances you would typically apply lambdas and closures in real-world code?

I figure that they are at least more convenient than callbacks with a *userData parameter like in C.

You can run Ocaml on the Raspberry Pi for one.

I would not say that I am particularly experienced, but I will tell my point of view from a not particularly sophisticated programmer. I am interested in seeing what objections others may have to what I write.

Compared to other popular programming languages aimed at web programming, such as Python, Ruby and PHP, Go provides more type safety. Comparable to Java's but for less code.

Go's runtime and development tools are very lightweight, which is important to me as I use multiple, often dated computers with limited memory.

It is very easy to learn, a low investment. This means that it is conceivable for a student previously only exposed to Java to get on board on your software project on short-time notice.

Here in Norway newspapers more or less survive, although perhaps not with the younger generations. They are generally the best source if you want to follow up on local events.

How do Americans follow local news?

How well does deploying Haskell web applications to a low-memory VPS work? My experience with the Play framework tells me that Scala is out of the question. Presumably using Haskell involves cross-compilation, considering the memory usage of GHC compilation.

It's as if it was only yesterday that we saw Microsoft bragging about IE9 being arguably slightly ahead of the other browsers.