ObnoxiousJul

I studied physics, and I learnt actual programming and assembly language: I actually did this in the real world!

What do you learn in Computer Science then?!

Gibbering useless concepts that makes you non-sensical experts in the field of not delivering your software neither in time, nor in the frame of the specification? Or just

There are so many security issues being unveiled that at this point one might wonder if Rails 4 (and a complete redesign) may not be the way to fix the security issues.

Maybe also, if ruby programmers learned to program (instead of doing banana driven lingo development) or committed suicide throwing themselves from a cliff (along with PHP developers) (like lemmings) we could also have a boring yet more secured internet.

I am voiceless: why would the f*ck would someone loose such that much time on a trivial, yet annoying task?

That is the first lesson you have in assembly language: program in assembly language, then in C because it spares you the time (and the mistakes involved in the process) to do such a thing.

Thousands of men year efforts and wisdom ruined in a post, showing how people have too much time on their hands, and so few imaginations (well he could have written something interesting on how to display p0rn pictures in ASCII art at least).

Well it is a known QA practice: never base incentive on metrics or people will cheat one way or another with the metrics. If your dev have a prime based on SLA or tickets solved guess what? You are giving them an incentive to cheat. You will have nice figures to show your investors, ypur stock options' values will raise and coder will be better paid. Everyone is happy, who cares about the truth, the unfairness, the lie. This is just mis placed moral. Stats that can be tricked are the prozac of our society. It make the metrics describing a situation improve with mutual benefits for (almost) all the stakeholders.

Who cares about the customers or minorities anyway? I mean not on the paper but honestly?

Unless you have a sensitivity to the initial conditions, hence you have a chaotic system. Which happens as fast as n body interactions in a gravitational field (but how many bodies/iterations do you need, which initial conditions makes the error a problem?)

But as I stated earlier, I think I have to check first because I am not that convinced any more on the performance point of view that JS has a problem, and float representation is not a JS problem, but a problem global to all CPUs.

Well it can be more than 10^-12 sometimes and the problem is not in physics but in trading when errors stack up. That's why I prefer when e-commerce solutions are based on fixed point arithmetic.

Even though canvases are still not homogeneous in terms of performance from browsers to browsers, some works fairly well.

Well, I would discourage playing with math if accuracy was important. Just open firebug and multiply

  >>> 10*1.1198 
  11.197999999999999

This limitation is intrinsic to IEEE 754, and no alternative are in the pipe (IEEE854 seems stalled).

I have been working for the web ads industry and canvases were pretty disappointing in terms of performance when the number of sprites were growing up. The funnier part was the inconsistency in result amongst the browsers.

So simulate as much as you want, just don't expect to beat flash or native client in terms of performance...