jeorgun

These questions seem pretty good!

In the max heap question, I'd argue that add should take a parameter by value, rather than a const reference, since this prevents having to needlessly copy temporaries (and is less verbose than overloading for T&&).

List of iterator categories is missing input iterators.

To that end, I highly recommend the command line utility 'sl', which runs an unskippable ASCII animation of a steam locomotive. Makes for great fun explaining it to the flummoxed coworker borrowing your computer!

Notably, the "al" in algebra and algorithm really is the Arabic 'al-'— algebra and algorithm are latinized forms of al-jabr and al-Khwarizmi respectively.

That seems pretty harsh. From context, 'been there, done that' sounds to me like sympathizing with the article's author, not dismissing them.

If it's more than 10-20% of Dropbox users, that says pretty bad things about their market share.

Calling Scheme a "new language with a strong Lisp influence" is a bit rich. It's certainly not new, and in many respects it's more representative of Lisps-of-Old than Common Lisp.

"Historically, languages designed for other people to use have been bad: Cobol, PL/I, Pascal, Ada, C++."

In what sense was C++ designed for other people? IIRC Stroustrup came up with it to use on his own research projects.

Mehmed II? In any case a lot of the territory Suleiman conquered did remain part of the Ottoman Empire into the 20th century.

I think the intention is less "the tipping model makes more sense", and more "given that the tipping model is in effect, you shouldn't unfairly punish the housekeepers by not tipping them".

Uncharitably, I'd say the old logo looked much more professional, and so didn't jive with Google's corporate ethos of "seem as much like a preschool as humanly possible". The new one definitely fits better in that respect.

I wouldn't object to somebody creating, from whole cloth, an electric-stuff-free place, but I do object to people co-opting an existing community that they're not part of and insisting that it become such a place for them. That seems to be what's going on here.

I think it's undeniable that a substantial portion of the interest in XMonad came about because it's written in Haskell, but that's very different from saying that all of the interest in it comes from a concerted propaganda campaign on the part of the Haskell community.

Ditto in English, for that matter, although for various reasons we spell "i" with two "e"s.

If I'm understanding right, grandparent isn't saying "effectiveness(minor, frequent) == effectiveness(major, infrequent)"; they're saying "effectiveness(minor) == effectiveness(major) && effectiveness(frequent) > effectiveness(infrequent)".

I'm going to assume from context that they're talking about xmonad.