twerquie

So much paper.

You know, it's possible to have a conversation without having an argument. It is possible to listen to others. Not everything in life, or indeed on Hacker News, is a debate to be won. Sometimes we're just sharing our human experience.

I'm not sure if you're talking about the pain of going back to testing ruby / rails after using mocha / node, but I feel that specific pain, especially on projects with old-school Rails purists who insist on Test::Unit style. Switching to rspec gives you nested describe blocks with shared setup and teardown steps, as nice as mocha. Minitest has this BDD style built in too, but somehow the way Rails ties it in makes it difficult or impossible to take advantage of.

The author has clearly framed these as personal opinions, which as we all know, everyone is entitled to.

1900s me had a fabric binder full of MSDN CDs - dozens upon dozens it seemed - with the same software footprint and a harder "download" process.

Using verb as a verb.

Agreed, it's actually a rather difficult melody.

There is a difference between web pages and web applications, and Meteor is built for the latter. There is no such thing as a progressive enhancement path in many cases. If your firewall (?) strips out JS, then you are on a broken network.

How does it do that anyway? Most sites are HTTPS.

Do you mean production support for hosted redis instances? If so, loads of companies offer this, most notably AWS through their ElasticCache service.

I can see a broader need for enterprise-level support for custom builds, perhaps.

But you can't have clients directly connecting to the database, their sockets still need to flow through an application layer where you have your business / application logic. Unless you start putting application logic into the db?

> Refactoring across the call stack is orders of magnitude easier than refactoring across a socket.

That's assuming that things haven't become deeply coupled within the "call stack". Separating things across a socket often forces a separation of concerns, which does tend to make refactoring easier.

He literally says that those who disagree with his code style should be shot. That's completely unacceptable language to use and makes him sound like he hasn't mastered English. I'm not sure anyone should take c-language style tips from such a boor.

What about testing these systems with headphones then?

I've heard it said a thousand times, but it still bears repeating; terrorism is impossible to defend against.