viggio24

clearly AI written (aka "slop"), stopped reading after a few paragraphs

Wonderful page, congratulations! navigating to the end takes time but the contents and the presentation are great

Very good point, especially the GPL license one.

Mentor Grpahics Calibre has a very good interface written in Tk. Also some utilities from the Encounter suite have Tk interfaces (not the whole suite of course as Tk is not suitable for graphicslly intensive applications)

I'm in the EDA world since 15 years at least and I'm still surprised why many (but not all) vendors have adopted TCL as their scripting language of choice for their public API; my opinion is because it is quite close to shell scripting and so more suitable than Perl or Python for engineers which are not experienced with real software development. Another reason is due probably to the good integration with the Tk UI library that allows to easily associate a UI interface to some of the scripting tasks, something that is highly appreciated by many engineers: this is not easy to accomplish if you use Pyhton or Perl. However I agree that Tcl is a terrible language that I would avoid for any modern project.

Compared with the web based apps we had in the past the LinkedIn one is a great step forward. The main point according to me is not the fact that web vieww apps are slow, for sure things will improve in the future and web view perofrmances will increase in the time thus reducing the performance impact in most apps. The main point that should be discussed is why these guys insist in using html and js. People seem to forfet where html is coming from: it was a way to layout a page on screen. The reason why html acquired "desktop application like" capabilities was to provide some desktop features to internet based apps: at the end the clear winner was html5+js+css, while java applet failed and flash is its decline. Looking at the efforts done by LinkedIn engineers, you may appreciate the hard work they did and the interesting way they faced several challenges, but what surprises me is why those guys didn't follow the Obj-C approach that would have given to them the possibility to reach better results in a more natural way. According to me html should be used only in those cases where it is superior to Obj-C: publishing. It offers much more capabilities than PDF at lower cost. All other usages are wrong. Someone may anseer that LinkedIn preferred to follow the html based approach to leverage their investment i. The web site, but I will object that: 1. Html5 is the only choice for the web in the computers, which are not mobile devices, but it's a poor choice for all mobile devices that have a native development environment 2. The effor they did in fixing all webview issues could have been moved to do a better API for native apps. And yes, if you compare their app to Flipboard you notice the difference.

lectures have not been done yet. The course will start at the end of september, I don't think the material will be published in advance

I completely agree. Using 4.x today allows to write code in a much cleaner and efficient way; a few examples: gestures (for iPhone), blocks, GCD. Besides multitasking and background processing allows features that were impossible to get or required complicated hacks. And now that we must provide iOS4 and iOS5 mixed compatibility, we cannot absolutely maintain any compatibility with iOS3.

You shouldn't consider this as a TM failure but just as an HDD failure. You may have some very o,d Snow Leopard backed-up data (e.g. parts of the OS which are never updated) or several months old documents which have been saved once by TM and never touched again. So TM cannit be blamed for such old filesystem nodes which have been damaged by the HDD failure and not TM one. What you tried to do is to completely wipe your HDD and do a complete restore by TM. This operation should be better accomplished using a fresh carbon-copied HDD image, that ensures all data are new and safe. What you can ask to Apple engineers eventually is to add a "cold restore" operation, that is asking to do some sort of simulated restore in order to check needed data integrity only, thus preventing users to make risky operations such as the one you tried to do.

Move the multi choice option after more time: currently it is faster to reply using the multichoice feature instead of typing. Or, another possibility, when a competitor replies using multichoice, don't reject the typed answer as too slow. Anyway nice game, nice idea.