You're clearly not happy for Tesla to succeed, or you would repetitively talk shit like this.
If you don't think the market for EVs is large, you are wrong. Gas in unsustainable. EVs will replace them. EVs are following the standard technology adoption curve. 25 years from now there will be as many gas powered cars as there are typewriters or monochrome TVs.
People like you, who don't actually know how money works, think that because Tesla is building a huge battery factory, that it explains why they are losing money. It doesn't.
Wrong. I told YOU that that didn't mean they were losing money. That you think they are losing money in the cars themselves is why YOU are an imbecile.
Not even the Model S, which has managed to lose billions of dollars.
You're a fucking imbecile. R&D and setting up factories is paid for over the full production years of a product. The Model S (and the Model X which is based on the same chassis) will be in production for years yet.
Now, it may yet make a profit in the long run, only time will tell on that one.
You're anything but indifferent to Tesla and EVs. You're on every thread on the topic. You're desperate for them to fail. You're totally committed to gas powered vehicles.
It's a refundable deposit. It's not "spent" unless they go through with the purchase. And since it gives them access to a much bigger tax saving, it's actually saving them money over what you are going to end up spending if you ever buy a new Tesla.
You're a dreamer. If there are any repossessed Model 3s on the market, there will be a lot of competition to buy them. There will be no steep discounts.
You might be able to get last years iPhone for cheaper than you could have got it a year ago. But you'll also get one year less usage out of it, so it's not quite the deal you think it is.
Even if you missed out on 7% pa (which I think is hopelessly optimistic in the day and age) that'd be $70. So what?
Good job you're not in a hurry, because you'll be waiting for a long time before 2nd year models come on to the user car market. ANd if they are still supply constrained, the used models that do may even be more expensive, not 2/3rds the price.
I work on a code base of multiple mature apps, originally written in Obj-C, but gradually being transitioned to Swift.
It took a couple of hours to fix everything up. Most of it is automatic fix-ups. I'm glad for the change as it'll stop one of my co-workers writing stuff with this archaic syntax. The alternatives to "for (;;)" in particular are all superior.
C only has the fastest code because it has no safety. Use modern container classes that are safe, and it's no faster than other fast languages. In virtually every case the lack of safety for speed trade off of C is no longer necessary.
C still exists for the same reason COBOL exists, but it simply isn't as far down the road yet.
Given Oracle suing Google for IPR issues on their Dalvik rip-off of Java, it seems quite likely. Swift is open source and so doesn't carry that problem.
They could use another language other than Swift and Java. But Swift is fit for purpose, having been designed specifically with smartphones in mind. And although young, already has a lot of mobile developers who know it.
Clearly he does understand it as he talked about needing to use weak references to break retain cycles.
What you don't seem to understand is that reference counting is a technique to do garbage collection. In Apple parlance they don't usually refer to ARC as a form of garbage collection, as they don't want to confuse it with the other and now abandoned auto garbage collection approach that they did just call the garbage collector.
Not only that but they removed the ++ and -- post and prefix operators. It's a policy not to get stuck with syntax that is was acknowledged to be a mistake, and to update code from old to new with refactoring tools.
Despite their familiarity to C programmers, "for (;;)" and ++/-- are not good syntaxes.
"for item in collection" and "for i in 1...10" are far clearer. And any other loop shoe-horned into for (;;) is clearer as a while.
And ++/-- encourage side effect computing. Better to explicitly increment a value on a line of it's own, than hide the increment in the middle of another statement. It's original C purpose as an occasional hand optimisation is no longer valid in the days of modern optimising compilers.
C# has been around for a while. I doubt if there isn't some syntax that is regretted in hindsight. It's a shame of they can fix that.
What's condescending about giving free support to people that ask for it?
If you think saying RTFM is the right thing to do because it's not "condescending, then you;re one of the people that's assuring that Linux on the desktop will never catch on.
That's a hell of a connectivity problem you have there.
But seriously. If you're a sysadmin, then yes, you'll be earning more if you work on Linux. But if you're a programmer, it's more than likely you'll be working for nothing. If you do get paid to program on Linux systems, you certainly won't be earning as much as others.
The majority of people who are professional developers will tell you that MS Dev Studio is the best IDE on any platform. Their features are second to none. And I say that as someone who despises Microsoft.
Of course that's not the typical opinion here. But that's because slashdot is full of Linux Heads that are NOT professional developers. They're mostly students or hobbyists or sysadmins.
Slashdot Mirror
The world doesn't owe you an explanation every time you say something stupid.
Here is what I believe:
1. The world is warming.
Well that at least is progress. You used to argue that it wasn't warming.
You're clearly not happy for Tesla to succeed, or you would repetitively talk shit like this.
If you don't think the market for EVs is large, you are wrong. Gas in unsustainable. EVs will replace them. EVs are following the standard technology adoption curve. 25 years from now there will be as many gas powered cars as there are typewriters or monochrome TVs.
People like you, who don't actually know how money works, think that because Tesla is building a huge battery factory, that it explains why they are losing money. It doesn't.
Wrong. I told YOU that that didn't mean they were losing money. That you think they are losing money in the cars themselves is why YOU are an imbecile.
Not even the Model S, which has managed to lose billions of dollars.
You're a fucking imbecile. R&D and setting up factories is paid for over the full production years of a product. The Model S (and the Model X which is based on the same chassis) will be in production for years yet.
Now, it may yet make a profit in the long run, only time will tell on that one.
So why say it's lost billions, idiot.
You're anything but indifferent to Tesla and EVs. You're on every thread on the topic. You're desperate for them to fail. You're totally committed to gas powered vehicles.
The GigaFactory is built and operational. Presumably in the process of scaling up production.
FlyHelicopters, always on the EV stories commenting about how they are not going to catch on. Even though the news stories show success.
"No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." over and over again.
FlyHelicopters, always on the wrong side of history.
It's a refundable deposit. It's not "spent" unless they go through with the purchase. And since it gives them access to a much bigger tax saving, it's actually saving them money over what you are going to end up spending if you ever buy a new Tesla.
You're a dreamer. If there are any repossessed Model 3s on the market, there will be a lot of competition to buy them. There will be no steep discounts.
You might be able to get last years iPhone for cheaper than you could have got it a year ago. But you'll also get one year less usage out of it, so it's not quite the deal you think it is.
Even if you missed out on 7% pa (which I think is hopelessly optimistic in the day and age) that'd be $70. So what?
Good job you're not in a hurry, because you'll be waiting for a long time before 2nd year models come on to the user car market. ANd if they are still supply constrained, the used models that do may even be more expensive, not 2/3rds the price.
I work on a code base of multiple mature apps, originally written in Obj-C, but gradually being transitioned to Swift.
It took a couple of hours to fix everything up. Most of it is automatic fix-ups. I'm glad for the change as it'll stop one of my co-workers writing stuff with this archaic syntax. The alternatives to "for (;;)" in particular are all superior.
Yeah, that'd be like Google basing their Browser on Apple's open sourced WebKit... and then forking it... Oh...
C only has the fastest code because it has no safety. Use modern container classes that are safe, and it's no faster than other fast languages. In virtually every case the lack of safety for speed trade off of C is no longer necessary.
C still exists for the same reason COBOL exists, but it simply isn't as far down the road yet.
Given Oracle suing Google for IPR issues on their Dalvik rip-off of Java, it seems quite likely. Swift is open source and so doesn't carry that problem.
They could use another language other than Swift and Java. But Swift is fit for purpose, having been designed specifically with smartphones in mind. And although young, already has a lot of mobile developers who know it.
Yeah. I like Swift, but the debugging isn't mature yet. XCode regularly crashes when you start putting breakpoints or single stepping though Swift.
Clearly he does understand it as he talked about needing to use weak references to break retain cycles.
What you don't seem to understand is that reference counting is a technique to do garbage collection. In Apple parlance they don't usually refer to ARC as a form of garbage collection, as they don't want to confuse it with the other and now abandoned auto garbage collection approach that they did just call the garbage collector.
Not only that but they removed the ++ and -- post and prefix operators.
It's a policy not to get stuck with syntax that is was acknowledged to be a mistake, and to update code from old to new with refactoring tools.
Despite their familiarity to C programmers, "for (;;)" and ++/-- are not good syntaxes.
"for item in collection" and "for i in 1...10" are far clearer. And any other loop shoe-horned into for (;;) is clearer as a while.
And ++/-- encourage side effect computing. Better to explicitly increment a value on a line of it's own, than hide the increment in the middle of another statement. It's original C purpose as an occasional hand optimisation is no longer valid in the days of modern optimising compilers.
C# has been around for a while. I doubt if there isn't some syntax that is regretted in hindsight. It's a shame of they can fix that.
What's the difference?
Netbeans / IntellIJ are just as competitive as visual studio in terms of features.
Thanks for the laugh..
It's absolutely irrelevant that Android runs on Linux. The user isn't exposed to any element of Linux.
And if you can do all your work on an Android, then you probably don't have much of a job.
What's condescending about giving free support to people that ask for it?
If you think saying RTFM is the right thing to do because it's not "condescending, then you;re one of the people that's assuring that Linux on the desktop will never catch on.
That's a hell of a connectivity problem you have there.
But seriously. If you're a sysadmin, then yes, you'll be earning more if you work on Linux. But if you're a programmer, it's more than likely you'll be working for nothing. If you do get paid to program on Linux systems, you certainly won't be earning as much as others.
The majority of people who are professional developers will tell you that MS Dev Studio is the best IDE on any platform. Their features are second to none. And I say that as someone who despises Microsoft.
Of course that's not the typical opinion here. But that's because slashdot is full of Linux Heads that are NOT professional developers. They're mostly students or hobbyists or sysadmins.