Americans do love insisting that it’s impossible to control guns, even though literally every other country does it successfully.

I wholeheartedly agree that TypeScript effectively supercedes JavaScript if you’re starting a new project.

JavaScript is still not the most unpleasant language to use though.

Yeah, we’re describing it the same way. A slice of pie with ice cream is preferable unless you don’t have ice cream available.

If you want to go on a rant about JavaScript then just do so, stop trying to goad someone into an argument about it.

Well two things:

1. yes I can. It’s perfectly possible for a slice of pie to be pleasant, and a slice of pie with ice cream to be more pleasant.

2. the original point of discussion to kick off this thread was claiming that js is the least pleasant.

If Apex had a “singular” purpose then they wouldn’t have built it as a turing complete generalized programming language.

And the reason you need namespaces is for basic code organization. Classes organize functional objects with a module of code, namespaces let you’re break code into modules.

If you have two distinct modules of code, each with their own logger class you suddenly have a confusing naming conflict with both loggers being exposed everywhere (or forced you to rename one).

So then it forces you to try and name your classes like RenderingLogger or Service_Logger and then you very quickly run into the fact that Apex imposes arbitrary length limits on class names.

If you’re writing a simple db access script then whatever, it can get the job (worse then other languages but it can). If you’re actually trying to build a proper application like you publish on AppExhange then it’s shortcomings become apparent everywhere.

Hell it didn’t have a reasonable unit testing framework until a side project from some devs introduced Apex Mockery, and it still sucks compared to Mockito and actual professional testing frameworks.

Apex doesn’t have namespaces. It doesn’t even let your organize your classes into subfolders. It is an absolute F-Tier language.

Try TypeScript, try React, try Go / Swift / Kotlin, spend more time with C#.

There are two types of languages:

• Ones people complain about
• Ones that don’t get used

JavaScript, especially when using TypeScript, is quite frankly one of the most pleasant development experiences. Yes, there are still footguns here and there due to poor early choices and maintaining decades of backwards compatibility (===, etc), but literally all of them are caught by basic linting.

Go try using Salesforce’s bastardized version of old Java (Apex) if you want to experience a truly unpleasant language.

If you’re a user who grows up using one, and then starts following instructions on how to build one, when are you going to come across the word program?

It will be app, maybe application, saas software, functions a service, compute as a service etc etc. Hell what most people think of as an “app” is really a collection of applications all working together.

People at the University of Washington don’t refer to soda pop the same way as people at Berkley, or at MIT, or at Oxford. Why would they all have had the exact same term for writing software?

Edit: I’m being argumentative, I honestly have no idea what term was common then. At that point most people I knew referred to it as “computer stuff”

It’s probably predominantly because of the switch to mobile computing / smartphones / web being dominant, and everyone referring to programs there as “apps” / applications.

i.e. If you write a mobile app with a function-as-a-service backend, you will never compile what someone would refer to as a “program”, so calling yourself a “programmer” (as-in, someone who makes programs) feels inaccurate and a not helpful description for people. “Coder” (as-in, someone who writes code) is a vaguer in terms of the type of code you write and more accurate in terms of what you spend your time producing.

Also anyone writing scripts, or even just using stuff like AWS Lambda / functions as a service, etc. etc.

In your specific circles.

Downvoted for sane-washing meta glasses.

Down voted for wash-washing any point being made.

You can’t just declare something washing and therefore bankruptcy, you have to explain your reasoning why.

I also disagree with your other takes, mainly boiling down to the insinuation that competence and intelligence is how capitalists make money in a system that’s rigged in their favor…

Yes but we’re not discussing a binary system of capitalist and “not-capitalists” we’re discussing a single company. And while they have not outcompeted their rivals on the basis of serving the best product for their users, or making the world better, they have outcompeted their rivals at the actually game they’re all playing (i.e. making money), all in the face of others who are playing equally soullessly.

Capitalism is deeply flawed, but what you’re experiencing is a failure of social media and journalism.

Everyone guffaws about Meta because everyone hates them, so bloggers write shitty vacuous click baity articles that just twist and distort everything meta does to make them look as terrible as possible. And while they’re shitty, they’re not shitty and incompetent in every single possible way or else they wouldn’t be as rich as they are.

But these vacuous articles that bend over backwards and diatort the truth to paint them as incompetent in every possible way then leaves people going “how could anyone be that stupid?”, and the reality is that they’re not that stupid, you were just misinformed by outrage journalism.

Despite the guffawing about shutting down Horizon Worlds, there’s a good chance that Meta’s reality Labs bet will still be a smart financial play in the long term. Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc have made billions by controlling the dominant OSes and Meta has far and away the strongest augment reality operating system as we head into AR glasses actually being viable from a technology standpoint.

It’s not necessarily projection, it can just be two shitty people accurately describing each other

Then fire him and hire someone with a plan to match.

Where did I say this?

👀

The US pumped massive percentages of its GDP into

…

Which changes absolutely nothing from the perspective of NATO

Lmao yes it does. It only doesn’t if you declare “I’m ignoring this information”, and stick your head in the sand.

That’s not reasoning, that’s weaponized incompetence.

Let’s remember that the US has been, by far, the richest country in the world since the world wars, largely because it stayed out of them til the ends, and issued massive loans to European countries that they continued to profit off of for decades and decades.

You talk about GDP percentage, as if every country had a similar GDP per capita, and could thus afford to spend similarly. The reality is that the US had more then enough money to both fund its military and fund its social programs, but it chose to instead fund the military and the already wealthy.

Fuck the US. Let it wallow and die. Talking more closely is just more likely to get its shit on you as it goes.

That doesn’t actually sound like they intend on producing usable helium though. That sounds like they intend on doing a really difficult and expensive fusion reaction to produce helium 3, which they will then use in a cheaper and easier to do fusion reaction, and the end result of all of that should be electricity and no net new helium since it’s expensive and rare AF and they need it all to make the whole process remotely plausibly profitable.