They provoked the strike on purpose by giving the workers an unacceptable contract. The aim was to wreck the union (they succeeded). They prepared in secret for two years for this.

Here's an account: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wash-post-busted-pressmens-un...

Also related: https://puzz.link/db/

And another one: https://www.brainbashers.com/puzzles.asp

Even if it didn't dedupe strings, mutable string literals means that it has to create a new string every time it encounters a literal in run time. If you have a literal string in a method, every time you call the method a new string is created. If you have one inside a loop, every iteration a new string is created. You get the idea.

With immutable strings literals, string literals can be reused.

Here’s a more concrete example:

You make an arrow function that takes an object as input, and calls another with a string and a field from the object, for instance to populate a lookup table. You probably don’t want someone changing map keys out from under you, because you’ll break resize. So copies are being made to ensure this?

Strings are going to keep being mutable by default. Only strings created by string literals won't be.

Thanks for the clarification! I have adjusted my wording.

>I do not understand how you can even begin coming to the conclusion of ...

Obviously he's not serious, he's playing the part of the out of touch old man.

Ah, okay. Maybe it’s more obvious in context, or maybe my hyperbole detector is broken.

I can imagine grumpy an old man frustrated by a different paradigm shouting at his computer.

We all become that eventually, hopefully we can all be as poetic and humble (and honest) about it.

Sure, but “JavaScript [is] utterly broken, incapable of executing the simplest programs without errors” is a bit much. I find it hard to believe that even when I’m completely out of touch, I’d say that about a language that people are obviously productive in (as much as I hate JS myself).

But apparently I didn’t get the hyperbole.

Sometimes when I play a point n click adventure and I am stuck for hours on a puzzle I tend to think: I've tried everything... surely there must be some kind of bug for why I am not proceeding.

Only to then realize (after reading the walkthrough) that there was indeed a way.

I think it's human nature to find (rather search) blame not only in yourself but everywhere else... anyhow, since the author is reflective we should be forgiving as well.

Just as a small note I did not get that too.

It is a rather common mindset among beginner programmers though, particularly younger ones.

Related to "Last is first", old Spanish books sometimes put at the end of the page the first syllable of the next page. (It was quite disconcerting when I first saw it.)

That's called a "catchword", and it's common in many older texts (not just in Spanish). It serves two purposes - it makes it easier for a person reading the book aloud to read smoothly while turning a page, and it makes it easier for bookbinders to spot pages which are missing or out of order. (Page numbers were, believe it or not, a later development.)

It was common throughout Europe in the early modern era.

I've got a book of recipes from Williamsburg, Virginia, a kind of outdoor museum LARPing as 1775. The recipes are from various sources, but they typeset it as a period document, including those catchwords. I find it charming.

They say it right in the next sentence.

But fb2 files are marked up text, which is (relatively) trivial to index. The bulk of Anna's Archive's books are made of from scanned images.

I don't think in Red a function can decide whether to evaluate its arguments or not. It's more like a Logo: functions have fixed arity, so you don't need to delimite the call, and lists ("blocks") are always quoted, so you need to explicitly evaluate them.

Not very reliable, this Phantom thing.