I wonder why people want to use/abuse signals and slots in QML, when it's perfectly possible to just use good old plain functions in a language binding, like it is done here (for ECL/Common Lisp):
L[2] has nothing to do with "second". It just means "plus 2".
If you consider Monday the first day of the week, then Monday[1] is (naturally) Monday + 1.
Zero indexing just feels right, I can't help it (it's written in our DNA).
I can't believe there's a serious discussion about this topic. Even if you overcome the technical challenges (which I doubt), people would get depressed on any planet other than Earth. All other planets are just insanely sad for human life. Our soul would suffer to dead...
People have lived in remote, desolate outposts on Earth for extended periods of time for a wide variety of reasons (military, science, etc). And that was without (basically) unlimited media to keep them from complete boredom.
Yeah, it's that bad... If all of your code base is C++, what do you think the mindset is of the main developers? The only compromise they were able to allow themselves to think in was... ECMAScript. Sad.
I tried latest Ubuntu (after using many other distros over the years), and I'm perfectly fine with it. The GUI is simple and does all what I need, with useful default behaviour.
Are you folks aware that 1000 years is already a very long time? Any number bigger than, say 100.000 years is just the same as infinity, regarding to time.
This "infinity" problem simply requires too much faith, and will never have real evidence. Not very good attributes for a credible theory.
Maybe it's about time to get a better one, with less time involved? This way the faith required would be at a real human reachable level.
> Any number bigger than, say 100.000 years is just the same as infinity, regarding to time.
Tell that to a geologist or an astrophysicist and you'll be laughed out of the room. There's plenty of evidence of timescales in the millions and billions of years.
If you take, let's say, 10 thousand years, and try to explain every single detail of our planet, in all branches of science involved, you get the whole picture completely painted, without contradictions.
Big numbers are just imagination, there's nothing you can prove about it. The so-called "measured" numbers of the age of different fossils etc. found are actually selected numbers of years: they pick the ones they agree with their theory, and discard all the others (that is, the majority). Very scientific, indeed :/
I'm aware about the creationist newish trick of trying to remove the 'god' factor out of their 'theory' during arguments.
Simple Newtonian physics could easily prove you can't /possibly/ reach a stable equilibrium in a system of the mass of the earth/moon for example in just 6k years. Let alone all the other fancy goodies flying around in the rest of the universe.
We don't need fossil records there. So unless the fairy in the sky built the universe, let it sat unused on a shelf for 13+ billion years THEN decided having Adam seems like a cool idea to break the boredom of perfectly stable orbits...
There is no sample chapter, ok, but all of the book's code (quite a lot) can be downloaded and worked through in Slime (see top of each file), even without buying the book!
https://gitlab.com/eql/EQL5/blob/master/examples/M-modules/q...