Hm, at first glance I am as well, especially with tagged template strings. Those look particularly simple but powerful.
Generally though, is it reasonable for features such as these to be included at the language level? I primarily use ES5 JavaScript so I'm used to pulling in a decent amount of modules (in this case handlebars, underscore, etc.) for things like templating.
But I will be relieved to have a language-standard solution to what feels like such a common problem for the environments in which JS is used primarily, despite the tradeoff that's made in accessibility due to feature bloat.
Unsafe string-munging is too easy and seductive. Doing things the safe/secure way needs to be at least as easy.
And it makes for a growable language, the way Lisp macros do. E.g. https://github.com/erights/quasiParserGenerator
This can reduce the demand for feature bloat in future language standards.
I too was reluctant of using many of the new ES6 features, but as I've begun to adapt them I've come to appreciate them a lot! In fact, when using Babel to compile ES2015/2016 you can in many cases rid yourself of things like Underscore/lodash[1], Promise libraries, etc.
I've recently started a new project in React/Flux, and I've cut away 3 or 4 dependencies compared to previous projects by fully embracing ES2015/2016, as Babel automatically provides the necessary polyfills and compilation.
As for template strings, I think they make sense. Most programming languages have them in someway or another, like Ruby "hello #{world}" or Python 'Hello {world}'.format(world='World').
lodash has ~200 modular methods. That means it covers much more ground than the handful of ES5/6 built-ins provided and because it's modular you can use what you need without the stuff you don't.
Most modern languages already have this feature, JavaScript's the strange one to not have a quick way of putting variables into a string and the first to have to name it though because it was missing it for so long. And by your comment have evidentally chosen a confusing name. This isn't to replace templating engines.
Admittedly you could trivially extend the string prototype to have something more akin to string.format or printf, which was something you couldn't do in other languages for a long time, making it less of a problem.
I'm not too qualified to comment on the hosting market, but I do want to vouch for DigitalOcean as I've never had uptime issues with them until now. They also have always had timely and helpful support and their pricing is obviously competitive.
That being said, near 100% uptime is really desired in this space and I've been scratching my head for the past hour or so wondering why I couldn't connect to my mongo process running on my droplet...maybe I should have tested DO sooner, but the fact that only mongo seemed to be failing (and not postgres for example) made me think I had client and not server issues.
I've been using Linode for many years, and DO for some time now (a year? not sure, since I can't even login to their control panel right now and check). I've seen issues on both providers, and dealt with support of both not too infrequently.
I'd still say Linode is miles ahead in terms of expertise and responsiveness. Most of my servers are on Linode for this reason, and only a few on DO.
As a customer I enjoy this competition and would like to keep both players compete - because I'm benefiting from it. So I'm likely to stick to both. But I would still recommend Linode more easily than I would DO.
Thanks for your input. I might be switching over as a result of the recent downtime and the support Linode has been receiving on this thread. Unfortunately, especially for non-hobbyist apps and services, this is an area demanding fickleness.
The big issue here is NYC2 droplets went down only 7 days ago. This time its even longer at over an a half. When it happened last week it was unfortunate, but things happen. When it happens twice in a week that is a much bigger problem.
As someone who's completely ignorant to the concepts behind algorave, could anyone more experienced outline the helpful prerequisites to know before I experiment with a tool like Wavepot?
I assume it's mostly the (basic?) physics of sound waves that I'd need to understand?
I've just started using git recently and have completely fallen in love with its power and flexibility.
But as someone just starting out, I can relate to how demanding git can _seem_ to a beginner. Say I have some refactoring ideas floating around in my head. I could either begin accommodating for these changes in git (namely branching, perhaps also chunking my edits into commits) or start coding and go back and handle commit isolation and branching later.
For me it can seem like git is getting in the way if I select the former method, and that the latter is just messy and cumbersome. But the more and more time I invest into the tool, both my efficiency and the cleanliness of the code base increases. Persevering through the higher learning curve (which exists probably due to a minimal (bad?) interface wrapping a set of concepts that can best be understood visually à la Dwarf Fortress) appears to be a worthwhile investment.
In addition to this, I think something that would help me a lot is being able to step back and forward through any history of commands that I'm experimenting with.
It might not be a crime, but if I were a woman, I could easily see myself feeling uncomfortable in a situation that were to remind me of our gender-imbalanced culture(s).
Ah I'm so excited to play To the Moon. This one by far stands out above the rest in this bundle at least to me. I'm going in with very little foreknowledge, just the way I like it.
I don't recall ever having any issues myself when donating for a Humble Bundle, but I frequently enter the wrong characters on other sites' CAPTCHAs, so I totally understand your frustration.
Actually, I think it's because I'm always (just barely) beating the average: "Orders below the average must authenticate with reCAPTCHA to help cut down on costly abuse." Is this the CAPTCHA you're referring to?
