Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sachinjoseph's commentslogin

So this is the wrong way but will still address the deficit? How exactly will this address the deficit?


He’s (rather Bessent) literally crashing the economy in order to force the Fed to lower the rates. To be fair, a soft landing was a pipe dream. Bessent has a long history of talking about this type of reckoning.


"Setting the building on fire was and in turn the entire blockthe only way to address the creaky floors". There's no Trump masterplan here (or anywhere else) than the sanewashing of his bs by his fanbois.


Poe's Law :-)


Hopefully this becomes a real product sometime that folks can get


While it would depend on the tolerance level of the particular situation, generally, 100 = 100,00 is way more wrong than 100 = 100.1


curious - would you mind listing some of those useful ones in the "old Power Toys"?


A bug has been filed about this on the WinDev repo, might help resolve it faster if it gets some upvotes: https://github.com/microsoft/Windows-Dev-Performance/issues/...


The use use of '=' here scares me:

   function add2(x: Int, y: Int): Int {
       return x + y;
   }
   
   add2(2, 3)     //5
   add2(x=2, y=3) //5
   add2(y=2, 5)   //7
The language already supports '=' operator for assignment of variables in the current scope, so should you use the same operator for denoting value assignment formal parameters in a function call? This can lead to a lot of confusion between variables in the scope and formal parameter names in a function that is called from the current scope.


Python, one of the most popular languages, uses this syntax, so I'm guessing the vast majority of people don't find it scary (I certainly don't).


This seems like a non issue to me and as tomp said, is already done in popular languages without problems. The third example (keyword arguments before positional) does seem a bit odd though, as interleaving positional and keyword arguments seems like a recipe for confusion, but using = for keyword arguments doesn’t seem like a problem to me.


This and a few other parts seem to be inspired by StandardML / Ocaml

https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/standard-ml/


I love this feature - calling named parameters is (for me) a glaring omission from Javascript (and surprisingly Typescript), I know you can define an object argument, but not many do and that’s not very elegant.


Thank you! Please also ensure all the countries on the planet have access to this tech.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: