ostensibly

we're using post in the way postmodernists use post, which is it's informed by modernism, it's informed by capitalism without being able to transcend it necessarily because capitalism and it's the most recent incarnation of capitalism, which is neoliberalism, is like the oxygen that we breathe. It's all encompassing. It's totalitarian in its nature. And it's pervasive. And so in that sense, we say we have to be informed by the logic of the dominant system.

Just because the code is described as part of the WebDAV spec doesn't mean it's WebDAV-specific! Status codes are supposed to be generic.

Concurrency means executing multiple tasks at the same time but not necessarily simultaneously.

When we have our git rev-parse examine our Git repository to view our origin/HEAD, what we see is whatever we have stored in this origin/HEAD. That need not match what is in their HEAD at this time. It might match! It might not.

Even though not all code smells indicate real problems (think fluent interfaces)

All safe methods are also idempotent, but not all idempotent methods are safe. For example, PUT and DELETE are both idempotent but unsafe.

However you're probably asking the wrong question. (Not necessarily, for example this might come up in a makefile.)

A general and intuitive description is that words in a semantic field are not necessarily synonymous, but are all used to talk about the same general phenomenon.

Those sorts of complaints are like saying that someone is not a buddhist unless they speak Pali.

So every program starts in the IO monad. From here you can get any input you need, call into relatively "pure" code with the inputs, and then output the result in some way. The reverse does not work. You cannot call into IO code from pure code like you can call into a Maybe function from pure code.

"Open access" refers to toll-free or gratis access to content

I close the issue but we can continue the discussion.

We don’t do politics, and we certainly don’t do religion. You’re bringing these here by using terms such as “politicians” or “evil”.

“JSONP is JSON with extra code” would be too easy for the real world. No, you gotta have little discrepancies. What’s the fun in programming if everything just works? Turns out JSON is not a subset of JavaScript. If all you do is take a JSON object and wrap it in a function call, one day you will be bitten by strange syntax errors, like I was today.

but that doesn’t mean that confining applications is not a benefit also to FOSS applications, security is an issue that needs to be addressed with many layers of measures no mater what licensing approach you use to license the software

Magnetic materials are always made of metal, but not all metals are magnetic

So if you are designing for an app

When you do import '../scss/application.scss', you're telling webpack to include application.scss in the build. This does not mean it's going to be compiled into your javascript, only that webpack now compiles and knows how to load this file.

In summary TLS uses PKI to secure information over the internet. However, it is important to note that TLS supports other encryption standards which are not part of PKI.

Once again, this isn’t good or bad, it’s just the most efficient way to create something that is similar to something else

This isn’t to say that multiplying code is good or bad – it’s a characteristic of all code regardless of quality.

Without elegant ways of expressing loops/iterators (like angular does with directives), the primary way to keep JSX readable thus becomes copying and pasting.

You can see that Rollup mapped browser globals called "React" and "ReactDOM" to variables called "React" and "ReactDOM". The latter are what you imported by writing import React and import ReactDOM. (The variable names don't have to be the same as the browser globals, but it's common.)

Just to make this clear, I'm on the side that adding strict rules doesn't necessarily improve a situation. Especially with something that is subjective like a commit message.