I really appreciated this article. It would be great to see a smaller svg graphics standard. I think SlimSVG is a bad name because it implies its still SVG. It should set its self apart. Just my 2 cents.

In my opinion, what makes SVG bloated is not the fact that it's for humans or machines, this is mostly irrelevant compared to the ability to have filters, CSS animation, interactivity, advanced rendering options on different contexts...

Concerning the simple use of standard shapes, you could restrict yourself to simple shapes within SVG : thus youd already have myriads of existing implementations and tooling, it would be mostly understandable by humans, short and writable by hand/simple scripts.

You could even call them mobile SVG Tiny and Basic : it exists since 2009. https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-SVGMobile-20030114/ . That would be a good start.

Very interesting. I'm happy I read it. I think that seeking simplicity in code for me is often trying to find the most simple and straightforward way to write the code so that I can understand it. This usually boils down to good naming, and good encapsulation of tackling specific problems into specific (ideally well named) places.

Tuche

Is there a repository of Gooeys people have made?

Cool stuff!

Typo in first paragraph of https://gustedt.wordpress.com/category/c/ (mayor instead of major)

Very interesting. I wonder if researchers take the time to make sure they have hardware that can handle such things

In regards to all the talk of not being able to verify your video source; perhaps we'll go back to film for things that need to be probably legitimate. Though perhaps that has the same issues.

I'm not sure why you are getting downvoted. I'd not like it if Apple will opinion-ate and make any package manager a default.

Package managers are for software developers. They are comfortable installing them on their own.

I expect he’s getting downvoted because he doesn’t offer any reasoning (or substance at all) along with his opinion.

The reasoning was in the question itself. Sometimes a prompt answer is a better one.

Gc was a mistake? On what possible authority can you make such a claim?

It's not that controversial of a statement. The choice has largely been dictated by the fact that non-GC meant C or C++, and it is not hard to find reasons to avoid them.

Now we also have rust, but rust is new and also has a low-level aura, making comparisons to high-level languages difficult.

That Go has a GC is a shame, such a missed opportunity.