That guys’ as well.

Just try, what is the worst that could happen? Hehe-- [sound of breaking bones and rupturing organs]

Oni would be great, problem is the rights to it are split between like five different studios and it’s effectively abandoned. It’s why it’s not on GOG, Steam, etc.

Possibly the same situation for Attack of the Saucerman. Dayum.

It also wouldn’t surprise me if the source code has been completely lost, meaning there’s no chance of an HD upscale or anything.

Oh well, realistically, an upscale and a few improvements wouldn’t have cut it anyway.

Yesssss.

• Oni
• Attack Of The Saucerman
• Urban Chaos (the older one, not sure about the new one)
• Half of the legit stuff Sseth reviewed.

Was it an intended pun?

Unfortunately, no.

Yet I think that had Judaism been more proselytist, it would have gained more followers and, probably, been more fanatical and aggressive.

Yes, that’s what I’m counting on, since I assume that ideas like religions take part in a long-term process of evolution. Unfortunately, the most whackiest, edgiest religions seem to be the most fit. Therefore my answer to the top level post.

I never said brainwashing children was ok as far as I can recall.

Fair enough, you didn’t. I apologize. I lost track of the chain of posters and mixed you up with the first poster who didn’t seem to recognize the dangers of passing belief to children.

As for Judaism, I stand by what I said: it’s not proselytist in the way other religions are, trying to convert other people. I don’t judge it as bad or as good, I don’t care. I just state a fact as I’ve seen/read.

That may be case. Which is possibly why, historically speaking, Judaism doesn’t seem to be on the winning side. Which is bad, because it means opportunities for more fanatical, agressive religions.

That’s not proselytising, it’s a while different thing

I don’t see your point. How is brainwashing children ok when wololo-ing people is not? Even from an egocentric perspective, you have to live in a society.

Pretty sure you can be born into judaism, though. Chances are, it is even the default scenario with even semi-religious parents.

That’s not “keeping to yourself” to me. That’s like passing the cigarettes to your kids.

If religious can keep to themselves

Since religions compete, that doesn’t sound feasible.

On second though, it doesn’t seem like a big improvement. Reminds me a bit of limbfeeders without limbs.

This, it would be less deep in the uncanny valley without eyes at all.

selfies of himself in klan attire

“I’m an american viking.” (Also some bullshit how he’d be genetically viking.)

What about square screens?

inb4 chaotic neckpain

but I could see it being a good step forward for more meaningful features to be added in the future.

I think you are right. And that is unfortunate.

My bad, I’m not deep enough into our frontend stack to realize Hjeilsberg already did what he does best - ruining enums. (I guess he is not to blame for global imports in c#, so i can not add ‘questionable import module/namespace ideas’.)

And it seems like this proposal contains type declarations (in order to compensate for their enums), among other typescript specific things. So, guess it is option B, then.

That’s not a positive, though.

Depending on how it pans out, it’s either not useful enough. Who the hell doesn’t use namespaces or enums. Or - as

These constructs are not in the scope of this proposal, but could be added by separate TC39 proposals.

implies - a door opener to outsource TypeScripts problem unto other peoples and not to investing into improving WebAssembly. That’s just MS being lazy and making their problems other peoples problems.

I feel like this would be the ideal scenario: things working right out of the box without needing a compile step or additional tooling.

It’s just annotations. No proposed semantics of a type system which your browser could check on its own.

That for sure looks fancy. Well, if I could draw to save my life, I’d definitely include it.