I think this misses the point. `times` is "better" than `for` because it's declarative, reads like English, etc. Which of course are opinions, but the implementation details (messaging passing or not) are irrelevant.
Example: Swift and Kotlin can do `Int#times` and don't need message passing to get it done.
> but the implementation details (messaging passing or not) are irrelevant.
I'm the author here. While I agree that the implementation details do not matter for _most_ developers, I wanted to learn Ruby with an understand of how things are implemented.
In my previous post[1], I go into why I've always felt I didn't need Ruby since I knew Python, and I spent time learning Rust instead. It felt redundant to learn a second dynamically typed programming langauge that offered no advantage in performance. I started working at Chatwoot, where we use Ruby, and I had to pick up Ruby for the job. I didn't want to be satisfied with a "user-level" knowledge of the language and instead wanted to rip its internals apart so I can learn why it does the things it does.
Call it a preference on how I want to learn things.
Pretty sure it didn’t use that custom font back then, and the iA swiss founder would never have done this. They seem to be focused on apps lately and probably had someone new try their hand at “modernising” the old website…
I thought HN would find this amusing. I went to sign in to Airbnb and faced the hardest security captcha test in my life. After 10 minutes and failing twice, I finally succeeded, only to be met with an error message saying I couldn't sign in anyway. Depression ensued.
Some small feedback if I may: Could you separate the link and the text on the main page? My first thought was: "This isn't text. I can't highlight or copy anything. It's actually the opposite of what the title says." But everything was as advertised when viewing an actual coin.
Example: Swift and Kotlin can do `Int#times` and don't need message passing to get it done.