Intentional or otherwise, the waveform certainly clips— you can see it in any audio editor, eg: http://imgur.com/a/WacOy
Since the drums sounds all started life as hi-fi samples, the detail is certainly there in the original Logic sessions. It would be an interesting experiment to do a listening test comparing the CD versions of the tracks against versions mastered with more headroom, either less loudly or to a 64-bit format.
It may well be that a certain degree of the grunge is artistic versus technical, but I suspect that in a blind test I would still prefer a version with slightly less muddy drums.
Atom just had an update this week that's supposed to have improved the DOM interaction. It might be a bit better now.
Out of curiosity, what's your use case for changing a token that appears several hundred times with multiple cursors? Wouldn't find and replace be more effective?
No and yes. I don't know of a "modern" logic programming language that is a standalone language (they might exist but are not too popular), but there are several embeddable logic programming languages. Clojure's core.logic is perhaps the most popular one, but there are others too. And Prolog itself can be embedded in several different languages.
And this makes all the sense in the world, Prolog isn't a very practical programming language for tasks that are not logic programming (or some variant thereof - like fuzzy logic). So it's nicer to have a logic programming language either as an embedded domain specific language (EDSL) or available as a library.
Implementing a Prolog -like language isn't too difficult (and it's very fun) so sometimes it might be more practical (or fun) to whip up a custom language for that purpose, perhaps with domain specific variations applied.
And besides, Prolog is "modern" in the sense that there are actively maintained and used implementations available. Like Lisp, it has stood up well to the test of time (perhaps because Lambda calculus and Predicate logic are solid theoretical foundations to build on), and there are modern implementations available even if the language itself is decades old.
Parts of the "logic" component has been relegated to libraries -- rule based system, constraint programming, databases (see Datomic and its Datalog based querying languages).
I guess I gotta wave my "descriptive not prescriptive" flag a bit. =) You are, technically, correct. Hermes Conrad aside, technically correct is not the best kind of correct--"apologist" has nearly universally negative connotations in, well, modern English, here, now. It is used almost exclusively to characterize a position that the user of the word views as negative. And people who don't fall into that generality often are using the word in "defiance" of that generality, which kind of makes you wonder why, when words are used to communicate. It's also worth noting that at least some dictionaries characterize "apologist" as a defender of something controversial, which is a nod towards the real-world use of the term if you read into what they mean by controversial a bit.
The world isn't an SAT test. Context always always always matters. (And, for extra context-matters, if you are now compelled, at the end of this post, to ask what a "Standard Aptitude Test test" is, I invite you to take a good long look at your life and ask yourself why you want to be That Guy because nobody likes That Guy.)
Sure. But the use of "apologist" in a Christian context is, today in 2015, much more niche than, say, calling the news organ of a particular political stripe "liberal apologia"; it would be rare to see the New York Times use that phrase except in irony but much more common for conservative sources to do so, because it's commonly understood to be more negative than neutral.
It's much the same as getting mad when somebody uses "hacker" to mean something other than "train and/or computer nerd". You don't get to lay a prescriptive claim to truth.
I am an apologist for the ideas of democracy, the rule of law and equality before it. As I am for certain aspects of attempts to achieve such. I am not any kind of apologist for facism, totalitarianism and ideologies that lead to such.
From a slightly different angle that may make the example clearer:
The so called "2 party" democracy has it's drawbacks, one of which is often labeled "partisanship" or something like that. I am an apologist for that, while acknowledging its imperfections and problems. The concept of the loyal opposition is the thing that seems to have worked best so far, I would argue it has worked best by such a huge margin that alternatives are scarcely worth considering other than as the enemy of freedom.
That's still a pretty ridiculous claim. That every plant we grow is in some perfect state where processing can't improve it. Especially when you consider how many are weird artificially bred mutants so any evolutionary argument is instantly invalid.
