Mobile user running Firefox + uBlock Origin here. Works great. Probably not on iPhones though...

There's https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/ for the more academic CS questions btw.

The new owners (well, not really new any more) are focused on adding AI to SO because it's the current hotness, and making other changes to try to extract more money that they're completely ignoring the community's issues and objections to their changes, which tend to be half-assed and full of bugs.

I see plenty of old answers that are still very relevant. Suppose it depends on what language/tech tags you follow.

Ublock and not being Google are Firefox's killer features for me.

Same. I tried LibreWolf for a while but as TA mentioned, it required too much tuning. (It also isn't signed on macOS so installing has extra hoops.) I'm on Waterfox now and it's just about right for me.

Does Waterfox support Firefox Sync? Their web page is a bit sparse on details on how it differs from Firefox.

It's right on their support page. They also have a search function, just type in "Sync" and you'll get there.

https://www.waterfox.com/support/how-do-i-set-sync-my-comput...

Also, no, the page is not "sparse" on how it differs from Firefox, it's clearly explained https://www.waterfox.com/#why-waterfox

I like several features of Firefox, particularly containers as the article mentions. But honestly, not being Google would be enough for me all by itself. I have my issues with Google itself, but even if Google was perfect I'd still be opposed to a large Internet content company also having monopoly control over the client side browser experience. That end-to-end control is just too tempting to abuse without some reasonable alternative that people can switch to.

Probably worried their taxes would go up.

More books than I can easily recall or put down here.

Currently in the middle of a re-read of one of my favorites, Ken Kesey's Sometimes A Great Notion. Also the first Otherside Picnic light novel, after watching and loving the anime adaptation.

English classes (at least at my high school) were largely about literature, less the language itself. Though I did take one elective class on grammar.

>Lua is the only lightweight language that I am aware of with TCO.

Scheme is pretty lightweight.

Tcl too, fwiw[0].

[0] https://wiki.tcl-lang.org/page/NRE

Tcl needs a special command for tail calls though, instead of it Just Working (tm). It's kind of awkward.

Which scheme implementation? Guile?

All of them.

To elaborate, the scheme spec requires tco.

Which scheme is embeddable and lightweight?

And what does lightweight mean? Does it mean low memory footprint or does it mean few-lines-of-code-to-introduce or does it mean zero-dependencies?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIOD is lighter weight than almost anything. Way smaller than Lua.

Also look at Hedgehog Lisp. The bytecode compiler (runs on a PC) is separate from the interpreter, i.e. there is no REPL. But it means that the interpreter is only about 20KB of code. It's quite practical. It's not Scheme but rather is a functional Lisp (immutable data including AVL trees as the main lookup structure) and it is tail recursive. https://github.com/sbp/hedgehog

I meant which scheme implementation is "lightweight" and also meant to ask what "lightweight means".

For a functionnal language, TCO is really a must have. How would you do the equivalent of loops without it ?

For a purely functional language. Scheme is not that.

https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/while-do...

And you are wrong because you can define a loop as iterating recursively over a list with just car and cdr.

Can but since other constructs exist that doesn't by itself make TCO "must have"

I wasn't asking which scheme has TCO.

I was asking which scheme if the 20-50 of them was "lightweight" and embeddable.

/Programmers/ can.