4 ms·

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Sounds interesting, but saying you can't prove it, and nobody will believe it is a tough sell. I guess I find it hard to bel

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Sounds interesting, but saying you can't prove it, and nobody will believe it is a tough sell. I guess I find it hard to believe like others, but you are talking in very abstract terms, and not being able to (or refusing to) give any kind of details sounds like you are trolling or don't realize that your solution does only work for what you work on. I'd say I could be proven wrong, but it seems you don't wish to do anything other than generalize. Good luck to you if you've actually found what you describe.

ninetyninenine 2y ago
No need to apologize. I assure you I'm not trolling. Yeah I am talking in abstract terms because I don't really want to get into a debate on the topic. The reason is because any design style in this area is basically unprovable and leads to endless debates. There's no point. I do have something that explains my pattern and serves as support for it. But it's no proof because such a thing isn't really provable. Anyway it's easier to let AI explain it. In the following conversation I basically ask chatGPT about this topic with very general questions while manipulating it as little as possible. https://chatgpt.com/share/67b3ca4b-fc5c-8001-a072-342357b8a61c https://chatgpt.com/share/67b3ca4b-fc5c-8001-a072-342357b8a6... chatGPT basically arrives at the same pattern I discovered. Where I cheated is when I started giving my own opinions on the several patterns chatGPT suggests and I hinted the LLM at the direction I wanted to go. Everything else is a very general question. That being said, there are clearly other sets of general questions that can very well lead chatGPT to form alternate conclusions, but this one aligns with what I and many others have discovered.
- ctenb 2y ago
  Those are pretty well known FP oriented guidelines that many developers here on HN are familiar with. I don't think that your fear of not being believed is warranted.
  - ninetyninenine 2y ago
    HN is mostly not hardcore fp programmers. There’s a good amount of fp programmers but they are not the majority. Plenty of go and c++ lovers here and people who don’t understand the guidelines above. The point is I don’t want to argue about it with someone who doesn’t get it.

ninetyninenine 2y ago

No need to apologize. I assure you I'm not trolling. Yeah I am talking in abstract terms because I don't really want to get into a debate on the topic. The reason is because any design style in this area is basically unprovable and leads to endless debates. There's no point. I do have something that explains my pattern and serves as support for it. But it's no proof because such a thing isn't really provable. Anyway it's easier to let AI explain it. In the following conversation I basically ask chatGPT about this topic with very general questions while manipulating it as little as possible. https://chatgpt.com/share/67b3ca4b-fc5c-8001-a072-342357b8a61c https://chatgpt.com/share/67b3ca4b-fc5c-8001-a072-342357b8a6... chatGPT basically arrives at the same pattern I discovered. Where I cheated is when I started giving my own opinions on the several patterns chatGPT suggests and I hinted the LLM at the direction I wanted to go. Everything else is a very general question. That being said, there are clearly other sets of general questions that can very well lead chatGPT to form alternate conclusions, but this one aligns with what I and many others have discovered.

ctenb 2y ago
Those are pretty well known FP oriented guidelines that many developers here on HN are familiar with. I don't think that your fear of not being believed is warranted.
- ninetyninenine 2y ago
  HN is mostly not hardcore fp programmers. There’s a good amount of fp programmers but they are not the majority. Plenty of go and c++ lovers here and people who don’t understand the guidelines above. The point is I don’t want to argue about it with someone who doesn’t get it.