59nadir

23 ms·

361.
by 59nadir 3y ago
`term_to_binary`/`binary_to_term` is used (probably more) outside of just transmission; the same caveats about those functions apply no matter the context.
362.
by 59nadir 3y ago
You're getting a lot of downvotes but I think it's mostly because of a misunderstanding of the bigger picture. Erlang can provide a low median latency and won't be very sensitive to outliers where many other languages will ha
363.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I don't know what to tell you. I don't know many languages that have a shorter on-ramp than Zig (or Odin). The obvious relevant language here would be Go, but Go wouldn't be as desirable in terms of producing as good results
364.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I agree; the title is doing a lot of work in terms of getting people to read the article and I'm sure the author is aware. This is a trade-off and when the article doesn't quite sell on the promise of the title you are bound to ge
365.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> Some people are alright with the fact that they're prototyping their code 10x more slowly than in another language because they enjoy performance optimization and seeing their code run fast, and there's nothing wrong with tha
366.
by 59nadir 3y ago
Learning Zig is a very low barrier to entry. From experience I can tell you that learning the language is a matter of weeks and most of the code in the wild will be very accessible to you once you've done that, because there aren'
367.
by 59nadir 3y ago
It's not a drop-in replacement. `lsd` is, as far as I can see.
368.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> I use `exa` (and now `eza`) because it provides a better than GNU `ls`, IMHO. A better what?
369.
by 59nadir 3y ago
You don't need a parser library; writing the tokenizer + parsing logic isn't a very time consuming endeavor and the code doesn't suffer from it either. The upside is also that you're not taking on some monstrosity of a l
370.
by 59nadir 3y ago
As far as languages go SQL is pretty bad, though. It's not even really a good representation of what it's trying to do. I think if SQL is a good domain specific language the bar seems very low.
371.
by 59nadir 3y ago
3/20 and two correct ones were guesses here; I was actually wondering what's wrong with me, asking "Dude, have you ever even seen the AWS console at this point?" (I have in fact stared at it way too much). Goes to show a
372.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I think you seem to be arguing that the end result should be a "map"-like structure, whereas the other commenter is arguing about the interface to the logging library not being based on maps. These are not the same and taking maps
373.
by 59nadir 3y ago
The fact that you had to preface this with you and your friends being pet owners kind of does make it a special case. You being suggested this vacuum cleaner by Amazon after buying it also doesn't do anything for you in this scenario b
374.
by 59nadir 3y ago
That would be a great point were it not for the fact that virtually all Linux distros run everything on shared libraries. I like Linux but this is one aspect of it that has never done it any favors. It was probably a decent choice at one po
375.
by 59nadir 3y ago
Linux is absolutely terrible with this, it sits on the "extremely unlikely" end whereas Windows sits on the other in terms of backwards compatibility. It's not surprising either because the entire ecosystem runs on the myth t
376.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I am fully on board with htmx but hyperscript doesn't necessarily interest me. The htmx side doesn't care even one bit what client-side interactivity you use at all, so it's not really material to whether htmx can be useful f
377.
by 59nadir 3y ago
In practice a lot of the supposed "more readable" code in FP style isn't actually more readable, it's mostly leaky abstractions you'll most likely want to get rid of if you want to know what code is actually doing o
378.
by 59nadir 3y ago
What is the obscure language?
379.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I think unknown knowns are more easy to spot when teaching newcomers how the system works. Their questions will sometimes be about things we hadn't even considerered (at least in some time) to be the case, but when you have to spell ev
380.
by 59nadir 3y ago
To some degree a lot of people are now finding OCaml via dev YouTube influencers who highlight OCaml without actually having used it. There's a lot of enthusiasm, kind of like how lots of people were loving and super excited about Rust
381.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> That’s common with people used to languages which provide poor parser generators. The vast majority of real languages have hand-rolled parsers and there is no real reason they shouldn't.
382.
by 59nadir 3y ago
It's funny that you're talking about this in a Python context, because pretty much every few lines will be 50-100x overhead. I take your point that Python would probably slow this type of thing down even more than it should, but s
383.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I searched for "multiplayer" here just to see if maybe I was mistaken about this game; number of players is not a super meaningful stressor on a system when you're not providing a whole slew of live services and simulation, s
384.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> “Readable” is mostly a matter of “fits the grooves already worn in my brain”; to me, the Elixir there nonstandard-macro-based-syntax-and-all, is vastly more readable than the Clojure. I'll admit to being able to read Lisp syntax w
385.
by 59nadir 3y ago
The interface to almost everything either contains or is based on a macro. This persists even in cases where you can clearly see there needed to be no macros at all. The non-standard (won't work with anything else) and basically superf
386.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> Yep this is definitely a problem, but fortunately the culture/community around Elixir generally tends to frown on unnecessary macros. I heard the saying, "if it can be a normal function, it should be" many times, which p
387.
by 59nadir 3y ago
> - custom DSL syntax without data representation This is an interesting comment in a post about Elixir because the Elixir ecosystem is actually full of things that should just be data but are instead macros being used in modules. Phoeni
388.
by 59nadir 3y ago
Easier in the best case and much harder in the worst, when your lack of thinking is an issue (which it definitely will be unless you're prepared to use more of the machine for no reason). Simplicity is not about what's easier to u
389.
by 59nadir 3y ago
No one needs to be fighting allocators; they are far less inhibiting and pose less of an issue than GC or RAII will in the vast majority of cases. They're far easier and simpler to deal with on the whole as well. You're always int
390.
by 59nadir 3y ago
I suspect Nim would be much, much harder to wrangle for games than Zig (or easily the best of the bunch: Odin) since it doesn't make enough things clear at all in terms of allocation and only allows indirect control of allocation and d

More ›