Joker_vD

27 ms·

571.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
Gee, I wonder why the tooling for ML in Lisp is missing even though the early ML frameworks were in Lisp. Perhaps there is something about the language that stifles truly wide collaboration?
572.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> the same sort of reason that retailers can't be held to incorrectly published prices (in the UK at least, a displayed price is an “invitation to tender”, not a contract or other promise) The hell? Over here, the price tags are a
573.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> if the url with the extension gets past around instead of the original (as would inevitably be done) you're back to square one. Why? It has no "Vary" header, and it's the one that's supposed to get cached anyho
574.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
Yes, you can dump your IR straight to the disk and then stream it to process further. That's how quite a number of compilers (and assemblers) were written back in the 70s and it was quite painful. IIRC, Unix's original as works th
575.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> if you limit each string to be at most 256 bytes, then a string with only 10 bytes will waste 246 bytes of memory. No? Unless you limit each string to be exactly 256 bytes but that's silly. > If you limit string length to 32
576.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
That's tangentially related to the Vary header. Not only Accept can go into its value, you know. And an optimal solution IMHO would be for the origin server to simply return 302 to a specific resource, selected upon the value of the Ac
577.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
As is traditional with most explanations of HTTP caching, it doesn't mention Vary header. Although apparently some CDNs (e.g. Cloudflare) straight up ignore it for some reason [0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?
578.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> don't believe the "syntax win" scenario. Python is also ugly, due to the required indentation, like yaml. That's like, your opinion. Python was explicitly designed being easy to learn, borrowing heavily from ABC, wh
579.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> The (n: i32) can be just (n i32), because there is no benefit to adding the colon there. > The -> i32 can also be just i32 because, again, the -> serves no purpose in function/method definition syntax. Well, there is, but
580.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
It's kinda amusing how much of interesting software there is beyond coreutils and GCC that came from GNU, and how little adoption it has actually seen.
581.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> Yes but but does the process have to read from a file system dotfile, instead of some data fetched over a ssh connection? Well, no. But if you didn't write that program (e.g. bash or vim), you're stuck with what their actual
582.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
Okay, right now it's basically Pascal as it was described in Revised Report, only even more restricted. Which is... fine, I guess, you can still write a whole OS with something like that (without using pointers/addresses) as Per-B
583.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
That starts to sound like using VS Code in remote mode.
584.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
scp my-precious-dotfiles remote:~ trap 'ssh remote rm my-precious-dotfiles' EXIT ssh remote Or you can even bake the trap into the remote bash's invocation, although that'd be a bit harder.
585.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> I wonder why are dofiles have to be on remote machines? Because the processes that use them run on the remote machines. > I type an alias, the ssh client expands it on my local machine and send complex commands to remote. This is n
586.
by Joker_vD 10mo ago
> Did it do what it was supposed to do, but in a different way or defer for retrying later? Then WARN. > Did it fail to do what it needed to do? ERROR > Did it do what it needed to do in the normal way because it was totally recove
587.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
I could've sworn we got "sets" in the Go's standard library along with the "maps" module but... apparently not? Huh.
588.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
> If you didn't have vectors, Maxwell's equations would spill all over the place. What do you mean, "would": they did! :) The original equations had 20 separate equations, although Maxwell himself tried to reformulate
589.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Ideally, one should pipe into $PAGER, or, if that's missing, into "pager" (it's usually symlinked to less), or, if that's missing, into "less"/"more"/"cat", or, if even those
590.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Yes, people tend to try to dig out additional information from the particular wording (talk about a hidden channel) based on how they would phrase the same message themselves. That's why communication is hard.
591.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Yeah, I've once said in a relationship "Look, sure, she maybe pretty, but I want to be with you, so no, I am not going to reach out to her, don't worry". Apparently, it was a poor way to word this idea.
592.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Oh, it's a transliteration of Russian "офтоп", which itself started as a borrowing of "off-topic" from English (but as a noun instead of an adjective/stative) and then went some natural linguistic developments,
593.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
All non-trivial specs, like the one for seL4, are hard to verify. Lots of that complexity comes from interacting with the rest of the world which is a huge shared mutable global state you can't afford to ignore. Of course, you can decl
594.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
> I am not an expert on this, but the worst API I've seen is those with hidden states. > e.g. .toggle() API. Call it old number of times, it goes to one state, call it even number of times, it goes back. This is literally a dumb
595.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
> Let's say formal verification could help to avoid some anti-patterns. I'd still like to hear about the actual mechanism of this happening. Because I personally find it much easier to believe that the moment keeping the formal
596.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
> Formal verification will eventually lead to good, stable API design. Why? Has it ever happened like this? Because to me it would seem that if the system verified to work, then it works no matter how API is shaped, so there is no incent
597.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
No, the root cause is that cancer exists. Or rather, that humans exist at all. It's all very well and dandy that you can say "actually, there is a larger structural problem underlying it all" when meeting something bad, but i
598.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Yeah, and in your contract with ISP you explicitly agree to file any lawsuit against them in small claims court only. Although you can probably go and complain to FCC about them?
599.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
Okay, I've imagined that. Am I supposed to sympathise with the end users in this scenario or?..
600.
by Joker_vD 11mo ago
And that's why I, personally, rent a VPS, run "ssh -D 9010 myvps" in a background, and selectively point my browser at it via proxy.pac (other apps get socksified as needed; although some stubbornly resist it, sigh ). But it

More ›