Kamq

26 ms·

331.
by Kamq 3y ago
Sure, but that's desirable with, maybe, 5% of the code re-use opportunities I run across. I'm not saying to never use classes. I just got really confused about them being pushed as one of the dominant forms of code-reuse.
332.
by Kamq 3y ago
Yeah, that still weirds me out. Especially considering the other obvious mechanism of code reuse, the function.
333.
by Kamq 3y ago
That doesn't seem ironic. Someone writing a book arguing for breaking the rules is exactly who I would expect to break the rules. Or is the irony here that someone actually took an idea seriously and followed through on it?
334.
by Kamq 3y ago
Wouldn't what you're proposing complicate the rest of normal mode though? Or is this just reversing the order so it's {motion}{verb} instead of {verb}{motion}?
335.
by Kamq 3y ago
You forgot BCPL
336.
by Kamq 3y ago
> So 3w could select three words but also move the cursor to the end of selection I mean, if you hit v first, that's exactly what it does.
337.
by Kamq 3y ago
> The key is to have that interface be narrow and well defined - something like gRPC. You really can't use a mesh of unikernels for this then. You need an external system to enforce the types (like a compiler does for a single progr
338.
by Kamq 3y ago
> qubes-style cluster-of-communicating-unikernels on the desktop Oh hey, yeah. A bunch of small utilities that communicate and interoperate. I can see it working out. You could even have them communicate with each other via some sort of
339.
by Kamq 3y ago
> C/C++ (the standard) makes no claims about what happens if you overflow integers. It makes no claims on what happens when you overflow signed integers. Unsigned integer wrapping is specified by section 6.2.5, paragraph 9 of the
340.
by Kamq 3y ago
> What entitles you to run one? I mean, you're sending _me_ the bytes. I get to decide what I do with them. I don't tend to complain when people stop serving content when I'm using an ad-blocker, but I do reserve the right
341.
by Kamq 3y ago
A number of languages that would have been traditionally compiled (statically typed, produce a native binary by default, etc), have started adding a "run" command. If your language compiles fast enough, it's about the same ex
342.
by Kamq 3y ago
You could have them spiral around each other (i.e. start with two hexagons next to each other, have the left one go up/right and the right one go down/left and keep wrapping clockwise). I think this is only having the areas not be
343.
by Kamq 3y ago
Interesting. Thanks for indulging me. I appreciate the conversation.
344.
by Kamq 3y ago
Ahh, I see. I originally thought you were trying to smuggle in a fully general argument against willful inconsistency, which so far as I've seen, produces very bad results. But (and correct me if I'm wrong here), your problem seem
345.
by Kamq 3y ago
> If you say 2+2=4 and then in the following sentence say 2+2=5 without any change in definitions or axioms, something is fucky with your theory. Sure, but assuming 2+2=5 has some really bad external outcomes you can point to. For exampl
346.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Can't have it both ways I'm afraid. Why? I mean, it's logically inconsistent, but human beings are pretty good at that. The irrational is entirely within our capabilities. You can argue that we shouldn't, but if it&
347.
by Kamq 3y ago
People forgot about the whole "flattening the curve" thing, and a bunch of narratives cropped up about what the end goal was. The goals, which were never real, started to have political consequences and it became a whole thing.
348.
by Kamq 3y ago
That's really more of a post 60s-ish thing. You can't really extend it back to Korea or before. From ~FDR-LBJ, the democratic party was pretty pro-war (so was the average american, really, so I guess that's fair for a party c
349.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Its never been harder to move The water at the new place won't give you dysentery in 2023. And even if it does, we have treatments for it.
350.
by Kamq 3y ago
> I would go a little bit farther and say that actually formally stating those from-the-heavens requirements would improve software quality and possibly even increase pleasantness for the principals in question Do you think so? It seems
351.
by Kamq 3y ago
As an american programmer, I don't think you have it exactly correct (though I think you're getting close). You're right that correctness isn't what I'm shooting for. Pleasantness is important only when the end user
352.
by Kamq 3y ago
Oh derp. Yeah I could see that being an issue. My brain's shot and I thought they were talking about some sort of server spec (not sure for what? conig? request handling?)
353.
by Kamq 3y ago
Generally speaking, at least with in realty, a single family home is a term used to mean a specific thing. Specifically, a single-family home has no shared property but is built on its own parcel of land. Additionally it can have no common-
354.
by Kamq 3y ago
> Because it's literally their job: Protect the citizen. That is not automatically the government's job. At least not in every worldview. And these things exist on a spectrum. Protecting people from direct external threats is p
355.
by Kamq 3y ago
That's really ignoring the network effect that you're claiming to be dealing with. As said, you don't subsidize the app creation or use. The apps already exist. The users know roughly how to use them. The solution would be to
356.
by Kamq 3y ago
It has only expanded to mean that in the couple of most expensive cities to live in in the world. And, really, having a single family home in, say, the middle of new york city IS a marker of wealth. You're displacing however many peopl
357.
by Kamq 3y ago
> non-conformant Non-conformant to what? Is it following a spec somewhere?
358.
by Kamq 3y ago
If you make me start statically typing the random scripts I write to munge data round to answer business questions, I quit.
359.
by Kamq 3y ago
The productivity hack is usually in getting examples of things you don't know how to do (or are unsure of the best way to do). Programming languages are pretty optimized for precision, if you want a specific thing done, and you already
360.
by Kamq 3y ago
> and, frankly, why would you write `.js` in 2023? It's surprisingly convenient for munging around random json files or calling random apis that return json (or for dealing with an interaction between the two), especially now that f

More ›