Miky

9 ms·

31.
by Miky 15y ago
Jumping the shark is the moment when something, such as a TV show, or in this case a community around a web framework, begins to decline in quality beyond recovery, so “jumping the shark for these small and trivial problems” really doesn't
32.
by Miky 15y ago
I'm a bit unconvinced, since specification, design, and testing could be fundamentally different and vastly improved from the way they are now, not just the area of syntax errors.
33.
by Miky 15y ago
The bartender says, “What is this - some kind of joke?” because a great deal of jokes are set up with three people of different ethnicities (or some other kind of group) walking into a bar.
34.
by Miky 15y ago
And from the other side, how many decades was AI approached from an ineffective direction because it was assumed that Lisp was good at it?
35.
by Miky 15y ago
Charles Stross is definitely an author to read if you're looking for interesting predictions that have a good chance of coming true.
36.
by Miky 15y ago
Nice Anathem reference :) The problem with your analogy is that the debris from the spaceship, etc. would still be visible to an observer after the fact. A better analogy would be this: The aliens point a camera at our entire civilization.
37.
by Miky 15y ago
There's still an event beyond which there appears to be no superposition, whether that's because the two blobs of amplitude have separated enough or whether it's because there's only one left, and I think the word collapse serves well enoug
38.
by Miky 15y ago
No, that is wrong. The cat is not both alive and dead at the same time. The Schrödinger's cat thought experiment was invented to show the absurdity of the collapse of quantum states being caused by a conscious observer. The collapse of stat
39.
by Miky 15y ago
I guess we're using the term “cargo cult programming” about different things. I'm not arguing that the author of this post doesn't have a very good knowledge of C++, and a somewhat good knowledge of how monads are sometimes used in Haskell.
40.
by Miky 15y ago
I don't even think the author should be using monads for expressions how he was doing in Haskell, which arguably does have suitable tools for using monads in this way. Doing it in C++ is ridiculous. One can have expressions like that in C++
41.
by Miky 15y ago
OK, downvotes. Why, exactly? I'm not trying to troll. Monads as commonly explained on blog posts are cargo cult mathematics, and monads used in languages like C++ where they make code longer and more complicated instead of simpler, are carg
42.
by Miky 15y ago
This is the worst example of cargo cult programming I've seen in a good while.
43.
by Miky 15y ago
It would be quite possible to design a processor that is not designed around series of instructions at all, but something more akin to functional programming. In this case, everything will “actually happen ” without any kind of series of i
44.
by Miky 15y ago
It seems that you didn't actually read the post. Your comment is only in response to the title, and it's actually a good example of what the post was trying to combat.
45.
by Miky 16y ago
> most programmers write code as in the language they first really used, regardless of the language they're actually using I doubt that this is true. I can't quite remember, but I'm pretty sure the first language I ever used was
46.
by Miky 16y ago
The author of this article appears never to have used a functional programming language in his life. He misunderstands several key terms in the realm of functional programming and makes up a few of his own terms so that he can construct a s
47.
by Miky 16y ago
Haskell does contain no assignment in the traditional sense. = in Haskell defines a name to stand for a value, which can't ever change.
48.
by Miky 16y ago
No, it's not. There is extremely little to suggest that it uses quantum effects for computation.
49.
by Miky 16y ago
It's not meaningful at all. The list would just be constructed entirely from right to left. The "first" item in a pair would be on the right, and "car" would just mean "item on the right of a pair", or "first item in a list".
50.
by Miky 16y ago
You could simply reverse the order of the arguments to cons.
51.
You Are All Liars(kotaku.com)
2 points by Miky 16y ago|0 comments
52.
by Miky 16y ago
His example of C vs C++ doesn't take advantage of virtual functions/polymorphism at all, which is a much more significant part of the "syntactic sugar" that C++ adds over C, and is what I would say makes it OO. So what if it's "just" syntac
53.
by Miky 16y ago
"A superset of Haskell, which allowed arbitrary IO tainting" doesn't really make any sense with Haskell's semantics, unless you're talking about unsafePerformIO, which already exists.
54.
by Miky 16y ago
There isn't anything that sufficiently complex algorithms can't find out that humans can, so this doesn't seen to be a terribly useful conclusion.
55.
by Miky 16y ago
C's type system is restrictive enough to get annoying occasionally, but doesn't protect you from loads of things it could, since it is not strongly typed.
56.
by Miky 17y ago
Strong typing and dynamic typing aren't mutually exclusive. Most dynamically typed languages are strongly typed, and C, a statically typed language, is weakly typed. But good suggestion. :)
57.
by Miky 17y ago
I'm not arguing that Haskell can't improve in a lot of ways, but his complaints all seem to stem from attempting to program in Haskell using idioms that don't work well there. If you want to incrementally add to a data structure, use curryi
58.
by Miky 17y ago
If Buzz had been released with invites, I think that it would have had the same problems as Wave with no one checking it. Both of them should be separate Google apps with Gmail notifications, but no Gmail integration. Wave could still have
59.
by Miky 17y ago
Those sound pretty cool. I'll look into them.
60.
by Miky 17y ago
Yes, that's it! Thank you.

More ›