Peaker

89 ms·

841.
by Peaker 14y ago
Or his actions could have spread the wealth of information to many who lack access to it, facilitating further progress. The notion that publicly funded research works are behind paywalls is absurd. In any case, we will never know, because
842.
by Peaker 14y ago
Did he actually distribute anything?
843.
by Peaker 14y ago
I disagree. Incremental changes are not always capable of reaching point B from point A. A large, extremely messy code-base can make even trivial changes unsafe, let alone large changes. The effort required not only to figure out what point
844.
by Peaker 14y ago
Of that list, I'd recommend Haskell and Erlang. Haskell in particular is especially interesting if speed is of concern. Haskell manages to combine the conciseness and elegance of good Python code with static safety not found in other mainst
845.
by Peaker 14y ago
My experience is the exact opposite. Trying to make do with horrible code for long periods of time, suffering through bugs in every change... Until we finally rewrite it. I've never regretted a rewrite, and it has always ended up signific
846.
by Peaker 14y ago
> Also note, that symmetrical funding will mean costs inflation - if defendant gets a million, prosecutor probably would have to spend more on prosecution, since now he has to overcome a million-dollar lawyers. I don't see how that make
847.
by Peaker 14y ago
It would just be a factor of two in costs. Surely you're exaggerating its effect. Additionally I would propose that in some random subset of accepted plea bargains, a trial is forced and if the plea is consistently unreasonably far from the
848.
by Peaker 14y ago
Apparently he broke very minor laws, though, that don't even imply any jail time.
849.
by Peaker 14y ago
I wonder, if there was a law that all funds spent on your side in a trial, had to be matched by funds given to the other side to fund his side as well -- would that work? If the DA's budget per trial is $1 million, then lawyers of the defen
850.
by Peaker 14y ago
None of my Haskell programs have any space leaks. While go makes a lot of correctness bugs really easy to accidentally make, Haskell does make a certain class of leak easier to maker. I'd personally take a correct program that leaks in som
851.
by Peaker 14y ago
I thought you recognized such a need by wanting to learn a new language and ideas.. I did Python for 7 years before I realized Haskell had huge advantages I find very important and it took an extra two years of gradual transition until I ha
852.
by Peaker 14y ago
So you will never dare to lose sight of shore to reach new lands?
853.
by Peaker 14y ago
Well, the nice thing about this abstraction in Haskell, is that you can give a name to the notion of receiving a bunch of values (Reader), outputting a bunch of values (Writer), threading state that can be both Read and Written (State), non
854.
by Peaker 14y ago
Yes, you pass in Random, and file streams. If you need to pass the same set of multiple things to multiple functions, you declare a type that represents all these arguments. At least this is the approach used in Haskell, with semi-explicit
855.
by Peaker 14y ago
Yeah, many years ago...
856.
by Peaker 14y ago
But passing in a function providing the time is a form of "dependency injection". It is a shitty name for the practice, but that's at least one way I saw the term "dependency injection" used.
857.
by Peaker 14y ago
Tests you only partially trust are a lot better than no tests at all. Also, the tests can be less reliable by generating false positives. As long as all positives are checked, and the tests are maintained to pass (by fixing the tests and pr
858.
by Peaker 14y ago
> Go makes concurrency easy to get right. I haven't seen any other language get this so right since Erlang. I don't understand this: You claim you've used Haskell? Haskell beats Go's concurrency out of the water. Not to mention concisen
859.
by Peaker 14y ago
More productive than any other language? That's quite a bold claim... I'd expect languages that require far less code for pretty much anything, and have far more compile-time safety to be more productive both at the prototyping stage, and a
860.
by Peaker 14y ago
The post I replied to said: > I am programmer because I am naturally curious and because I love creative problem solving. Which is still an excellent reason to be a programmer. > What honestly pisses me off, is that these days progr
861.
by Peaker 14y ago
It is entirely possible to move higher up to very HLL's and still have a very deep understanding of how things work. I have been using Haskell, a very high-level language for about 4 years now, and there is so much deep stuff to learn. No
862.
by Peaker 14y ago
We definitely are closer to an AI than we were. More and more functions that were once human-only are now a machine capability. Intelligently playing games, voice recognition, image recognition, and some (though this is still undergoing int
863.
by Peaker 14y ago
What I thought "singularity" meant is merely that eventually human work will become worthless as easy to replicate machines will be more intelligent. I agree that predicting when it would happen is somewhat silly. Also, I had no idea that
864.
by Peaker 14y ago
Are you claiming that the idea that AI will eventually be smarter than humans and thus render human work mostly useless, a religious idea?
865.
by Peaker 14y ago
Strong typing is not nearly as good when the type system is weaker. Java's "strong typing" doesn't protect you from null dereference errors, as one example out of many. Also, strong typing is not as good when you have to specify a lot of
866.
by Peaker 14y ago
Indeed, extending your repertoire is definitely a good thing.
867.
by Peaker 14y ago
Your claim that it is over-engineered is unsubstantiated, and from a Haskell user's point of view, plainly false. The claim that the notation is unreadable is similar. Haskell's notation is certainly unfamiliar, and that can be frustrating
868.
by Peaker 14y ago
You also need an Ord or at least an Eq constraint on the b's.
869.
by Peaker 14y ago
You can start to use your commit log as the comments.
870.
by Peaker 14y ago
> relative to just writing the code in the order you want things to happen in an imperative language When you write them in the order you want, you're implicitly chaining them with a primitive chain operator that's built-into the langua

More ›