Quekid5

32 ms·

391.
by Quekid5 4y ago
In OCaml lazy data is fundamentally incompatible with strict data -- you have to explicitly evaluate it, e.g. when passing to a function which takes strict data. This means you end up with two disjoint 'worlds' where you need to w
392.
by Quekid5 4y ago
While you're technically right, it's only in the same sense that any TC language can do anything any other TC language can -- you can theoretically always delay any computation behind a lambda, but the ergonomics have wide-ranging
393.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Indeed, a fundamental to the problem is that most unicode text doesn't actually carry the relevant locale information... (Of course, one probably wouldn't want to rely on sender-specified locales for email adresses when deciding
394.
by Quekid5 4y ago
[Thank you, edited]
395.
by Quekid5 4y ago
I think this talk shows that it's probably a bit more complicated than that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw Unless you happen to understand Finnish, subtitles are mandatory (and very accurate AFAICT). Ther
396.
by Quekid5 4y ago
It really is mind-bending stuff -- I have only the vaguest idea of how these proofs could work, but you summarized it beautifully. As an aside, this is also perhaps also one of the best motivating examples of the idea of "oracles"
397.
by Quekid5 4y ago
There was a Revised Syntax (not sure if it's still a thing) which smooths out some of the most egregious warts. It requires preprocessing, but it was part of the standard distribution last I looked. The most egregious for me was actual
398.
by Quekid5 4y ago
It might actually be a meta-joke on the band name 'OK Go'.
399.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Sounds like a good reason to perhaps literally ban links to oa.mg on HN?
400.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Fair :)
401.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Further, in certain cases (P =? NP is one I know of) it has been proven that certain types [0] of proofs cannot possibly work -- and yet people keep offering "proofs" of those bound-to-be-wrong types. [0] Not sure if 'types&
402.
by Quekid5 4y ago
> "player (number) zero" That would be because any game worth playing has at least one player... and so it's natural to continue from there. (In terms of language.)
403.
by Quekid5 4y ago
The underlying problem here is that SQL lacks Sum Types (aka Tagged Unions). Such types solve all these problems effortlessly. In contrast to what SQL has, Sum Types combined with Product Types (which is basically what a row is) are actuall
404.
by Quekid5 4y ago
> I have never seen the benefit of leaving signed overflow undefined, IIRC it affords huge optimization opportunities, esp. around loops. (Now, whether you like that or not is a value judgment, but a lot of people do want those optim
405.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Others have already answered this one, but somewhat relevant: https://www.timeanddate.com/date/february-30.html
406.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Having largely unquestioning followers certainly does bestow a certain level of power.
407.
by Quekid5 4y ago
That would be a Fail Open type solution which isn't exactly great where security is concerned.
408.
by Quekid5 4y ago
The site would have to have a hell of a value proposition for that to be worth the effort.
409.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Yes, but if you're distributing revocation lists you might as well distribute new authorized_keys files? Or wait, maybe I'm misremembering... does sshd support querying remote revocation lists? If so, point conceded. You still hav
410.
by Quekid5 4y ago
> invalidate old ones This one is non-trivial in SSH land (unless you go with a CA approach, of course). Lots of authorized_keys files strewn about everywhere...
411.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Ah, right. I had heard of that term and was hoping it was less bleak. Don't need all of the audience to have issues of any sort to have some of them... do things. Sometimes the reach of "information" sucks.
412.
by Quekid5 4y ago
> Is an online mob of people with mental problems the best new way to censor information and discourage scientific oversight? What you mean by this? Do you think his audience has mental problems, or...? If yes, then what percentage of hi
413.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Well, yes, but we were imagining a world with a sort of universal "about:", I think? You wouldn't even need that many basic types to cover about 90%+ of the state space. Of course, there would be bonus points if applications
414.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Constexpr all the things is kind of a super-power of C++. Zig has an even more powerful comptime feature, but that's an aside. (Bonus points: Declare a static constexpr value in a compilation unit... and use it somewhere at runtime to
415.
by Quekid5 4y ago
I agree, which is why I mentioned the "about:" thing. It would be nice to have a base level of types that all programs could agree on.
416.
by Quekid5 4y ago
That text file and your editor is two layers of abstraction (at least, because there's parsing involved, e.g. how to i specify timouts? sizes? Can I use "MiB", "s", "ms", etc?). The thing we want to optimi
417.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Seems to be a matter of regulating the industry to require repairability by 3rd parties?
418.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Indeed, the Adversarial system includes some 'preconditions' that don't really hold in the real world, alas. Of course there are lots of other systemic issues with the US 'justice' system, but I also think the found
419.
by Quekid5 4y ago
One cannot prove a negative, but given how much public recording of everything there is these days (and in the last decade+), I'd say it's safe to err on the side of them not having prevented much of consequence. ("Absence
420.
by Quekid5 4y ago
Well, certainly string literal types have been around in GHC Haskell for quite a while (7.10.x). They've also been a thing in Scala 2.12.x although the 'implementation' was some sort of weird type checker 'hack'. I

More ›