Quekid5

13 ms·

181.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Eh... not really. The main problem is that it becomes incredibly hard to reason about the exact sequencing of things (which matters a lot for mechanical sympathy) in async world.
182.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Not really for building code, at least. It's a common problem , but it's not insurmountable. Use the equivalent of 'make -j1' or whatever... This requires engineering on the part of compiler writers, but ultimately is s
183.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Turing Machines have that property. There the Tarpit lies.
184.
by Quekid5 2y ago
> Believe it or not, being hired to work on a big ball of mud can be pretty chill. The key is for you to be in a stage in your life where you don’t really care about your work beyond meeting professional responsibilities. Yeah, that&#x27
185.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Just as an adjacent aside from a random about learning by doing: Implementing a ThingDoer is a huge learning experience. I remember doing co-op "write-a-compiler" coursework with another person. We were doing great, everything wa
186.
by Quekid5 2y ago
This is why friends don't let friends use unsafePerformIO ... or whatever the equivalent was here :) I'm still a bit confused about the point though. I feel like an adequate rejoinder would be to enforce formal methods at all the
187.
by Quekid5 2y ago
In C++, you can do much of what you want with std::array, std::mdspan... and you could also create a Ptr<T> with "using" to define a type alias for T* -- see [0]. Of course the default syntax for pointers is T* and that&#x
188.
by Quekid5 2y ago
I feel obligated to mention that I run Arch and have done for a long time :). About the upstart thing... even the creator of Upstart acknowledged that systemd's design is more sound -- on Canonical's bug tracker no less -- and kud
189.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Something something Snap. Something something Mir. Something something Upstart. ... it's just Shuttleworth's latest fancy, I expect.
190.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Ultimately, enough money/political capital will be lost such that the deciders will move towards Capability-based security[0] stances... oh, who am I kidding? It'll just be the Certification Game round NaN. [0] That really is the
191.
by Quekid5 2y ago
> Imagine being able to put on glasses, and instantly have your computer. Your hands are tracked so you can type without a keyboard. How, exactly, would that work? You'd stare intently at the virtual keyboard? Or just think about
192.
by Quekid5 2y ago
Just like fusion is juuuuust 20 years away... for the last 30 years. Not saying they're the same level of difficulty/tech, necessarily, but there's a reason we have the term Hype Cycle. We had one for VR about 25-30 years a
193.
by Quekid5 2y ago
> Other statically typed languages retain type information at runtime. Funnily enough, Haskell[0] doesn't... unless you ask it to by explicitly asking for it via Typable[1]. [0] ... which is renowned/infamous for its extremely
194.
by Quekid5 2y ago
> E-mail is, at its core, best-effort, [...] If anyone expends as much effort at delivery (7 days, usually, with spaced repetition) of anything these days, I'd be seriously impressed. > Implementing "quiet hours as seen in I
195.
by Quekid5 2y ago
One would hope... but corporate structures can apply a LOT of pressure which can end up impairing judgment or resistance to decisions by higher-level executives. It might or might not be the issue here, but it's definitely been seen in
196.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Haha, reminds me of some Scheme interpreter that would just say something like 'missing paren' at position 0 or EOF depending on where the imbalance was :) ... but, yeah... I'm pretty sure there could be some hints as to wh
197.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Good. I wonder how many people do and also if their compilers support it. (One would hope so, of course. I assume clang and GCC do.) ... but the question is really what you ship to production. Btw, possible signed overflow was just an examp
198.
by Quekid5 3y ago
... but you do get an error. That's a lot better what you typically get with C or C++. Assuming it's valid systax, of course. This is a veering off topic, but I do agree that Nix-the-language has a lot of issues. (You might sugges
199.
by Quekid5 3y ago
The hard problem with C is that it's hard to tell if what the programmer wrote is an error. Hence warnings... which can be very hit or miss, or absurd overkill in some cases. (Signed overflow being a prime example where you really eith
200.
by Quekid5 3y ago
... and "This Is Water", by Wallace
201.
by Quekid5 3y ago
I don't think anybody (even us Haskell weirdos) are clamoring for full immutability of anything. For data structures it's AMAZING unless you really cannot live with a log factor, but that's neither here nor there. Anyway,
202.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Plus... Wayland is literally the work of many of the original X.org devs.
203.
by Quekid5 3y ago
I think a slightly more succinct way of thinking about mutability in actor systems is this: (I think it's from Erik Meijer, but not quite sure.) Ultimately, any actor system has global mutable state via message queues. You can perfec
204.
by Quekid5 3y ago
I'd invest $10 into a rescue USB stick regardless. I like putting Ventoy on it and having a large number of different distribution ISOs on there, just in case.
205.
by Quekid5 3y ago
That was a very cheeky comment, and fully agreed. I'm on the permissive side (Haskell and Lenseful Haskell at that!), but make it consistent and principled and it's usually fine.
206.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Interestingly, Scala has a great solution to this, namely Scala-CLI[0]. You can do all the things... use whatever deps you want, pick the scala version, include tests in your script, etc. etc. So you can really have a self-contained scrip
207.
by Quekid5 3y ago
> It runs in millions of cars and other embedded systems, not that niche tbh. Linux (in some mutilated form) runs on billions of devices. Hell, even JavaME does; or at least did, not sure what current status is. That's not really a
208.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Ah, I see. That's sad :( ... and now that you mention it, I do remember the variants terminology, esp. around the polymorphic variants feature. It's been 20+ years since I used OCaml, I'm afraid...
209.
by Quekid5 3y ago
I think it might be due to the O'Caml influence on early Rust. They call them enums there[0]. [0] https://www.ocamlwiki.com/index.php?title=Enums_in_OCaml
210.
by Quekid5 3y ago
Not that I'm looking for a replacement right now, but I guess that confirms why I'm committed to Sparkle Motion^W^W AMD :)

More ›