Twey

14 ms·

151.
by Twey 1y ago
Important to note that in the Culture universe all the extant AIs are _explicitly_ noted to be psychologically flawed in some way, with every culture that's managed to produce a true ‘perfect’ AI immediately ascending to some godlike p
152.
by Twey 1y ago
Even better, WMs can (and sometimes do) support tabs!
153.
by Twey 1y ago
There's nothing stopping a window manager from supporting docking windows to each other, or the more common option in tiling window managers of having nested tiling groups so you can arrange your editor windows however you like and man
154.
by Twey 1y ago
Oh no I get that the in-site MDI is a funny stylistic choice, and I've no problem with it. But the thing it's poking fun at is in-browser MDI, hence the comment. I stand by the anti-pattern comment. I think there are very, very fe
155.
by Twey 1y ago
Abstracting something away and duplicating it for yourself are two very different things! Remember Java Swing? But I take your point, if you want to target the lowest common denominator of window managers it makes some sense to do your own
156.
by Twey 1y ago
The difference is that tmux, with all its state, typically runs on a remote system. The graphical equivalent would be a VNC &c. session, assuming that the remote machine has the prerequisites for that (which is a pretty big ask).
157.
by Twey 1y ago
Well it subsumes app groups, I think? If anything app groups become just a default/prebuilt grouping policy.
158.
by Twey 1y ago
The ‘application context’ isn't a concept that adds value, at least for the applications I've seen. For things where the application windows do need to be treated differently (e.g. patch bays that can be connected together, or wid
159.
by Twey 1y ago
I think that's still a little too restrictive. Sometimes you really do want multiple groups of windows that may belong to the same (think multiple browser windows each with multiple tabs) or different applications (e.g. grouped by task
160.
by Twey 1y ago
I've always thought ‘multi-document interfaces’ as we used to call them are an anti-pattern. I have a perfectly good window manager; why does every app need its own incompatible, usually inferior window manager built in? (Mind you on m
161.
by Twey 1y ago
As a reductio ad absurdum, statically typed programs are also (represented as) streams of bytes!
162.
by Twey 1y ago
As other people here have said, type systems are merely an automated check that interfaces are used correctly. But to read this more generously, the author is saying that with sufficiently simple interfaces such checking isn't necessar
163.
by Twey 1y ago
This is the main reason I really like concatenative syntax for languages — this property is _enforced_ for programs (minus some delimited special cases, usually). It also neatly generalizes the special `self` argument so you can dispatch o
164.
by Twey 1y ago
The solution suggested by the author, I assume, is `table.where(true).delete()` and `all_my_data.rm()`, which indeed has the property you describe.
165.
by Twey 1y ago
Right, due to the complexity of the syntax one of the most sensible things to do in C if you're faced with a problem that maps naturally to higher-order functions is to reframe the problem so that the solution doesn't use higher-o
166.
by Twey 1y ago
Right, this is a pretty common syntax, but doesn't address the same problem as Zig's syntax. I've only seen two that do: the Zig approach, and a postprocessing ‘dedent’ step.
167.
by Twey 1y ago
It (this particular example, of function pointer syntax) is absolutely just incidental complexity, though. E.G. Haskell (a -> b) -> c -> d becomes C D (*f(B (*)(A)))(C) and it's no surprise that the former is considered much
168.
by Twey 1y ago
I maintain — they shouldn't be fancy. ‘Fancy’ is the mark of something your language doesn't support well. They can be _long_, and that's often worth breaking up, but if something is ‘fancy’ it's because it's not cl
169.
by Twey 1y ago
I think because of the forces I talked about above we experience a repeating progression step in programming languages: - we have a language with a particular philosophy of development - we discover that some concept A is awkward to express
170.
by Twey 1y ago
And what if you do want to include two spaces at the beginning of the block (but not any of the rest of the indentation)? Choice of specific line-start marker aside, I think this is the best solution to the indented-string problem I've
171.
by Twey 1y ago
I wonder if it's dyslexia-adjacent. Dyslexic people famously have particular difficulty distinguishing rotated and reflected letterforms.
172.
by Twey 1y ago
> it's not the kind of surface level "aesthetically beautiful" readability that tickles the mind of an abstract thinker Rather, the sort of beauty it's going for here is exactly the type of beauty that requires a bi
173.
by Twey 1y ago
> I think Kotlin nails it: val, var, fun. Note all three are monosyllable, unlike const and fn! At least in my pronunciation, all five of those are monosyllabic! (/kQnst/, /f@n/). (Nice to see someone agree with me on
174.
by Twey 1y ago
> fancy function types If the syntax were straightforward, plain old function types wouldn't be ‘fancy’ :)
175.
by Twey 1y ago
No you're totally right! In fact I think you're even more right than you said in the original post: the analogy you draw isn't just an analogy, they are in fact the exact same thing. A class is (amongst other things) a module
176.
by Twey 1y ago
Typically when an OOP programmer says the word ‘class’ they mean one (or both) of two things, depending on their favourite OOP language: - a factory for objects, that hides some internal state of the object; - a static construct that gives
177.
by Twey 1y ago
And ‘monoid’ isn't even from type theory!
178.
by Twey 1y ago
I've been recommended /r/pl a lot but it's not quite the same vibe as LtU. I think LtU was very carefully curated professional research with commentary, while /r/pl has a lot more amateurs asking questions abou
179.
by Twey 1y ago
I didn't know about this! That's brilliant, thank you for the pointer! Since the death of LtU I don't really know where to learn about interesting new PL work. I try to occasionally read the POPL submissions but there's
180.
by Twey 1y ago
Kind of! Specifically typestates allow you to encode the special case of linear functions `f a ⊸ f b` for some type constructor `f` where `a` and `b` are (usually?) phantom types. Phantom types themselves don't involve any linearity p

More ›