Yoric

20 ms·

361.
by Yoric 1y ago
I like the idea of compile-time asserting that no runtime check is needed for array access!
362.
by Yoric 1y ago
How does this compare to previous generations of specification-driven development using formal methods?
363.
by Yoric 1y ago
Good point.
364.
by Yoric 1y ago
Nice! When I wrote Go, I figured that I would eventually have to do something like that, to fix the glaring omissions in the language. And then I stopped writing Go, but glad to see that someone got around to it!
365.
by Yoric 1y ago
Well, it seems to support tuples, which are more powerful.
366.
by Yoric 1y ago
A tool to solve optimization problems using quantum computers. Just released the first open-source version https://github.com/pasqal-io/maximum-independent-set/ . Now expanding it to more complex types of optimiza
367.
by Yoric 1y ago
Out of curiosity, why is knowing the size of locals required, exactly? Because it avoids dynamic allocations for each fiber?
368.
by Yoric 1y ago
Please do not give us other FP users a bad name :) Python is high level insofar as it's very far from the metal, and insofar as you can define quite sophisticated abstractions. Would I use Python to write a compiler or sophisticated gr
369.
by Yoric 1y ago
But it's true that you generally couldn't use the same Lisp dialect on two different families of computers, for instance.
370.
by Yoric 1y ago
Who ever said that?
371.
by Yoric 1y ago
Best news of the day!
372.
by Yoric 1y ago
Indeed, OOP and FP both allow and encourage attaching invariants to data structures. In my book, that's the most important difference with C, Zig or Go-style languages, that consider that data structures are mostly descriptions of memo
373.
by Yoric 1y ago
Hey, I'm old enough to remember "components" being a research topic in academia, with researchers theorizing what we know today as services & APIs. It looked more fun on paper, FWIW.
374.
by Yoric 1y ago
Good point. Open-source does replace entire companies, but typically with better products that other companies can build upon, and in the end, this expands the demand for software. AI is expected to replace developers, and I believe that it
375.
by Yoric 1y ago
> To be fair that thirst probably comes from people who aren’t seeing the gains the hype would lead you to believe and are reaching into the void to not feel like they’re taking crazy pills. Yes, exactly! I've spent way too much tim
376.
by Yoric 1y ago
Segfaults are just the simplest way of exposing a memory issue. It's quite easy to use a race condition to reproduce a state that isn't supposed to be reachable, and that's much worse than a segfault, because it means memory
377.
by Yoric 1y ago
Hey, going from Rust to Go drops my productivity by maybe about 50% :) But more seriously, yeah, Rust doesn't make sense for trivial programs. But these days, I write Python for a living, and it doesn't take long to stumble upon b
378.
by Yoric 1y ago
Two examples of interesting ideas: - using zero values as an optimization mechanism; - (non-)pointers and passing self by copy. I mean, I hate both mechanisms, but intellectually, I find them quite interesting. Also, I'd not classify i
379.
by Yoric 1y ago
I'd be surprised if the JSON module was used within Google, though. It's neither particularly fast nor particularly convenient nor particularly suited to properly handle edge cases. But it's still in the stdlib for compatibil
380.
by Yoric 1y ago
Well, that and the slight fact that it bears Google's brand name. I personally appreciate Go as a research experiment. Plenty of very interesting ideas, just as, for instance, Haskell. I don't particularly like it as a development
381.
by Yoric 1y ago
I seem to recall that one of the main reasons to doubt batteries was that they relied on minerals that are just too rare on Earth to consider scaling them up to the entire grid. Was my understanding incorrect? Or perhaps have new technologi
382.
by Yoric 1y ago
Yep, I'm also using Element X and I'm quite happy with it. It will be nice once all the features are in, but experience seems to indicate that I can live with better performance and fewer features.
383.
by Yoric 1y ago
Not entirely sure what you mean. If you're writing that you don't need to understand how your browser works, "just" to make things fast enough... well, sure, go ahead. But anybody who wants to graduate to a higher-level
384.
by Yoric 1y ago
I think that PI will have a role, but I suspect that it can quickly destroy the performance of wasm code in unexpected ways. As for fixing OS threads, indeed, this may very well change the ecosystem, but many developers expect their code to
385.
by Yoric 1y ago
Well, sure, if you have `yield`, you pretty much have `await` already, as `await` is thin syntactic sugar on top of `yield` in all languages other than OCaml.
386.
by Yoric 1y ago
Yeah, I'm insisting because I recently reviewed a PR with async code calling blocking code, which made the entire exercise pointless. And that was from an experienced dev. There used to be a few compilers that used static analysis to p
387.
by Yoric 1y ago
sympathizes If you look on the bright side, it looks like free-threading is approaching, and OCaml has demonstrated how, by removing the GIL and adding exactly one primitive, you can turn a powerful enough language into a concurrency&#x2F
388.
by Yoric 1y ago
Well, one of the ways we "sold" async/await it to Google was by showing how we could improve Promise-based tests. I recall that one of our test suites was tens of thousands of lines of code using `then()`. The code was compli
389.
by Yoric 1y ago
Largely agreed: async means that the code is structured in such a manner that the only way to be certain that a task is complete is to perform some rendez-vous. By extension, it covers mechanisms to make this happen in your code.
390.
by Yoric 1y ago
While this is indeed the most common use, I'll bring as counter-examples Rust (or C#, or F#, or OCaml 5+) that supports both OS threads and async. OS threads are good for CPU-bound tasks, async for IO-bound tasks. The main benefit of h

More ›