_a_a_a_

27 ms·

301.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
That doth not illuminate, nor does it reveal.
302.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Others (mathematicians) can peer through the notation to the thing beneath. That's extremely difficult for me to do, and once I've done it I can see something interesting, but beautiful? No, that tree is intriguing but beautiful t
303.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I've never been able to perceive the beauty that others such as yourself can see. Genuine question, where do you see the beauty? All I see in your link is a wall of equations, although I have a maths background it's all abstract
304.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I needed code generation for C# and looked at T4, decided it was less capable than M4 (and obviously less portable, a big plus for Microsoft in tying you into their environment) and went with python instead. That was a while back, maybe T4
305.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Agreed "It's a classic so it's good, don't argue" doesn't wash. It's just conformity impressed on one by conformists. Some things need to be allowed to die on their own dis-merits, not forced to remain ali
306.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> Denigrating Greek literature is incredibly dismissive AFAICS he was praising it
307.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Not sure if ODBC supported it, but Microsoft added at some point MARS - multiple active results sets. I don't know anything about them though.
308.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
A few minutes ago I posted https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38605643#38606523 in response to a poor quality pro-legalisation post. TBH yours is anti-legalisation with really no more factual content in it either. I was r
309.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
P2P is a methamphetamine precursor, not a drug in itself AFAIK Edit: I did a search and can't find much. There seems to be a lot of bullshit but suspiciously little by way of solid info. The best I could find was this so-called super m
310.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
While I personally tend towards decriminalisation, a raging, emotive and fact-free posts like this is just plain counter-productive.
311.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
What are these "practically infeasible (or very expensive) associated programs" in your view (genuine question)
312.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
That's rather nice.
313.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
umm, touche
314.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Can you link to what you read please
315.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
"more affordable" -> cheaper
316.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
to the downvoter: I thought this was a reasonable question? Semantic equivalence is IIRC undecidable in general. Some languages (Backus' FL?) try to deal with that but I dunno.
317.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Apparently even solubility of compounds in various solvents is empirically derived because there's no reliable theoretical model of this in chemistry/physics. (AIUI anyway)
318.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Yeah, it costs. That, and that people will accept shite software makes it high quality a fight software companies can avoid. Rationally therefore, they do.
319.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
define 'semantic similarity' would your hoped-for tool recognise that 1 and sin(x)^2 + cos(x)^2 are the same? (I think that identity holds, but if not you get the picture)
320.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
A, thanks for these tests! That will be really useful for my work. A couple of thoughts: what do you mean by a 'scrapper'? At first I thought you meant scraper, but I don't think it's that. I haven't come across the
321.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
You don't want it talked about so try throwing a smokescreen that no-one should. I say the big picture is quite clear enough.
322.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Where is the SQLite test suite, please? I'd be very interested. There are already SQL grammars, check https://github.com/antlr/grammars-v4 specifically in here I think https://github.com/antlr&#x2F
323.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
I think you misinterpreted his post. It seems you both are much in the same position.
324.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> It’s insane how normalized antisemitism is you people don’t even see it breakdown 1. normalized antisemitism = there is antisemitism AND it is normalised. Neither claim backed up. 2. 'you people don’t even see it' = there is
325.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> there are lots of developments in the last 5-10 years So tell us what these are so I/we can learn from you
326.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Thank you so much Dan. Was away so didn't see it immediately. Will reply in private. Thanks again!
327.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> I have an idea for a programming language that would change fundamental aspects. I'm interested, go on.
328.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
Okay, I partly take back what I said in my sibling post. Your "(req) => {..}" lambda has to be constrained only to contain inflight methods. Yes, it can be done by either building the contents of the lambda in some truly horrid
329.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
With respect, and also with the understanding that I do not comprehend your domain very well so I may be talking out of my but with static typing I think it is possible, perhaps if a bit less pretty. I can try and put something together in
330.
by _a_a_a_ 3y ago
> In existing languages, where there is no way to distinguish between multiple execution phases, it is impossible to naturally represent this idea that an object has methods that can only be executed from within a specific execution phas

More ›