alphaalpha101

30 ms·

61.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>But that feels like the debate about Illegal Immigrants. One side says "what part of illegal don't you understand" and the other responds with "hey, these are good humans." Is there any country other than the US
62.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
But the escapes aren't actually standardised to particular values, as far as I remember. The terminfo database exists for a reason. Assuming every terminal is 'xterm' is an awful idea.
63.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
I actually really like Vimscript. It has features that many popular languages lack or have only recently got, like destructuring let [file, line, col] = split("hello.c:39:10", ":") This is the sort of feature I
64.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
You can prove it, but you can also prove that a C++ programme has no memory safety bugs. And there are a lot of languages where you don't have to, where it's simply impossible to get memory safety bugs (assuming the runtime is saf
65.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
It doesn't matter that it's 'kind of unusual', even though I contend that it isn't. Even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that it is, that doesn't change my point. My point is that the whole point of Rus
66.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Rust doesn't ensure memory safety or safe concurrency. It ensures memory safety - including data race safety, just one part of safe concurrency - assuming you never use any unsafe code and that the standard library is free of bugs. I&#
67.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
I don't want to write nt(a=1, b=2). That's ugly. I want to write (a=1, b=2). Being able to implement it without changing the syntax is irrelevant to the users of the language, mostly. It's an implementation concern. I've
68.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Not necessarily. There is no actual reason that you couldn't be required to prove to the compiler that your code is safe. That proof might be parameterised by a proof that some external FFI function was safe, which you might not be a
69.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
It's also really no better than C. Or at least no better than C++. This is my main issue with Rust. It doesn't seem to really solve the right problem. I feel like it solves the easy problems that I already know how to solve easily
70.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
> Either way (or both) would be implemented in C for speed. It would allow named tuples to be created without having to describe them up front, as is done now. But it would also remove one of the principles that guided the design of name
71.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
My PC is powered, I think, entirely by hydroelectric power stations. Almost all of New Zealand's power is.
72.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
And if you don't think being an entrepreneur/startup founder/businessman is the pinnacle of human achievement? What then?
73.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>The worst PhD productivity advice is to work long hours. This advice is shared by successful people in Academia, so it should be good advice, shouldn’t it? Is it though? Because I've never heard this ever. I've heard over and
74.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
They aren't really REPLs. >Your argument is the equivalent of saying notepad isn't a text editor because you can't edit multiple lines at once or highlight syntax. No it's the equivalent of saying that not even progra
75.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
I don't understand how these coins have value. Surely things only have value if they: 1) have some scarcity, and 2) have some useful purpose. I can see how these coins get scarcity, but what is their useful purpose? What can I do with
76.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
> Just to keep things in perspective, all I'm saying is that "the ability to write multiplication naturally" comes at a cost. I'm aware of Haskell/ML-like syntax for curried functions, but it is at odds with juxt
77.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>If you do it naively, the complexity will be exponential Hindley-Milner type inference is doubly exponential already but is still widely used. If people never actually use extremely nested expressions in real code that require this sort
78.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>That's altering the syntax for function application by allowing f x to mean f(x), which is fine but changing the rules. If we do go with that, then "a b c" should be "Apply a (Apply b c)" because of the associat
79.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
It seems so insane to me that we have a company that is spending billions of dollars per year to break the law all over the world by undercutting while making a loss to corner markets, that is breaking labour laws all over the world, is a h
80.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
When I first encountered material implication I thought it was just stupid. False implies anything? Everything implies true? That's not what implies means, there must be some sort of relevancy, surely? The block for me was treating mat
81.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>That syntax doesn't work along with using parentheses for function application unless you do something like making the parser context-sensitive (so function followed by '(' means application but value followed by '(&
82.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
If you want to be literal about it then sure, it just means read-eval-print loop. But I think that's akin to saying that a functional programming language is a language that has functions in it. EDIT: To be clear, what I'm saying
83.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Yeah that was pretty worthless as a comment.
84.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
This line is a straw man. I'm sure code like that exists, but it's hardly the best we can do. The proposed system is good enough that you don't have to compare it against a straw man for it to look good and useful. forc
85.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Well maybe. I think the implication there is 'I would pay a subscription to use this service if I had to, and would prefer that than an ad-supported service'. I don't think it's 'I would pay money for no reason rath
86.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
They aren't really REPLs. A REPL isn't just a prompt that you can put code into.
87.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
>My point is, I don't think a lot of you are being totally honest when you say you'd be willing to pay if the site removed advertising. Well why would I do it if I don't have to? I'm happy to pay for Netflix because t
88.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Isn't it still undefined behaviour to do so, though?
89.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
I think the difference is that Rust and Go projects seem to be posted to HackerNews (and upvoted!) much more than Python and C++ projects are, despite there being way more of the latter.
90.
by alphaalpha101 9y ago
Maybe you shouldn't choose to have such a terrible healthcare system then.

More ›