anaphor

41 ms·

361.
by anaphor 7y ago
If you find this interesting, you should give the paper "Basic Polymorphic Typechecking" by Luca Cardelli a read[0]. It's probably the clearest explanation I've read of how parametric polymorphism and type inference work
362.
by anaphor 7y ago
And not every programming language is Turing-complete which means there are languages without loops that are guaranteed to terminate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_functional_programming
363.
by anaphor 7y ago
So not all programming languages then...
364.
by anaphor 7y ago
Does it mention the actor model? Edit: the original title said Every Programming Language in 15 Minutes
365.
by anaphor 7y ago
That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of things they could have done to make this more secure. The fact that you can just `docker login` with the same credentials that allow access to your entire registry is pretty poor security
366.
Pony: I learned to stop worrying and embrace an unproven technology(youtube.com)
2 points by anaphor 8y ago|0 comments
367.
What Are Capabilities?(habitatchronicles.com)
2 points by anaphor 8y ago|0 comments
368.
by anaphor 8y ago
Mostly to make myself feel less tied to it. I have no illusion that it does anything more than remove a reference to them.
369.
by anaphor 8y ago
In case you decide to try it again, I wrote a little Selenium script in Python that works pretty well (although it took 3 days to complete for about 12 years of FB posts) https://github.com/weskerfoot/DeleteFB/blob
370.
by anaphor 8y ago
Keep in mind that this does not mean you have a 70% chance of getting prostate cancer if you take fish oil supplements. Based on this[0], it's roughly an increase from about 0.02% chance to about 0.034% chance (given no other informati
371.
by anaphor 8y ago
Does anyone know if this also affects the Requests library? Does it use these under the hood, or is it all httplib? (I'm pretty sure that's the case)
372.
by anaphor 8y ago
Yep https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashomon_effect
373.
by anaphor 8y ago
I hadn't heard that, but that's exactly why he says (in his latest video and here) to avoid too much speculation, because there are other things that could go wrong under similar conditions. Takeoff and landing are the most risky
374.
by anaphor 8y ago
Woops yeah I misremembered that detail, thanks.
375.
by anaphor 8y ago
The engines are larger than previous models and had to be moved forward, which causes it to (potentially) stall, so they implemented an anti-stalling mechanism called MCAS which relies on a particular sensor, which can malfunction potential
376.
by anaphor 8y ago
What about PEGs? You can get the benefits of writing down a grammar that you can analyze yourself, and you can call methods on the production results, etc.
377.
Mitogen v0.2.4 released(mitogen.readthedocs.io)
3 points by anaphor 8y ago|0 comments
378.
by anaphor 8y ago
I think the word you're looking for is "promulgation"
379.
by anaphor 8y ago
Stoic Meditations (Massimo Pigliucci): https://anchor.fm/stoicmeditations Partially Examined Life: https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/ Freakonomics: http://freakonomics.com/
380.
by anaphor 8y ago
Quitting is always an option (i.e. avoid the sunk-cost fallacy as much as possible).
381.
by anaphor 8y ago
Properties are not the same thing as attributes though. If `A.b` is a property (has a __get__ method associated with it), then this could easily break your code because `A.b` is supposed to change values. If it's an attribute that stay
382.
by anaphor 8y ago
Thanks, I didn't even know there was a successor. I've been using Parsley for a while and love it. It's kind of like the object-oriented answer to parser combinators I think.
383.
by anaphor 8y ago
Try PEGs https://parsley.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorial.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMeta
384.
OpenBSD on Twitter(twitter.com)
2 points by anaphor 8y ago|0 comments
385.
Internet Voting? Really? – Andrew Appel – TEDxPrincetonU(youtube.com)
3 points by anaphor 8y ago|0 comments
386.
Python iterators: wat(paste.pound-python.org)
6 points by anaphor 8y ago|1 comments
387.
by anaphor 8y ago
Nope, it's simply about less risk. Of course we know now that Zuckerberg is wealthy, but Facebook could easily go under or lose a lot of value. If the entire market were to crash, then either it will stay that way (in which case everyo
388.
by anaphor 8y ago
That's my recommendation as well. If you want to manage your own finances there are plenty of services that let you buy ETFs with no commission fees too. I'm definitely not telling people to go out and dump all their money into BH
389.
by anaphor 8y ago
My point is that billionaires like Mark Zuckerberg whose wealth is concentrated in equity for a single company are different from people like Buffett, who actually spent most of their life working on managing different investments in order
390.
by anaphor 8y ago
As an individual looking to make long term investments, I'd still much rather own stock in Berkshire Hathaway because its holdings are much more diverse than just Facebook stock. FB is not as safe a long term bet for the average person

More ›