Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
bcherny
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
46 ms
·
391.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
This hasn’t been accurate for at least 2 years. - Use the —noImplicitAny flag to prevent implicitly using any (and if you really want — I don’t think you do, but you can — completely ban any with TSLint) - Use the —strictNullChecks flag to
392.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
+1 Okasaki’s book is a great reference. I’ve personally given out a few as gifts. https://smile.amazon.com/Purely-Functional-Data-Structures-O...
393.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Could it be that you need to first invest in fiber, then you need to invest in other things like small business incentives and attracting VC?
394.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I do the same. I do feel ok not responding right away after I see a message, though. I wonder if it’s a cultural expectation that is/will change over time.
395.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Out of curiosity, why do you not like those features? To me, "seen" is a feedback mechanism. When I send a message to you, I don't always need a response, but I do usually want to know that you saw the message -- sort of an A
396.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I wonder if it’s not the language that causes the products, but more that programmers that are drawn to functional languages are less likely to care about product. That said, lots of things are functional: chunks of Facebook, Twitter, and M
397.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I’m not sure how practical this kind of generalized approach is, but notice how incremental computation is already all around you: in your build system, in the way React recomputes its tree and your browser recomputes layout, in any pull-ba
398.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Is there a single ad network or ad platform that does that, besides DuckDuckGo?
399.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Same for “react” and “reactJS”.
400.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
What an interesting idea. Sort of, isolate out a graph of concepts from a language, and pull it out into its own language. I do wonder why the author believes you need a separate language for this. Why not a DSL, or even a regular library i
401.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
It looks like no one is even sure what the code actually does? Or am I misreading that thread.
402.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
This is a phenomenal explanation! I especially like the context around where these concepts come from. Another great treatment of this is the chapter on monads in Functional Programming in Scala.
403.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
You know, I think that’s a really fair way to look at it. I would be surprised, though, if down the line type safety wasn’t a design goal. It did come from the same company that built XHP around 2010, and the same dude that built the first
404.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
You could definitely do that (Angular recently started doing this too!). I think once there is a way to enforce compile time safety for HTM, it’ll be a lot more appealing for TypeScript/Flow folks.
405.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I think type safety was a core design constraint for JSX (since XHP — where JSX came from — is typechecked, after all). It’s also nice to be able to do this checking with the type system you already have (TS, Flow, Reason), rather than havi
406.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
My opinion, not a fact. Before JSX came out, there were tons of templating systems that let you embed HTMLish things in JS: Handlebars, Mustache, EJS, Pug, Angular templates. JSX’s big innovation was taking the way XHP promoted HTML to firs
407.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
This is a neat syntax, but it doesn’t seem at all typesafe (typesafety was the main benefit of JSX over the various string templates that came before it).
408.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
> Best case for survival would be to become multiplanetary. How far away do you have to be to avoid getting gamma'd?
409.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I get what you mean, but I bet it’s more than 15 :) Hell, I bet just FB has more Haskell openings than that.
410.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I mean, it’s just the beginning right? You’re making it sound like it’s the end of the road for HTTP2.
411.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
> “h2 failed” Just curious, what do you mean? Quickly Googling this, it looks like 1/3 websites use HTTP2 today, which is darn good for a relatively new protocol. https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ce
412.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Does HTTP2 server push help solve this? Is there a way to send headers for things you’re about to push before pushing them, then letting the browser switch some subset of your resource loads over to another TCP thread without interrupting t
413.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I’m not sure there’s any evidence of that in the studies I’ve seen. It seems a bit far removed from what we actually see today.
414.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
I’m not sure that’s quite accurate. If you just look at it through the lens of supply and demand, of course rent control is bad. But the real issues are more nuanced than that. For example, a recent study from Stanford found that rent contr
415.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
How would you adjust the algorithm? Maybe surface new posts with some degree of stochasticity, like what HN does? Sorting by Hot on Reddit feels pretty similar to FB, and sorting strictly chronologically doesn't scale (just sort by New
416.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
> Instead they should have tried to identify a niche where Facebook was failing (say, intimate private sharing, or the antithesis of the narcissist fest) and build up a loyal core of rabidly passionate users, then slowly expanded from th
417.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Anything surprising here, if anyone’s up to date on this stuff? I thought it’s a given that since both CNNs and CAs are Turing complete, you can use one to simulate the other.
418.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Since we’re talking about recursion, it would be neat to add benchmarks for languages that encourage recursion over iteration (not top 10, but could be fun): - Haskell - OCaml - Scala - F# - Clojure - Common Lisp
419.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Sidenote, that is one obnoxious color scheme :/
420.
▲
by
bcherny
8y ago
Aren't there ethical considerations in outing the author? Clearly he/she intended to remain anonymous, for obvious reasons.
More ›