bradrn

43 ms·

571.
by bradrn 5y ago
Though the argument here is well-stated and obviously reasonable, I find myself wondering how well this could work outside the field of geology. After all, we’re all familiar with sand, clay and the fact that rocks can have cracks, so terms
572.
by bradrn 5y ago
> I wondered if [Get Back] was the result of a man who, locked down in his Antipodean editing suite, had waded too deep into his material and lost control of it Note that Peter Jackson is a New Zealander, and presumably was in the countr
573.
by bradrn 5y ago
It goes further. Agda allows mixfix operators [0], which allows expressions to be arbitrarily interleaved with names and symbols, e.g.: if_then_else_ : {A : Set} → Bool → A → A → A if true then x else y = x if false then x e
574.
by bradrn 5y ago
Yes, GHC still uses Cmm as its backend: https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/wikis/commentary/rts/cm...
575.
by bradrn 5y ago
Though this page doesn’t seem to mention it, the Glasgow Haskell Compiler still uses Cmm as its backend [0]. (Cmm is a close relative of C--, though I’m not sure exactly what the differences are.) In fact, if you pass -ddump-cmm to GHC (or
576.
by bradrn 5y ago
No need for a Raspberry Pi! I once made a spectrometer at home out of just a camera, a white LED and a diffraction grating (and some tape and a wood base to hold it together). If you don’t have a diffraction grating, it can be replaced by a
577.
by bradrn 5y ago
> Is the conjugation of the verb "to be" an exception, or is it covered by a very specific rule that only applies to that particular verb? I guess in the end it could be a matter of definition. But if this is supposed to be one
578.
by bradrn 5y ago
I disagree. Field linguistics is all about deducing the underlying rules of a language from a language sample. Maybe those rules are very complex — perhaps even unpredictable, or irregular — but they can be described. The best reference g
579.
by bradrn 5y ago
See this article (by the same author as OP) for a synthetic scheme: https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/making-paxlovid
580.
by bradrn 5y ago
Ah, interesting. In that case, if I want some, I guess I’ll just have to wait until I find a cone myself!
581.
by bradrn 5y ago
I’m surprised to hear this — living in Sydney, I don’t recall ever seeing any. Where do you find them? (There’s a smallish bunya-bunya near my house, but I don’t think I’ll try gathering nuts from there myself…)
582.
by bradrn 5y ago
> I think that seems totally reasonable that the word boundary itself is phonetic, as such it could be intentionally accentuated That’s not what I mean. By ‘the word boundary is phonemic’ [not ‘phonetic’!], I mean that the word boundary
583.
by bradrn 5y ago
> phonemes were perceptually distinct units of sound, in the same way graphemes are visually distinct units Yes, exactly! This is a great way to describe it. (I think I might steal it for the future, even.) > What would the term be fo
584.
by bradrn 5y ago
Interesting question! Not a linguist, but I’d be inclined to the view that the word boundary itself is phonemic: these can be transcribed (for me) as /ma͡is poː/ vs /ma͡i spoː/. Supporting this analysis is the fact that
585.
by bradrn 5y ago
This is an excellent article! However, I find the definition of phonemes very unsatisfying: > Phonemes are not exactly the same thing as sounds, and they’re not exactly the same thing as letters. They are kind of like connecting categori
586.
by bradrn 5y ago
Practically none. Tolkien went out of his way to avoid using constructed languages in his books, even going so far as to translate character names (‘Frodo’ is really Maura). When he does provide sentences, there is no effort to make them co
587.
by bradrn 5y ago
> I had a colleague that pronounced RTS as "ritz". What I find interesting with "ritz" is why the "i". Why not "rats" or "ruts" or "rets" or "rots". This has an explan
588.
by bradrn 5y ago
I’ve seen Australian magpies do exactly the same thing. I was thoroughly unsurprised to see that they are in the list of laughing animals as well.
589.
by bradrn 5y ago
Links: http://www.zompist.com/proto.html (with less statistics), http://www.zompist.com/chance.htm (with more statistics).
590.
by bradrn 5y ago
Paper: https://www.pnas.org/content/112/35/10985 . Note that the paper comes to a slightly different conclusion than this summary article: in particular, it never claims that Montsechia might be ‘the origina
591.
by bradrn 5y ago
> instead of using a bunch of red squigglies and making you feel like a fool for typing broken code, offers you a shortcut to create the code that doesn’t exist yet. The Haskell Language Server allows this. On the other hand, its autocom
592.
by bradrn 5y ago
> Imagine my disillusion after finding out this was but another article fixated on skin colour instead of one dealing with a specific type of printing process. I had a similar reaction — I thought it would be about printing on a black ba
593.
by bradrn 5y ago
Yes, it is, though strictly speaking it’s not a ‘language’ in the traditional sense.
594.
by bradrn 5y ago
I’ve editorialised the title very slightly to highlight what I thought was the most interesting part of the article, a meditation on complexity, scaling, libraries and the role of language ecosystem in software development. Key quote: >
595.
Complexity Considerations(red-lang.org)
34 points by bradrn 5y ago|1 comments
596.
by bradrn 5y ago
I’m surprised this worked at all. Do you have a link?
597.
by bradrn 5y ago
Haskell does this as well, using Haddock [0] — e.g. all content on this page is generated from comments in the standard library: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.16.0.0/docs/Prelu... [0] https:&#x2
598.
by bradrn 5y ago
Sure, it’s pretty common, and it never ceases to amaze me. But what I find particularly interesting about treehood is that it’s just so unexpected : I would never have expected that palm trees, aloes and gum trees (to take two random examp
599.
by bradrn 5y ago
This is one of my favourite articles! But as someone who has recently become interested in botany, what I find really crazy about this is that there are so many different ways for plants to become trees. A listing (surely incomplete): • N
600.
by bradrn 5y ago
They’ve missed at least one prominent example, namely the South American language Karajá [0]. Ribeiro’s grammar spends a whole chapter talking about the difference between female and male speech, which include: • Men can drop k , often cau

More ›