deltasixeight

12 ms·

31.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> Government policy reflects the culture. The rest of the paragraph doesn't support your main point. How do your Japanese friends scolding you on the cultural nuances of japan prove or help support your point of government policy re
32.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
There needs to be science on this. Some way to quantitatively measure the performance of programmers who do competitive programming and to measure ones that don't. Until then everyone will agree or disagree but some science will prove
33.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
The lines have blurred. I would put it more in the editor category. You really need to download plugins for it to come close to an IDE and it's not as feature complete as say pycharm or Clion. I would say VSCode is more in the code edi
34.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
"it" in this case refers to the project. If it refers to the IDE then the statement is false. So by logic it must refer to the project itself. Why else would I come on here to make some claim that is false?
35.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Yes that's configuration for the IDE. But the project itself is configured off of Maven, the project files for the IDE are ADDITIONAL settings for the IDE itself. For example in CLion you can't create a new target from the IDE, yo
36.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Totally Wrong. The Maven Project IS the configuration. Intellij is only a shortcut. It let's you access configurations via click rather than via a command line expression. In the end if you want to create a Maven Project configuration
37.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Nah if you ever used a modern IDE from the jetbrains line. In order to even get the IDE working with a project you need to configure it to work. That absolutely necessitates understanding of the details of what's going on. You are lite
38.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Those editors aren't really part of the conversation anymore. I would say they were maybe over 12 years ago. Not so nowadays. People are referring to SublimeText, Vim, Emacs, VSCode as Programming Text editors. VSCode is currently the
39.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Whats up with the name? Are you trying to get this thing to be a a complete layer over the OS?
40.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> To the people saying $15 is too much: SigmaOS is almost certainly targeting companies, not individual users. Doubtful, individual signups and education discounts show otherwise. Even as a company I'd be reluctant to purchase this.
41.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Well he posted an unsubstantiated comment. I Had a long post and he dismissed it with one line. So there's a little aggression in my response, but I told the truth, did not insult him or do anything of the sort. There is obviously Zero
42.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>When I say "singularity," I mean that the coefficients blow up (aren't continuous because they shoot toward infinity in finite time). When author of the pdf file you link to writes "singularity," he means "
43.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Let me just explain to you what functional programming is at a high level and I'll get a little bit into the monad. Maybe that will help you understand. IF you can compress all your javascript into one line of code or as close to it as
44.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
It's just something to know, nobody is actually keeping track of when logic is actually executed.
45.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
I mean it's not like this type system is exclusive to functional programming. You can tack it on to an imperative language (see rust). It's mostly the type theory that is hard here but people talk about functional programming beca
46.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
If you read the thread. There's no flame war going on at all. It is just discussion. Seriously.
47.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>I have no idea why you bring up functors. Are you thinking of functionals? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functor . The functor is a generalization of the concept of changing "space". It specifically refers
48.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> I have already explained why you are wrong. There is however a new error here: And I have countered your argument. I get it. You're trying to say that we're talking past each other here and that you're just repeating you
49.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>I'm been aware of the dome example for some time. I didn't think such pathologies were worth discussing because they are irrelevant to the current problem, where multiple solutions for the same initial condition do not exist.
50.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Incompleteness implies indeterminacy. Davies point is sort of pedantic but the math from Nortons paper is nondeterministic BECAUSE of incompleteness. We know at the singularity newtons laws are incomplete so in that region you are correct.
51.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>It is more straightforward to see using Lagrangian or Hamiltonian mechanics, which are better suited to this kind of constrained problem, if one is so inclined. Why? He proved it mathematically without needing to Lift the entire system
52.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Yeah that blog post demolishes Nortons Dome. No seriously here's some other relevant sources that I would consider more legit: http://dsbaero.engin.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/441/... http:&
53.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
> It's not that there is no unique solution past the time of collision, it's that there is no solution at all. The model ceases to be well-defined because there is a singularity. What you meant to say is there is no solution at
54.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
No read the dome example again. You are wrong. Nortons dome is literally demonstrating there is proof for the non deterministic case. I've discussed this in other places but the theorem you reference only applies to functions that are
55.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
Reddit proves it. Case closed. Just kidding. No seriously that thread is long and there's no singular point, it's a debate. Take a look at this (not the same link above I target a single comment): https://www.reddit.com
56.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
I cannot agree or disagree with that paper. Unfortunately I don't have time to read the whole thing. BUT, I do have time to read the section you referenced. So I should be more clear with my words: The paragraph on the first part of se
57.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
>What "special case" is being considered by the term paper I linked above. Not referring to that. Referring to the Wikipedia version which immediately stated it's a special case. Anyway you're not focusing on that you
58.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodies/Dome/ we don't.
59.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28184786
60.
by deltasixeight 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28184786

More ›