eeperson

9 ms·

31.
by eeperson 6y ago
I think you want generics for many useful sum types (e.g. options) so you don't have to repeat your sum type definition everywhere it is used. Also, you can have options and matching without sum types (e.g. scala).
32.
by eeperson 6y ago
> Don't use wayland. Run gnome in xorg mode. Interestingly, for me, I only see some of the issues the GP mention when using xorg instead of wayland.
33.
by eeperson 6y ago
> Even though the Android version is barely usable after the rework... Yeah, the initial launch was pretty bad. However, this has improved quite a bit from the initial launch if you haven't tried it in a while.
34.
by eeperson 6y ago
I've used both and end up writing much more Scala. There are a few reasons why this was the case for me: - Scala is much closer to Java making it an easier sell to other Java programmers. - I think static typing makes a lot more
35.
by eeperson 6y ago
In my experience, it is both.
36.
by eeperson 6y ago
Scala experimented[0] with implementing those in its standard library. I'm not sure if it made it in to the final release or not. EDIT It looks like it did make it in: https://github.com/scala/scala/commit&#x
37.
by eeperson 6y ago
If a fixed blade knife would work, I suggest looking at a Morakniv Companion. They are super cheap and surprisingly well made
38.
by eeperson 6y ago
That's why I like to carry a Spyderco Dragonfly. A small (<2.5in) knife that is legal pretty much anywhere but feels like a much bigger knife when you use it.
39.
by eeperson 7y ago
Do you mean: Failure { error: Error } Success<T> { value: T } I assume you want value or error not value and error.
40.
by eeperson 7y ago
I don't think any of your description about how the JVM GC works is accurate. The default GC is generational so it generally does lots of garbage collection before it takes up the reaches the heap limit. I assume what you really want
41.
by eeperson 7y ago
Sorry, perhaps I should have been a little clearer. What I meant is that you don't need to figure out the order in which you have to construct the dependency tree. The order of the tree itself (as in what depends on what) is somethin
42.
by eeperson 7y ago
The benefit of a dependency injection framework is that you don't have to figure out the order of the dependency tree. If you do this work manually, then you have to make sure to instantiate things in a particular order so that depend
43.
by eeperson 8y ago
I've set this up before. How many video cards are you trying to use to connect these monitors? I've always had it just work if you are only using one card. In the past I've had to invoke xrandr with the --setprovideroutput
44.
by eeperson 8y ago
> But it also would have been a Pyrrhic victory, because you'd have lost the ability to run any existing Scala code, which would have scads of dependencies on other bits of the JDK as well, on Scala for .NET. At which point, what&#x
45.
by eeperson 8y ago
> You do know how journalling works, yes? Unless the drive lies about the state of data being written, in which case not even COW will save you, a journal is just as good as COW. Exceptions being coding errors but those can occur on COW
46.
by eeperson 8y ago
> Bitrot is rare. Over the average lifetime of most consumer desktops, the loss of any personal documents is very unlikely unless it makes up a majority of the disk. And if it does, it's most likely that it affects negligible parts
47.
by eeperson 8y ago
> So why pick btrfs with it's dataloss stories or ZFS with it's complex management? As you mentioned, the bitrot. Also, my understanding is that a COW filesystem can be more reliable than a traditional journaling filesystem in
48.
by eeperson 8y ago
> btrfs, which I do use nowadays but I'm absolutely aware of the high risk of data corruption because the underlying code is terrible. Is the underlying code terrible? I haven't heard any particular concerns about code quality
49.
by eeperson 8y ago
BTRFS does provide a status for all the major features: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status
50.
by eeperson 8y ago
Scala 2.13 greatly simplifies the external interface of the collections and no longer requires CanBuildFrom [1]. You may find them much easier to work with now. [1] https://scala-lang.org/files/archive/api/2.
51.
by eeperson 8y ago
How is reification any more type safe than erasure?
52.
by eeperson 8y ago
> https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/type-safe-builders.htm... . > > It's more designed to build DSLs or similar, so you'll find more documentaion/examples in that area of the docs. Thank
53.
by eeperson 8y ago
It is interesting to see that is possible in Kotlin. I just learned a lot about receivers (as an aside, do you know where I can find better documentation? The best I could find was a stack overflow post). I think this issue with this is w
54.
by eeperson 8y ago
It is interesting to see that is possible in Kotlin. I just learned a lot about receivers (as an aside, do you know where I can find better documentation? The best I could find was a stack overflow post). I think this issue with this is w
55.
by eeperson 8y ago
It just dawned on me that Kotlin receivers[1] and extension methods[2] are basically the equivalent to Scala implicit params and conversions respectively. Although it appears that receivers can only really be used with anonymous functions.
56.
by eeperson 8y ago
I wonder if this is a link between 'madness' and 'genius' or if this is the result of pressure put on kids to succeed at a prestigious middle school.
57.
by eeperson 8y ago
It looks like you can force strict equality everywhere with the flag '-language:strictEquality'. See the dotty documentation for more details: http://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/reference/multiversal-equality.htm
58.
by eeperson 8y ago
It already has support although it is not complete: http://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/usage/ide-support.html
59.
by eeperson 8y ago
> Macros going wrong with complicated builds, implicits galore all over the place, just the usual complaints. I'm not sure I totally understand this. What do you mean by "macros going wrong"? It doesn't seem like th
60.
by eeperson 8y ago
> SBT is the worst build tool I've seen in the 20 years of programming across a dozen languages. > > And by a very, very long margin. It has arcane syntax, is slow, is incredibly complex if you want to extend functionality Th

More ›