gclaramunt

13 ms·

91.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
You're right, it should be called Schönfinkeling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Sch%C3%B6nfinkel
92.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I got confused, are you talking about bringing freedom to the US ? :) Kidding aside, not saying you're wrong, but companies that want to maximize profit take a too big of a risk alienating a possible big market...
93.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
is a trade-off, I worked from home for a year, and although I missed the casual interactions you get in the office, I was able at any moment to take a 5 minute break to play with my kids, go pick them up from school, help them with homework
94.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
tl;dr: being a parent is totally different from what you plan to be as a parent (and that's actually awesome)
95.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Computing a type level factorial can take more than 1 minute :)
96.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
but as practice has shown, the exposure of the global economy to a photo sharing startup going belly up is negligible, but the exposure of the global economy to a miscalculated risk was significant enough to warrant a less cavalier attitude
97.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Obviously YMMV, but if I think on myself without CS degree, I'll probably: Be comfortable programming in Java/C#, learned Scala and trying to learn FP. Learned about big O notation. But wouldn't know: why you should NEVER u
98.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I think the blessing and the curse of OOP is that is actually pretty good for simulation (SIMULA got it right I guess :) ), so what you usually have is a program that's a simulation of a process. Even the standard OO modelling techniqu
99.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I wish it were that simple and a magic diet made the autism go away...
100.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I would argue that the most important management skill is herd people to "get sh*t done", being skilled in firing people won't save your ass if you don't deliver
101.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
heck, if they are alive and the house is not on fire, you're doing pretty good :)
102.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
heh, need to upgrade my Haskell skills from n00b to experienced first
103.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
But those are pretty short to write (explaining the category theory machinery behind it takes several book chapters tho :) )
104.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Hmm, but when you add a new type of expression, you still have to write the particular implementation of the functions for that type. There are other approaches to generic programming where when you add a new datatype, all the already defin
105.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
True, I actually was thinking about a Cartesian Closed Category (as explained in https://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Hask )
106.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
The "Theorems for free" paper is here: http://ttic.uchicago.edu/~dreyer/course/papers/wadler.pdf ( I guess is the most precise you can get :) )
107.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Where's the paper? :)
108.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
True, if I recall correctly, having bottom everywhere just complicates things without adding much value.
109.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
If you can stand my thick accent , I did an attempt to introduce the very basics at PNWScala 2014 http://www.confreaks.com/videos/4864-PNWS2014-what-every-sca... (mind you, I'm just learning the stuff)
110.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
You don't need to go deep. Types and functions (ignoring non-termination) form a category. Functional programming (Haskell programmers in particular) uses many results from it. e.g. building any "container" type (collections,
111.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
OTOH, I think is part of the point: > file, err = os.Open("file.txt") > if err != nil { > ... handle error ... A type system with generics can use types to make an error a different type and produce a compile e
112.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
While I concede that's not the "billion-dollar American startup that was built by a 100% virtual team", I've worked for a startup where half of the team was distributed across america and europe. It was an amazing team,
113.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
yes, that part makes sense, but in Haskell, an unknown "message" is a compiler error, and bottom represents abnormal termination (e.g exception or even non termination), I don't really understand how that's related to in
114.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
> Where is inheritance? Inheritance is just a protocol which specifies what to do with unknown message instead of signaling an error or returning a bottom like in Haskell. Care to explain? Doesn't make any sense to me...
115.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Does your programming language has the map function? That comes straight from CT. A simple but concrete result: map (f.g) = map f . map g (i.e. if you have two functions that compose, mapping the composition is the same as mapping each one
116.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I will argue that a big difference like that is caused by the environment: looks like is failing to grow skills, motivate and foster collaboration, and if there a few that are truly clueless, failing to proper hire/assign.
117.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
For the record, the only performance problem that Scala implicits give is just extra compile time, but there's no runtime overhead of using it. (as compared to explicitly call the function)
118.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
Yes, I think she needed to kill the Hanna Montana image. And look! here we are, talking in "social media" about her... damn!
119.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
I'm pretty sure with a father and godmother long timers in the music business, I'm pretty sure she knows what she's doing. For another take that confirms it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOwblaKmyVw
120.
by gclaramunt 12y ago
> I want my children to understand perspective. You can't grieve for every individual injustice in the world, you can only strive to make it better overall. Totally agree. I found the article helpful overall, I understand it must h

More ›