grav1tas

5 ms·

1.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I would qualify that statement better by saying "compilers with Turing Complete macros or type systems terminate for any input is trivially false". The point may not be trivial (which I'm not ready to concede), but it still doesn't matter.
2.
by grav1tas 15y ago
That's fine that they're different. My point is that they're both formal processes. Adding AI to the mix will not help you arrive at formal conclusions. The conclusions will be probabilistic, instead. If an AI could use formal routines
3.
by grav1tas 15y ago
The point about the macros being Turing Complete is trivial in this instance because if you wrote a macro that never terminated, you'd never compile anything do decompile ;-).
4.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I don't think you connected your arguments very well. Just because a human can do something doesn't mean that AI's are the best solution to the task. I'm not sure how your specific example plays to the general case. Both AIs and Humans bo
5.
by grav1tas 15y ago
The set of all possible inputs for a compiler is infinite, too. Does that mean that compilers are all harangued by the halting problem as well? Nope. Having an infinite number of possible inputs (infinite input set size) does not prevent
6.
by grav1tas 15y ago
It depends on what you want from decompilation. Decompilation by its basic nature is just as decideable as compilation is. It's a translation from one language to another in addition to semantics-preserving translations. Now what a lot o
7.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Applying AI to a decompilation problem is just like applying AI to a compilation problem. You're taking a potentially nondeterministic approach to a problem that should be formalized and deterministic. I think AI applied to compilers is s
8.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Sometimes I wonder if these payment processing companies behave like this so they can keep their books straight/solvent.
9.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I think it might be important to note that while the terms map and reduce do come from Lisp, they're not one-to-one with what these functions do in Lisp. The original MapReduce paper mentions the borrowing, but doesn't really go into speci
10.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Yeah I've always been tweaked by the "inborn" trait thing. I think there's a natural affinity that people can have for things, but at the same time, anybody who puts in the hours can get there with this stuff. Yes, some people "get" how t
11.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I'm not sure what's surprising about a compiler with no C in it. They're becoming much more common. I personally think C is an awful language to write a compiler in. One shouldn't be worrying about C's bookkeeping while also worrying abo
12.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Perhaps Peter Thiel's real master plan is to increase the value of an education by convincing a lot of people that they shouldn't go to school, and thus increasing scarcity of those getting degrees. AmIright?
13.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Your suggestion that the deans are pro-college institution because they are deans doesn't necessarily follow. It actually is an ad hominem against the deans because you're trying to weaken the author's point by reducing the weight of a ser
14.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I also think it sort of waters down Computer Science to wedge it into engineering and treat it as such. Ultimately it's more about theory, formalisms, and mathematical/logical foundations than it is about "making it go". I think when we s
15.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Is good software engineering something you can truly learn in the classroom, or is it something that's emergent to applying good learning techniques to real life experiences (kind of like being a journeyman)? I think a good Software Engine
16.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Isn't that kinda like saying the C language still lives on in the form of Java?
17.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I've read some of this and it's good stuff. I guess where I was coming from was that OOP is already so scatter shot and widely used as such that even if somebody did formalize something based on OOP, it wouldn't be generally accepted as "t
18.
by grav1tas 15y ago
Haskell is a purely functional language in this sense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purely_functional Haskell has taken functional purity and ran with it. It's proof that you can eliminate sid
19.
by grav1tas 15y ago
I think with languages like Haskell, ML, Coq, ACL2 and their ilk, you're not going to get a lot of traction for theorem proving in an OOP-ed C++ variant. The first two do compile to machine code, and have type systems that better lend them
20.
by grav1tas 15y ago
FP ~ Math/Formal Logics. OOP is a grab bag of theories, ideas and their applications to programming. Unfortunately I don't think that there's a generally accepted formal notion of what OOP actually is. On the other hand, functional langu
21.
by grav1tas 16y ago
I think to call C++ compilers a black box and then turn around and say something like gcc is not is a bit of a stretch, and simply unfair to C++. The largess of the GNU C compiler is the very definition of a black box. If you're going to
22.
by grav1tas 16y ago
While the price tag is pretty bad, at least she'll be ending with an advanced degree. Some of the people in this article had comparable liabilities but were going to wind up with undergraduate degrees. I hope it works out for you all, reg
23.
by grav1tas 16y ago
Agreed. My second year in college as a CS student I felt like I was rolling in money (relative to working at a grocery store) when I had an internship.
24.
by grav1tas 16y ago
Which part? I don't think he actually logged in under the guy's Facebook account?
25.
by grav1tas 16y ago
Care to elaborate what you mean by VB-like stack?
26.
by grav1tas 16y ago
Apple is pretty secretive already. Would it really matter if they got even more secretive? I find myself on the opposite end of the spectrum as you with respect to NDAs. I think it's a sad state of affairs that so many companies today us
27.
by grav1tas 16y ago
I'm curious if specs in mobile devices have become less important when the device is only supposed to do more or less what it's advertised to doand what the user bought it to do, and not much else. Apple advertises all the apps that work o
28.
by grav1tas 16y ago
The presence of wealth and the presence of motivation do not entail the existence of the other in a person.
29.
by grav1tas 16y ago
Even if that were the case, you still have to package your app for distribution. The app store model probably makes this easier to do since you don't have to develop a framework for pushing your apps along with any updates you have down th
30.
by grav1tas 16y ago
That's actually a very interesting point. Is maintaining another app distribution system viable in the face of "developer fatigue"? I guess that also sorta begs the question: is developer fatigue real?

More ›