haskellshill

9 ms·

91.
by haskellshill 1y ago
And those are supposed to be good things? Don't make me laugh. The only good anti-antisocial-behavior regulations I've seen are those of China
92.
by haskellshill 1y ago
If all your code depends on all your other code, yeah 200k lines might be a lot. But if you actually know how to code, I fail to understand why 200k lines (or any number) of properly encapsulated well-written code would be a problem. Furthe
93.
by haskellshill 1y ago
> if my tax dollars went towards protecting your shit, you owe society access Well, the protection is only from random people accessing one's stuff, so this is a very silly (in fact nonsensical) argument. "If my tax dollars wen
94.
by haskellshill 1y ago
"Sorry, you didn't invest your money optimally, so we confiscated it all" Okay...
95.
by haskellshill 1y ago
Also, you do know the > Please show me on the doll where this stranger hurt you phrasing is pretty closely associated with child abuse investigations, right? I don't know why you'd associate gender identity with that?
96.
by haskellshill 1y ago
Sounds like a similar idea to what the "plus N-word license" is trying to accomplish
97.
by haskellshill 1y ago
For lack of a better term one might describe the ideology as "woke"
98.
by haskellshill 1y ago
They asked a question about what ideology was being referred to, and you're angry I clarified?
99.
by haskellshill 1y ago
>Please call me (order of preference): They/them or She/her please. Take a wild guess
100.
by haskellshill 1y ago
This is a reply to an old comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44452679 (since I cannot reply in the original thread) > Even assuming python's foreach loop in these cases get optimized down to a very bare fo
101.
by haskellshill 1y ago
> "Graphic violence" meant "violence in images" in my lifetime. I doubt that > graphic (adj.) "vivid, describing accurately ," 1660s (graphically "vividly" is from 1570s) [...] Meaning "per
102.
by haskellshill 1y ago
>we end up performing two loops instead of one, all because sticking three operations in one statement is "yucky" You seem to believe that "O(2 n)" for value in range(1, n + 1): result ^= value for value in
103.
by haskellshill 1y ago
How about the following Haskell program? rec ((x:xs),p) = (filter (/= p+x) xs,p+x) sequ = map snd $ iterate rec ([2..],1) sequ is an infinite list of terms of the sequence A005228.