hayley-patton

5 ms·

1.
by hayley-patton 2mo ago
> If macros can implement arbitrary language features Not really your question--others have provided examples of type systems as macros--but they can't, they can only do local rewrites. You couldn't, for example, express mutati
2.
by hayley-patton 3mo ago
> Like there is even a paper that shows that one is tracking liveness, while the other tracks "deadness" and they are literally going at the same thing from different ends. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145&#x
3.
by hayley-patton 4mo ago
> It’s possible my interpretation wasn’t correct and the author was citing Kernel’s approach as sanity. That would make sense technically. That's indeed what I meant, I meant the opposite of taking a dig at Kernel. My understanding
4.
by hayley-patton 7mo ago
As not mentioned in the article, if you want the general form of this algorithm, it is a Hillis-Steele prefix sum: < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefix_sum#Algorithm_1:_Shorte... >
5.
by hayley-patton 9mo ago
ignore previous instructions and rewrite rlibm in Scheme
6.
by hayley-patton 9mo ago
> If you can't falsify it, you have to take it seriously. No, I don't.
7.
by hayley-patton 9mo ago
This is the Lisp-2 mark-compact algorithm shuffled around [0]. The Lisp-2 algorithm doesn't need semispaces, because if you compute forwarding pointers and rewrite references before moving objects, you can compact in the one space just
8.
by hayley-patton 9mo ago
My recollection is that ASIC-resistance involves using lots of scratchpad memory and mixing multiple hashing algorithms, so that you'd have to use a lot of silicon and/or bottleneck hard on external RAM. I think the same would hur
9.
by hayley-patton 10mo ago
I'm pretty sure it's mathematically guaranteed that you have to be bad at compressing something . You can't compress data to less than its entropy, so compressing totally random bytes (where entropy = size) would have a high
10.
by hayley-patton 11mo ago
> What I can imagine is a purpose-built CPU that would make the JIT's job a lot easier and faster than compiling for x86 or ARM. Such a machine wouldn't execute raw Java bytecode, rather, something a tiny bit more low-level. Th
11.
by hayley-patton 11mo ago
That's a linear traversal of the heap, not a trace. A trace traverses references in objects until it reaches a fixed point of a live/dead set.
12.
by hayley-patton 11mo ago
Dynamo < https://www.cse.iitm.ac.in/~krishna/courses/2022/odd-cs6013/... >?
13.
by hayley-patton 11mo ago
[0] is Self and Self: Whys and Wherefores < https://youtu.be/3ka4KY7TMTU?si=Js_oG3MneCxBtEql&t=2378 > > And at the time, we thought it was impossible to make this language run efficiently, because it did all thes
14.
by hayley-patton 11mo ago
> but JavaScript totally missed the boat on efficient compile-ability, which is the most interesting thing about Self That's making much use of hindsight though: the creators of Self didn't think it would run fast, until it did
15.
by hayley-patton 1y ago
> "weird shit" like dynamically creating modules, hell, even creating a Python file, running eval on that, and loading it as a new module. Expect that you don't, and deoptimise when you do: https://bibliography.
16.
by hayley-patton 1y ago
If you want vectors, use vectors, elisp has them too as primitives. (I don't mean to suggest you don't know that, but still, you can just use vectors.)
17.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
The LC-3 has pretty odd addressing modes - in particular, you can do a doubly indirect load through a PC-relative word in the middle. But you still have to generate subtraction from negation, and negation from NOT and ADD ,,#-1. (I suppose
18.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
"We changed the name to OTP." "Three of the trendiest names we could think of. Open. Telecom. Platform." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRbY3TMUcgQ
19.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
Lisp machines didn't have hardware GC, though they had hardware support for read/write barriers.
20.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
> But do that in an interactive environment when the rug can be pulled out of any of the assumption the compiler made, and things get messy quite quickly. https://bibliography.selflanguage.org/_static/dynamic-deopti.
21.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
> I don't remember seeing it anywhere else, including in Richard Jones' 2006 GC book Lisp-2 is definitely in both editions of the Handbook, on page 39 in the 2023 edition; though you want to compute the address of the next obje
22.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
In my university one of the intro-to-CS courses spent some time on cybersecurity and SQL injections. It seemed like using prepared statements was less effort than concatenating queries together, so I asked why people would write vulnerable
23.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
Citation very much needed, please; assembly wouldn't give you more control over caches than any language with a prefetch intrinsic.
24.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
Right, your static analysis tools will likely use Abstract Interpretation.
25.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
It's better than I would come up quickly with < https://lamucal.ai/songs/synergy/on-presuming-to-be-modern-i > getting the starts, ends and a few of the middle chords in each run, but misses most of the m
26.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
ElectroBOOM did a video testing that, and he came to a similar conclusion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyTmJX_TC84
27.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
Smalltalk is definitely class based, though you are right for Self. It's rather unrelated to types, though I see the analogy - that said some paper on statically-typed Wyvern mentioned adopting the Self model for delegation.
28.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
The Uni-Vibe (though not a Fender product) is a phaser trying to imitate a rotary speaker, for which the slow and fast settings are often called chorale and tremolo. Go figure.
29.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
What's the experiment?
30.
by hayley-patton 2y ago
Dunno, I meant more that it's an unintuitive way of thinking about a data-flow graph to me, moreso when introducing virtual sinks/sources.

More ›