hyperpape

244 ms·

2581.
by hyperpape 13y ago
Most regex implementations allow you to parse some context-free grammars, and even some non-context-free grammars. But they don't let you parse all context-free grammars. reference: http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/que
2582.
by hyperpape 13y ago
Depends. Many proofs have errors in them. You'll only get people to pay attention if it's difficult/impossible to repair those errors for a reasonable practitioner. In contrast, since a program is executed by a computer, many
2583.
by hyperpape 14y ago
The database is available under creative commons, and they're working on an API, so I'm confused what you're talking about--whether Wikipedia is an elitist organization or not, I don't see how that would matter.
2584.
by hyperpape 14y ago
I enabled it on my old Mac--because I am a huge freaking nerd. I never once needed it, but it made me happy. However, I think it's definitely a bad default. Make it easy to enable, and the people who need it will enable it. But we should de
2585.
by hyperpape 14y ago
Please, stop talking about eye candy if you don't have a deep understanding of UI design. The most important aspects of UI are about presenting information in a way that is comprehensible. Flashing error messages on screen for less than a s
2586.
by hyperpape 14y ago
This is really a minor point, but lots of people seem to hate function level scoping, including these guys. Having started out in languages with function level scoping, and only later used block level scoping, the former strikes me as the m
2587.
by hyperpape 14y ago
I think it's a great exercise--you will learn something if you try it. But you lose so much precision, and you wouldn't want to make that your normal way of speaking.
2588.
by hyperpape 14y ago
Have you ever read an explanation of a compiler or concurrency using only the 1000 most common English words? It can be done (and I wish I could find the link), but there's a reason we don't talk like that, and neither should scientists.
2589.
by hyperpape 14y ago
Except the assumption here is that improvements must necessarily be slower. But that's not necessarily true: collaboration between Chromium and WebKit was already incredibly problematic and was definitely slowing people down ( http://infreq
2590.
by hyperpape 14y ago
You cite the Ada template, which says "sexual language and imagery" is inappropriate for a conference or other public event. Your website only mentions "sexist language". From the tone and tenor of the post, I suspect you mean to endorse th
2591.
by hyperpape 14y ago
Lack of standardization makes people go crazy. If another programming language had an API this simple, people would never think it is heavyweight. But because you're always rolling your own, people get obsessed with the smallest things in j
2592.
by hyperpape 14y ago
Not to mention that the system was propped up by organized violence and the corruption of the legal system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharecropping#United_States ). This isn't a bad post, but the sharecropper simile kinda stinks.
2593.
by hyperpape 14y ago
In a few years, maybe we can have "nfnpm" (noise-free node package manager).
2594.
by hyperpape 14y ago
That's more or less right, masklinn. To the above writers, look at the Python source (I can't vouch for how the C implementation does things). It's not beautiful, but it's also not hard to understand. The effective work is all done inside a
2595.
by hyperpape 14y ago
No, he drives some people crazy, and I personally think he'd be twice as good if he posted half as much, but he clearly knows a lot about a lot of things. Try this endorsement for example: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2