jules

99 ms·

931.
by jules 11y ago
It's true that it was a discovery that Martin Lof identity types could have multiple inhabitants, but it's a general principle of type theory that types can have multiple inhabitants (unlike in set theory, where propositions are j
932.
by jules 11y ago
I wouldn't call that a proper treatment of equality. It is unsatisfactory in several ways: no proper equality on functions (function extensionality), no proper equality on types (univalence), no quotient types (~= HITs), and since refl
933.
by jules 11y ago
Even though there isn't a constructive method of generating uncountable sequences, that doesn't mean that this also assumed from within the logic. In conventional mathematics you can also only write down countably many sequences,
934.
by jules 11y ago
First the type theory part of homotopy type theory. Mathematicians have been doing logic for a long time, but mathematical statements and proofs were not themselves mathematical objects. They were just human language text with some math not
935.
by jules 11y ago
Opinion is not evidence, regardless of whose opinion it is. We didn't decide on the existence of the Higgs boson by asking Stephen Hawking's opinion.
936.
by jules 11y ago
Compared to GC the other options have several important disadvantages. Rust style memory management: - Additional complexity in the language and in your code - You need unsafe blocks for code that does something interesting with pointers -
937.
by jules 11y ago
I don't see any evidence there.
938.
by jules 11y ago
Is there any actual evidence for this? By the same token you could say that watching Game of Thrones will make you a murderer. I could easily see it being the opposite: relieving sexual pressure could make people less likely to actually har
939.
by jules 11y ago
That quote is saying more about artists than about Escher.
940.
by jules 11y ago
Abstract art has a high degree of pretentiousness and fakeness to it. What makes Escher's art attractive is that it is purely what it is. It's impressive on its own, and there is no need to elevate it into something that it is not
941.
by jules 11y ago
> it's insane ramblings Exactly. I'd recommend the other 100 commenters or so who posted a similar reply to learn some basic quantum mechanics. Contrary to popular belief it's not that hard if you have a grasp of math.
942.
by jules 11y ago
For what it's worth I think the importance put on height is primarily a US phenomenon. That's not to say that it's unimportant elsewhere, but not as exceptionally important as in the US. It's one of the factors among man
943.
by jules 11y ago
Yea...no. The population of the Netherlands is 17 million. There is absolutely no way this is a statistical outlier.
944.
by jules 11y ago
Thanks for the heads up, I was about to try Atom but I'll wait until this is fixed.
945.
by jules 11y ago
It's highly dependent on coding style. If you program in a mostly ML-like style then I think that design has its advantages because only only need record of functions + open recursion + named + always constructed via some constructor i
946.
by jules 11y ago
In that case, why not write a compiler in Haskell to C ;-)
947.
by jules 11y ago
It's actually a lot easier to learn ML and then read/write the interpreter in ML than to read/write the interpreter in C. An interpreter written in C would be too convoluted.
948.
by jules 11y ago
You can also implement an interpreter in Haskell/ML without using closures to implement closures. It would still be a lot less painful than C.
949.
by jules 11y ago
Certainly, it happens all the time. Leibniz and Newton invented calculus at the same time. Scala is 12 years old though, and it's rare for a language designer to not be aware of the main competitor in the same space, which is probably
950.
by jules 11y ago
The difference is that a class combines several things into one construct (initialization, type definition, naming) that are separate with records. This is also what causes you to need such an elaborate design for constructors.
951.
by jules 11y ago
I assumed duaneb was referring to the whole idea of giving parameters to the class definition.
952.
by jules 11y ago
Yes, sure, you need a construct to extend a record. All but the simplest record systems have this though.
953.
by jules 11y ago
If that were the case, yes, but it isn't. There are obviously some differences but there are clearly also uncanny similarities.
954.
by jules 11y ago
Can you elaborate on that? Since in this model constructors are just functions you can of course define multiple constructors that may or may not call each other.
955.
by jules 11y ago
I think what they're saying is that it's good to give credit where credit is due.
956.
by jules 11y ago
A record literal is an expression that creates a value. A class would then be a function, as chriswarbo suggests.
957.
by jules 11y ago
Wouldn't record literals with open recursion lead to a design with much less semantic duplication?
958.
by jules 11y ago
Some countries have since recognized that mistake and have been successful in getting cars out of the city center.
959.
by jules 11y ago
I do agree that GA is overhyped, but it's definitely not useless. GA brings many separate concepts into a common framework. He's a couple of things that are just ugly: - Cross product only works in 3d - Why is it that the cross pr
960.
by jules 11y ago
I think that is an algorithm from a different paper, namely this one: https://www.fmi.uni-sofia.bg/fmi/logic/theses/mitankin-en.pd... It looks like that is still quite a bit more complicated; 40 lines vs 40+

More ›