olavk

78 ms·

781.
by olavk 12y ago
Sets without any associated storyline or franchise still exist as the "Creator"-series, and seem to be quite popular.
782.
by olavk 12y ago
Maybe classic Lego was meant for everyone, but actually it has always been far more popular among boys. While the old sets may seem gender neutral on the surface, the appealed much more to boys than girls. Lego have made many misguided atte
783.
by olavk 12y ago
A subtlety which is not mentioned in the article: Why do we like the ad? Because it it targeted towards grownups! This is due to the understanding in the Lego company at the time, that parents decided what to buy for their children. Therefo
784.
by olavk 12y ago
I would assume you get a compile-time error because you are declaring 'foo' twice. I guess you are right that the language is getting more complex because you are introducing a new way of declaring variables. However the added c
785.
by olavk 12y ago
Dynamic languages was a breath of fresh air compared to the clunky explicit typing of Java. The first versions of Java didn't even have generic, so just using collections required lots of explicit casting to make the compiler happy for
786.
by olavk 12y ago
Why are you talking about forced static typing when the presentation is talking about optional typing?
787.
by olavk 12y ago
I don't really see any edge cases in the interaction between let and var, can you provide an example? But yeah, using both var and let in the same function would be ugly. Probably you would want to stick with let in new code since ther
788.
by olavk 12y ago
They are suggesting adding optional explicit typing to JavaScript. This will not impede your ability to use untyped dynamic JSON. But it allows you to take advantage of explicit typing where it adds value.
789.
by olavk 12y ago
> Block level scoping will introduce coding nightmares trying to figure out what scope your variable is in. I almost suspect you are trolling here. The variable is in scope inside the block in which it is declared. What could be simpler?
790.
by olavk 12y ago
SaneScript is AFAICT like the "use strict" directive in ES5 which defines a restricted subset of the language. Compilers might also take advantage of this by performing certain optimizations. SoundScript extends this restricted su
791.
by olavk 12y ago
Mascara Compiler ( http://www.mascaraengine.com/ ) supports many of these features already: - non-nullable types - proper scoping (no use before declare, block scope) - optional and rest arguments - calling with too
792.
by olavk 12y ago
My point is that do-notation is comparable to macros since it is a kind of syntactic sugar. Monads on the other hand are a type (or design pattern, depending on perspective), not a kind of syntactic sugar. So you can't compare lisp mac
793.
by olavk 12y ago
The Javascript example kind of confuses the solution with the problem. The convoluted syntax of the 'callback-hell' is the problem. Monads does not solve this problem, rather the use of monads leads to that kind of syntax. The sol
794.
by olavk 12y ago
The ability to write (2, "hello") instead of Tuple.Create(2, "Hello"). But more importantly, syntax for deconstructing tuples will make tuples convenient for returning multiple values from a method. Eg.: (var x, var
795.
by olavk 12y ago
Have blind tests been performed, where musicians could't distinguish between music composed by computers and music composed by humans?
796.
by olavk 12y ago
Yeah, the parable is wishful thinking by a developer who wants to be left alone and code without having to communicate with anybody. There are rational reasons that this is not a viable approach for most non-hobby software development. A si
797.
by olavk 12y ago
My take on how to explain basic IO without having to explain monads: (1) Any function with interacts with the world is called an IO function and has the result type "IO something". e.g. "IO String" for getLine (because i
798.
by olavk 12y ago
Yeah, no way around learning do-notation even for the simplest of programs. And do-notation is kind of a DSL with a totally different feel than the rest of the language. So getting started writing even simple toy programs in Haskell require
799.
by olavk 12y ago
I wonder about the purpose and intended audience for a writeup like this. It is probably not intended for OO-practicers, since it starts out by calling them idiots and fanatics before even touching any technical arguments. Oh and calling th
800.
by olavk 12y ago
How on earth is "human" sexist?
801.
by olavk 12y ago
So "good person" just means "one of us" and has nothing to do with ethics.
802.
by olavk 12y ago
Not that effective for gathering reliable intelligence in a timely manner, but very effective for other purposes: To punish, to instill fear in potential enemies, to satisfy a need for revenge. The "gathering intelligence" excu
803.
by olavk 12y ago
Depends on which 75% you are weeding out. What if you are just weeding out people which haven't prior experiences in a more accessible language?
804.
by olavk 12y ago
I loved SICP when I worked through it, but I was already an experienced programmer at that time. I venture to guess that most of the people praising SICP actually has programming experience before reading it, even if the book purport to be
805.
by olavk 12y ago
Java was introduced in Netscape Navigator 2 at the same time as JavaScript. But Java was really not integrated with the html at all. It lived in its own isolated box on the page. JavaScript was integrated with html and with the browser envi
806.
by olavk 12y ago
> 'Mankind' still puts one gender ahead of the other; It is really the other way around, since "man" as meaning both genders is the more original meaning of the word. So there is nothing sexist about "mankind&quo
807.
by olavk 12y ago
Except he doesn't say "torture is sometimes permissible". He supports the specific actions of CIA where torture were used, but didn't lead to reliable intelligence of value. So it was not a "ticking time-bomb scenar
808.
by olavk 12y ago
There is a lot of discussion in this thread if torture theoretically could be morally justified - ticking time bomb scenarios and so on. But his support is not for some theoretical scenario. It is for the actual CIA actions where people wer
809.
by olavk 12y ago
When "man" is used without an article it means "mankind" - that is all humans, male and female. When used with an article ("a man") it indicates a male human.
810.
by olavk 12y ago
> Since when is it reasonable to judge a language on how the amateurs use it, instead of the professionals? Well, if you want to judge the appropriateness of a language for a given task, you will have to consider how it is going to be us

More ›