omaranto

71 ms·

721.
by omaranto 12y ago
Well, I'd say no, not in "Python". It seems to me that when people say "Python" they still mostly mean Python 2, where range returns a list and xrange a generator. In Python 3 there is no xrange and range returns a
722.
by omaranto 12y ago
In Python 3 you'd be right, but I think people still call mostly that language "Python 3" and mean Python 2 when they say "Python".
723.
by omaranto 12y ago
I used fish for several years and fortunately never came across that one. It's pretty awful.
724.
by omaranto 12y ago
Maybe the now defunct pysh profile of ipython [1] is close to what you want. (It's defunct because it is mostly unneccesary in recent versions of ipython, that page shows how to get most (all?) of the functionality it used to provide.)
725.
by omaranto 12y ago
I think you did miss something: the comment you replied to didn't say x.forEach(f); but rather items(x).forEach(x); which is definitely possible, you just need to implement items().
726.
by omaranto 12y ago
I don't there is anything too surprising about this. "User Experience" isn't something you can measure on a single line, there are different aspects to it. I'm not an expert but I think the following are some of the
727.
by omaranto 12y ago
What's "pseudo" about Clojure's dynamic typing?
728.
by omaranto 12y ago
When you did that, did you use Shake[^1] for the build scripts? If not, check it out! It lets you easily say things like "bundle.tar.gz depends on the file MANIFEST and on every file mentioned in it", for example. [^1]: https:&
729.
by omaranto 12y ago
Oh, OK. That makes sense.
730.
by omaranto 12y ago
Having read some of Steve's excellent documentation already I'm sure the advice in it makes more sense than Strunk and White ---see http://chronicle.com/article/50-Years-of-Stupid-Grammar/2549...
731.
by omaranto 12y ago
> To their credit, I've made similar mistakes in my career. What did you mean? You don't mean that if X makes a mistake that you made first, that mistake is a credit to X, do you?
732.
by omaranto 12y ago
I respectfully suggest that Applicative is not what makes this article hard to understand. I agree with thinkpad20 here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7894258
733.
by omaranto 12y ago
> Most people don't expect upper bounds, though, when talking about estimations. What do you mean? If all I know about a number X is that it is an estimate for Y, I would expect X to be an upper bound for Y 50% of the time and a low
734.
by omaranto 12y ago
It only says not to use the mouse at the top. Further down the page you can find the "advanced directions", for people "advanced" enough to use a mouse. (I'm a basic keyboarder myself.)
735.
by omaranto 12y ago
Can you say something about why you consider the Wired article to be terrible? I read it a few years ago and remember loving it.
736.
by omaranto 12y ago
What a coincidence, just yesterday The United States Chess Federation published an article about Ken Regan and his methods for detecting cheating. Article: http://www.uschess.org/content/view/12677/763/
737.
by omaranto 12y ago
> I understand they beat human players, but that people feel computers play in dull ways. Without knowing anything about chess, I'd say that makes humans sounds like sore losers. I wonder if this will lead to having tournaments wher
738.
by omaranto 12y ago
Computer assisted chess is becoming more popular in human-only tournaments. In that context it's usually called cheating, of course. Ken Regan has developed some interesting statistical methods to detect it, see for example his blog po
739.
by omaranto 12y ago
I think this is even more true for Chinese than most other languages. Commonsense indicates the difficulty of learning a language doesn't depend solely on the language in question, but on how similar it is to languages you al
740.
by omaranto 12y ago
By forbidding them, most likely.
741.
by omaranto 12y ago
Oh, that explains why I thought PDF.js is horrible across the board! If you judged the source of PDF's solely by the ones I read, you'd think every PDF in the world is either produced by LaTeX or is a restaurant menu. Are there st
742.
by omaranto 12y ago
It's not useful at all, it makes Haskell sound bizarre. Haskell is much more of an ordinary programming language than this would suggest: like ordinary languages it has functions but also numbers, strings, list, arrays, etc.
743.
by omaranto 12y ago
Really, that myth is common? If so it explains why people seem to be afraid of Haskell: they think it has no numbers, characters, strings, lists, arrays, etc. Someone who believes the myth and is aware of Church encodings probably thinks ev
744.
by omaranto 12y ago
It's not faster on my computer, a 32bit netbook with an Intel Atom N450 chip (all scores average of five warm runs): CPython 2.7.5: 27032 PyPy.js: 20103 PyPy 2.0.2: 444011 I ran PyPy.js on Firefox 29.
745.
by omaranto 13y ago
Julia's comprehensions are multidimensional array comprehensions so allowing filtering doesn't make much sense because the result needs to be rectangular and filtering can create arbitrary holes. For a one-dimensional array compre
746.
by omaranto 13y ago
You're right, I wasn't careful. Without precomputing F, the speedup is only around 7x.
747.
by omaranto 13y ago
Do users mind that in your words Moolenar is a risk to vim, though? Are people specifically interested in the advancement of vim or just more generally in the progress of vim-like text editors, in which case they can happily switch to neovi
748.
by omaranto 13y ago
Well, this particular example shows instead that the overhead of calling libraries written in other languages can be so large that a pure python solution can be faster. The current top answer to the question shows a pure python version that
749.
by omaranto 13y ago
I don't think that's right at all, the OP seemed more interested in "how fast is the output your compiler produces?".
750.
by omaranto 13y ago
But isn't that extremely limited? Does Mac OS X have keyboard shortcuts for entering greek letters or the infinity symbol.

More ›