patrec

59 ms·

571.
by patrec 6y ago
Why not?
572.
by patrec 6y ago
Is this based on conjecture or personal experience from working on multi-dev projects with both hygienic and unhygienic macro systems? I lack such comparative experience but my guess would be that if your org's development approach is
573.
by patrec 6y ago
Again this is not fundamentally tied to whether functions and variables share a namespace, in clojure they do and yet your example above does not cause a problem. Watch: Let's start out with a function: user=> (defn enlist [x]
574.
by patrec 6y ago
> No. Unless you're not familiar with Lisp-1 vs Lisp-2. Just because "classical" defmacro is mildly awkward to use in Common Lisp and much more so in scheme does not mean that the only viable alternatives are R*RS style hy
575.
by patrec 6y ago
Well, that's the standard Common Lisper opinion. I don't buy it though -- I don't get the impression that it's a problem in clojure (which does not have scheme-style hygenic macros, but shares the single namespace for va
576.
by patrec 6y ago
Well, certainly no one seems to understand how e.g. syntax-case works. But my impression is that macro hygiene in itself is a solution looking for a problem. The key advantage e.g. racket's macro system has over clojure or common lisp
577.
by patrec 6y ago
> Oleg can write unhygienic syntax-rules macros. Not only can he do it, he even wrote a paper about it: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.36...
578.
by patrec 6y ago
Ex-Microsofty Gabe must have been pretty paranoid when he decided to bootstrap a linux based gaming platform out of fear of being locked out by Microsoft.
579.
by patrec 6y ago
So you think, sure Microsoft may lock users out of control of their own computers when it serves their monetization interests but they would never do anything so crass as control third party developer access in order to squeeze profit out o
580.
by patrec 6y ago
He's not right. Windows comes with "telemetry" (read spyware) you cannot disable (unless you got a corporate version). Also UEFI has not exactly been without controversy.
581.
by patrec 6y ago
Jetbrains products are my preferred choice for full-featured IDEs, but this is not exactly an industry renowned for producing snappy and pleasing interfaces. And since LSP has narrowed the gap, most of the time I don't require the feat
582.
by patrec 6y ago
I say that some who likes Jetbrains and buys their products: No one in his right mind loves the UI of Jetbrains Apps and the Linux experience has always been a shitshow unless you were using Gnome or KDE. Because Swing does not implement th
583.
by patrec 6y ago
Sure, I'm not in favor of using DKIM for repudiation and in favor of Google releasing the secret keys.
584.
by patrec 6y ago
> To allow a stranger to authenticate a messages is to concede information to them, and avoiding concessions is the point of messaging cryptography. Whilst I agree with you that email messages should be repudiable , I have a feeling you&
585.
by patrec 6y ago
What's end-to-end latency for a local cluster like? What's your business model? I'm a big fan of kafka as an abstract building block, but not so much the actual implementation, which is as painful to setup as a consultancy-ba
586.
by patrec 6y ago
All the languages you mention have parameterized types, so I don't see why anyone would be tempted to use subtyping rather than generics. The only reason I could see is wanting to parameterize at runtime, but it's not immediately
587.
by patrec 6y ago
You're both moving the goal posts (if powershell were superior I and countless other people would absolutely chsh it for our accounts, since we're already not using bash anyway) and not making much sense. Many sysadmins tend to s
588.
by patrec 6y ago
> And yes I would prefer your second "mental overhead" way as it involves less typing. 1. It doesn't, just use zsh and piping into grep becomes a single character, like so: alias -g G='|grep -P' 2. Even
589.
by patrec 6y ago
As someone who's written a lot of impressive dweets -- what do you recommend for someone wanting to start out with this type of coding? Just going to dwitter and trying to decipher other people's dweets as well as writing your own
590.
by patrec 6y ago
> Curious. To me this is the worst thing you could ever do. Talking via streams to say `cat file.txt | grep ERROR | wc -l` is cool. But you could do SOOO much more, if programs would actually output structured data streams. A lot of peop
591.
by patrec 6y ago
La France se libère, part deux?
592.
by patrec 6y ago
> Apple's customers are the users. As are a crack dealer's.
593.
by patrec 6y ago
Ah, OK, you mean stuff like this, right? https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/85103 I haven't often run into wrapper issues, but when you do it's a pain. So thanks for the pointer, I should probabl
594.
by patrec 6y ago
> Isn't DRM... Completely fucking pointless? It never ceases to amaze me how easy it is to boil frogs, even if the frogs in question are high-IQ, technically sophisticated HN readers. Right now, you can still circumvent DRM, because
595.
by patrec 6y ago
Hilarious. I wonder if any of the downvoters of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25068229 now experience cognitive dissonance.
596.
by patrec 6y ago
> Mac OS is no longer any good for professional use, outside of media creation. I agree, and I bet they will kick themselves for it in ~5 years time.
597.
by patrec 6y ago
> Now Apple computers [...] Apple no longer sells computers. You can rent some shiny gizmo from them to run software of their choosing provided by people they deign to allow on their platform and in a manner they approve of¹. It's n
598.
by patrec 6y ago
Thanks for taking the time to write a up a detailed and informative answer! I agree wrt desirability of grafts as an escape hatch (I think there's been some undocumented crappy version of this in nix for ages, no idea what keeps it in
599.
by patrec 6y ago
Thanks for alerting me to the existence of the faq, which I had missed (in fact even after you mentioned it it took me a bit to find it on the page)! It makes more sense now. So bascically the idea is P6 is too complicated. And you don&#x27
600.
by patrec 6y ago
This seems literally some completely superfluous reinvention of PPM P6. What's wrong with the suckless guys?

More ›