patrec

86 ms·

841.
by patrec 7y ago
Probably not so much a matter of culture, but more that the mechanism is a) garbage b) high effort. I bet if either of those two weren't true, you'd see a lot more of it.
842.
by patrec 7y ago
I 100% agree. Lua is a small and elegant language, with two unambiguous severe flaws: global scope as default and one based indexing (one based indexing might be fine in other contexts, but not as some C/C++-glue language). The global
843.
by patrec 7y ago
I know that luajit is carefully written to make this fast as well, but it's of course nonsense that nothing prevents one from doing that. It breaks `#` for starters: #{[0]=1,2,3} == #{2,3} -- true To be able to use zero-based
844.
by patrec 7y ago
I really wish someone did a luajit fork with zero based indexing. It's even more galling in Luajit, because you can otherwise use native C types completely frictionlessly.
845.
by patrec 7y ago
I'm guilty of being overly hyperbolic, and you are right to correct me. But if your poster boys to illustrate the benefits of parser generators forcing you to write a declarative grammar which a human can understand are perl, bash or e
846.
by patrec 7y ago
Basically no serious programming language uses bison or flex, and everything that does (awk is YACC based) has terrible error messages. People totally do handwrite lexers and parsers, if you use some language in earnest the chances it has a
847.
by patrec 7y ago
> This is all good and well except it's very hard to implement in practice. If a microservice needs to replay all business events from months or years in the past it may take hours or days to do this. In my experience it's not
848.
by patrec 7y ago
It's been a while since I last wrote CL but I think your program can produce any counts between zero and the correct one – you need to use eql instead of eq if you want this to work in standard common lisp.
849.
by patrec 7y ago
Strict. Not a change in language semantics at all.
850.
by patrec 7y ago
How about: a typical typescript project does not start off with a dozen compiler pragmas non-trivially changing language semantics? Or: no matter their background, it will take at least 10x more time to spin up new developers with Haskell t
851.
by patrec 7y ago
What do you mean with es6 lifted closures into the language? As far as I remember, closures have been in JS right from the start (and given that Brendan Eich joined mozilla to "do scheme in the browser", we can be pretty sure wher
852.
by patrec 7y ago
I don't understand your argument, in that I really can't see how one can equally argue the opposite. I fully acknowledge that Haskell has been successful as a test bed for PL research, and I also think Haskell is an interesting la
853.
by patrec 7y ago
Well, to my mind the fact that Haskell has a large amount of mind share in academia and smart programmers, has been around for decades and there is very little to show for it[*] that I'm aware off makes me think it almost certainly has
854.
by patrec 7y ago
Exactly. I find it revealing that having some moderately visible successful software does not feature on this list. Even ocaml does, IMO, better here (bits of mirageOs for non-linux docker; Xen; unison, coq, at least one successful ocaml on
855.
by patrec 7y ago
You can use your knowledge of emacs in other non-emacs contexts as well! Elisp is a reasonably capable, if sprawling, programming language and comes with a lot of useful text and code munging stuff, as well as with cross-platform networking
856.
by patrec 7y ago
How does your own DNS server substantially help, given that it needs to get its data somewhere?
857.
by patrec 7y ago
Well, it may seem fairly obvious but it's also wrong.
858.
by patrec 7y ago
The camels and their water consumption impact are not uniformly distributed throughout Australia. And since they are considered an invasive species, allowing them to live presumably isn't considered a top priority.
859.
by patrec 7y ago
True but I believe that due to some Australian legal idiosyncrasies, the sniping of humans involves more red tape then that of feral camels.
860.
by patrec 7y ago
Plus, Knuth, despite his accomplishments, is a terrible computer scientist and programmer in some capacities. TeX must be the most odious language not designed as a deliberate joke.
861.
by patrec 7y ago
I love the idea behind blockly of bringing back structured editors to teach beginners in a way that side-steps the time waste of syntactically malformed code. And also the mix direct manipulation and indirect manipulation via coding. But th
862.
by patrec 7y ago
> Dude, didn't I tell you to use regular expressions? Replace is obviously slower. I used it because it's easier to read then regexp. Rerun your experiment on that. I specifically mentioned that the regexp is the faster impleme
863.
by patrec 7y ago
A lot of people consider Monad transformers as an ugly hack to partially paper of the lack of compositionality of Monads (hence alternative attempts like extensible effects). Something that composes nicely has low overhead, does not introdu
864.
by patrec 7y ago
I timed it -- 2 orders of magnitude slower across the board. In [19]: short, middle, long = [{2*i+1:2*i+2 for i in range(n)} for n in [2, 2**8, 2**16]] In [20]: timeit [x for kv in d.items() for x in short] 812 ns ± 6.86 ns p
865.
by patrec 7y ago
Monad transformers are really not the great counterexample you seem to think they are.
866.
by patrec 7y ago
Can you spell out what myth is being busted, and how, in a way a numerate person would be inclined to agree with?
867.
by patrec 7y ago
Still needlessly complex and slow. [x for kv in d.items() for x in kv]
868.
by patrec 7y ago
Sure, but mind explaining how the fact that a woman beat a man in the World Darts championship (which probably has the world's top 0.01% of darts players) will make people less likely to mistakenly not hire a male designer over a fema
869.
by patrec 7y ago
> About your plot related comment you probably won't get in from you the elite of the elite of programmers/designers/whatever. I can't parse this sentence.
870.
by patrec 7y ago
This is a very confused comment. Yes, people should be evaluated as individuals, especially where doing so is very easy (such as figuring out how accurate you are at throwing darts). No, surprise at an elite member from population x outpe

More ›