pka

19 ms·

121.
by pka 10y ago
You are implicitly talking about being able to objectively measure a goal's "optimality". Unless you believe in absolute morality or the like, there's no such thing as an objective measure. A goal can only be optimal to
122.
by pka 10y ago
I highly recommend watching this playlist about AI self-improvement and safety [0] by Rob Miles. Probably best short overview I've watched on the topic. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qfIgCiYlfY&index=6&li
123.
by pka 10y ago
So now if something like this gets integrated into the OS and gets deeplink support and some OS-wide back button on the desktop [0] I think we actually may be one step closer to interlinked, insta-updateabble, native apps! Maybe we'll
124.
by pka 10y ago
Instantly reminded me of "I have no mouth and I must scream". It's a short, but pretty depressing read.
125.
by pka 10y ago
Why can't you use higher-order functions in macros?
126.
by pka 10y ago
Even Apple's current leadership can't be stupid enough to do that. If they kill the Mac/MacBook, who is gonna write the apps for their mobile platforms? Or maybe they can, judging by the last MBP release. Hopefully they turn
127.
by pka 10y ago
They won't need luck, plenty of people would love to program in Haskell professionally.
128.
by pka 10y ago
My impression was that QFT includes gravity and "only" breaks down when things get extreme, i.e. black holes/big bang/etc.
129.
by pka 10y ago
At my previous company we used Haskell for a very complex, edge-case ridden, algorithm heavy path finding and pricing backend. For other uses, [0]. [0] https://wiki.haskell.org/Haskell_in_industry
130.
by pka 10y ago
Cont, the mother of all monads [0] :) [0] http://blog.sigfpe.com/2008/12/mother-of-all-monads.html?m=1
131.
by pka 10y ago
(Shameless plug) Couple of years ago I made Atea [0], a text-based note taking/TODO/time tracking app for MacOS. Since it stores everything in plain text files, synchronisation can be offloaded to Dropbox etc. There's no sort
132.
by pka 10y ago
This resonates well with me. Had I not learned Haskell, I probably would've left the industry 5 years ago. The novelty has yet to wear off, there's really so much to learn. However, I agree with the general sentiment of the respon
133.
by pka 10y ago
Sure, then you have a valid use case for C/C++ (even better, Rust!) But often people don't and still use C++.
134.
by pka 10y ago
From a practical point of view, in many cases the performance critical sections are tiny compared to the rest of the codebase. Imposing such a cognitive overhead on the programmer when 90% of the code are executed once a second just to make
135.
by pka 10y ago
And after that, PureScript :)
136.
by pka 10y ago
C programmers should be held personally accountable for the damage they cause. Now of course everybody makes mistakes, but if you deliberately choose C when there are better options available then you should pay out of pocket for your buffe
137.
by pka 10y ago
The monad laws guarantee that there's no difference between do_x(); do_y(); and do_x_and_y(); where the latter is defined as { do_x(); do_y() }. In fact, monads would be pretty useless if that were not the case.
138.
Introducing PureScript Erlang back end(nwolverson.uk)
174 points by pka 10y ago|31 comments
139.
by pka 10y ago
I don't think this is top-dow design really, just an overengineered OOP monstrosity. Top-down doesn't mean that you have to model the universe first before getting to model your problem :)
140.
by pka 10y ago
I don't know why people keep spreading the misconception that mutation isn't possible in pure languages. ref <- newIORef 0 writeIORef ref 1 y <- readIORef ref print y > 1 There you go, mutation in Has
141.
by pka 10y ago
Have you tried what I'm talking about, i.e. prototyping something by specifying the types and iterating on the core design first before implementing large chunks of the required functionality? It's probably hard to see the benefit
142.
by pka 10y ago
> If I am facing a problem that I have never faced before, I like to start off without any types in my code, and then, as I understand the problem more, I like to add in more contract-enforcement. This seems to be a widespread sentiment.
143.
by pka 10y ago
Yeah, that's what I meant. You can't tell from the type signature alone if a pure function uses ST though, so I'd say that counts as pure :)
144.
by pka 10y ago
You can do that perfectly fine even in a pure language like Haskell.
145.
by pka 10y ago
Often, when I need to get familiar with a particularly tricky piece of code, I print it out and start annotating the printout, drawing arrows between dependent functions, visualizing data structures, algorithms and data flow, simplifying fr
146.
by pka 10y ago
> I haven't looked at the browser since I started. > I switch to the browser and sure enough, the whole thing works perfectly. This is the general workflow in a typed language as well (i.e. PureScript, Elm) - you write some code
147.
by pka 10y ago
But it's not static. Pre/postcondition runtime checks can be implemented in a static language as well.
148.
by pka 10y ago
Clojurescript doesn't have a way of managing IO (i.e. types.)
149.
by pka 10y ago
So what is it that you need classes for that dearly?
150.
by pka 10y ago
I've heard that argument dozens of times, but I really can't understand it. The App Store has millions of apps. Who created those apps, if not pro users? Without the App Store, who would buy iPhones, iPads and iPods? If Apple shit

More ›