pklausler

9 ms·

181.
by pklausler 1y ago
Why? It was a relatively cheap way to dodge the capricious whims of a madman who is fortunately easy to distract with shiny objects.
182.
by pklausler 1y ago
Maybe, but if so, it would be better if they didn't contain weird usage in their examples.
183.
by pklausler 1y ago
My ideal array language is one in which array operations are function compositions, since arrays are functions. A functional view of array expressions naturally minimizes needless temporaries in most cases. See https://github.co
184.
by pklausler 1y ago
The physician's assistant recorded my height last week as 5'13". I'm worried now about "I" in general, not just "AI".
185.
by pklausler 1y ago
One of my earliest memories was staying up late on a Sunday night to see Neil and Buzz on the moon. Now, in the same country that could once put them there, I have to defend that it even happened. Basic health measures like pasteurization
186.
by pklausler 1y ago
I have found over the years that I learn more by asking easier questions and interacting with candidates as they think through problems out loud. Little things that test the critical ability to craft a Boolean expression to accurately char
187.
by pklausler 1y ago
The country born out of the scientific enlightenment is eagerly devolving back into medieval mindlessness.
188.
by pklausler 1y ago
Fortran has multiple incompatible implementations and a standard that's supported completely by none of them, and that hasn't maintained 100% forward compatibility across revisions. It'll still be around in the sense that En
189.
by pklausler 1y ago
I'll take that bet.
190.
by pklausler 1y ago
That was obviously before FORTRAN existed.
191.
by pklausler 1y ago
Programmers of assembly code (not binary) shunned FORTRAN? Got a source for that?
192.
by pklausler 1y ago
Non-default lower bounds in Fortran are a famous pitfall, however; they don't persist in many cases where one might think that they do, and are not 100% portable across compilers.
193.
by pklausler 1y ago
If the assembly programmers were struggling with correctly optimizing loops for optimal performance on several distinct target machines, I would hope that their management would want them to try this new Fortran thing and see how well it wo
194.
by pklausler 1y ago
Thanks for that link!
195.
by pklausler 1y ago
The linked article has a good summary.
196.
by pklausler 1y ago
At a closest approach of 1.8AU, you really don't have to worry about a collision with Earth. But that film is relevant to this comet in another way -- several missions that made it into space before the administration's war on the
197.
by pklausler 1y ago
What was the one failure of the Saturn V that you mention? If you're thinking of Apollo 13, that took place after the Apollo stack had ditched all of the Saturn V stages.
198.
by pklausler 1y ago
Why would they still be there?
199.
by pklausler 1y ago
Recursive descent is a cleaner way to go when the language cannot be lexed without feedback from the parser and semantics, like Fortran. And parser combinators make RD straightforward to code.
200.
by pklausler 1y ago
For obvious reasons, the people who are most able to find a good gig elsewhere are the most likely to elect to go do so; and they tend to be the people that you'll miss more.
201.
by pklausler 1y ago
I get paid to implement one very badly specified but important programming language in another programming language that is painful to use and rife with pitfalls even when used defensively. But each year, there's Advent of Code, and I
202.
by pklausler 1y ago
So you're saying that the changes made to Fortran have made it more specialized?
203.
by pklausler 1y ago
Are you saying that Fortran was once a general purpose programming language, but somehow changed to no longer be one?
204.
by pklausler 1y ago
What you mean by "humanist" does not seem to be what philosophers mean by it.
205.
by pklausler 1y ago
Or, from the perspective of memetics, writing has always been using us for everything.
206.
by pklausler 1y ago
EQUIVALENCE is useful even when the types are identical.
207.
by pklausler 1y ago
`EQUIVALENCE` was (and is) a storage overlay of variables. It's not part of the type system, and one cannot define a derived type in standard Fortran that contains components with overlaid storage.
208.
by pklausler 1y ago
"computing resources are cheaper than developers up to some level of scaling" is more accurate.
209.
by pklausler 1y ago
Fortran is nothing like a low-level language.
210.
by pklausler 1y ago
For those who like that sort of thing, Fortran is exactly the sort of thing that they like.

More ›