ragnese

80 ms·

781.
by ragnese 6y ago
Rust uses a mixture of affine and ... "regular"? types. My understanding is that affine is a looser version of linear because the type doesn't have to be consumed. You can have dtors in non-affine types (types that implement
782.
by ragnese 6y ago
The stock market hit all time highs in the Great Depression, too, no?
783.
by ragnese 6y ago
> Regularly if you're doing refactoring of code. Are we talking about a published library or your internal-only code? If the former, I sympathize with the argument that relaxing a requirement should not force consumers to change the
784.
by ragnese 6y ago
I haven't watched the talk recently, but my feeling at the time was that he was just being pedantic about the definition of a sum type. Kotlin's nullable types would be example of true sum types because they are symmetric. But you
785.
by ragnese 6y ago
One of the things I like about non-managed languages is the ability to have true destructors. Releasing resources is awkward at best in Java, et al.
786.
by ragnese 6y ago
How often do you believe this really happens in practice? And does that truly outweigh the benefit of being able to define a precise contract on your APIs? How many times have you written a function and a version later said "Oh, wait.
787.
by ragnese 6y ago
You're basically just regurgitating a recent Rich Hickey talk. Interested readers can probably find it on YouTube. Rich is certainly a brighter individual than me, but some of his points are either him missing the point or being intent
788.
by ragnese 6y ago
Probably because that's the entire point of Rust and has already been blogged to death. There's nothing new to say about the borrow checker or boxing heap-allocated objects.
789.
by ragnese 6y ago
Everyone who is quasi-technical should be using uMatrix. I'm a privacy nut, but I don't think you even have to be much of one to appreciate the value that something like uMatrix provides. On the other hand, everyone keeps saying t
790.
by ragnese 6y ago
I've been saying for a while now that PHP today is basically Java - generics + better nullability and with a much worse standard library.
791.
by ragnese 6y ago
Java is not the same thing as JavaScript
792.
by ragnese 6y ago
That's still very explicit. If you don't bind the returned Result to something (`let _ = ...`), the compiler bitches at you.
793.
by ragnese 6y ago
Agreed. However, that's not exactly exonerating Mormonism or other popular religions...
794.
by ragnese 6y ago
Depends what we're talking about. A "true" memory leak (as in allocated memory that is not referenced) is not very likely. A reference cycle with `Arc`s can happen though. But if you're talking about Java and mediocre de
795.
by ragnese 6y ago
It's not wrong. I didn't mean to imply that. I just mean that saying non-GC languages are about performance overhead of the garbage collector is missing the point. Sometimes, it's convenient and easier to reason about stuff w
796.
by ragnese 6y ago
Tell this to someone who has had to fiddle with JVM GC parameters. Whatever language you're using, you probably should care a little bit about your memory patterns.
797.
by ragnese 6y ago
I'm glad to see this post here. Just because I hear/read a lot of people outright dismiss Rust's potential here with arguments that kind of miss the point: 1. You don't need CPU performance for most web stuff. It's
798.
by ragnese 6y ago
I don't have that much to add to the discussion, really. I just wanted to ruminate on something: > I've often wondered how this can be possible, given that to me it's such an obvious glaring issue that all the other cited
799.
by ragnese 6y ago
That's a good point. The ownership patterns are basically compiler-enforced best-practices of C++. Fair enough.
800.
by ragnese 6y ago
> When I mention Rust having the marks of a being from the C++ world, I'm referring to a property of the language that it shares with Swift. But what property is that? > I saw where Hejlsberg once said that he doesn't get wh
801.
by ragnese 6y ago
I guess some other people here are assuming malintent with your question. Assuming that the answer might be condescending or dismissive depending on how I answer. I'll assume that's not the case and that you simply want to know so
802.
by ragnese 6y ago
Can you elaborate on the underdiscussion of Rust as a byproduct of the C++ world? I'm into Rust, so I guess I assumed it was common knowledge that it was originally written to be like OCaml with better concurrency, and that one of the
803.
by ragnese 6y ago
It's because it also has expressiveness features that Java and Go don't. * Better handling of "null"-ness * Sum types * Stricter/different error-handling * Move semantics, which can actually be nice for some APIs ou
804.
by ragnese 6y ago
There's more recent debate about what a "unit" is. The parent reply is not wrong. We're just using different definitions.
805.
by ragnese 6y ago
Thank you. I've forgotten some of the terminology, since I haven't thought about real math in a few years. :(
806.
by ragnese 6y ago
f(x) = 1/x is also defined over what we call the "extended reals" which is just R + inf. But, I don't think what you said is quite right, either. If you define f(x) = 1/x over the non-zero reals, then the range does
807.
by ragnese 6y ago
> What differentiates addThreeTimes(i) from sqrt(x) or average(x,y) or pow(x,y) or multiply(x,y)? Not how many call sites it has, nor the presence of a dedicated operator to the function in the language. Instead, I'd say: the functi
808.
by ragnese 6y ago
I agree with your point and your edit. The inheritance thing is very similar to what I'm talking about!
809.
by ragnese 6y ago
I can't help but wonder if we're sometimes using the wrong words for things. In this discussion we keep talking about "code duplication" and "abstraction" hand-in-hand, but I think they're almost orthogona
810.
by ragnese 6y ago
For backend? Kotlin. Hands down. All the benefits of the mature Java ecosystem, but with a language that is vastly superior to Java, itself. You get coroutines, threads, strong static typing, etc. Not the perfect type system, because it&#x2

More ›