rak1507

15 ms·

121.
by rak1507 5y ago
243 MB?! If that's all code (which is unlikely, sure) and it has an average line length of 100, that's 2.4 MILLION lines! Do you really need that, (no), or have you just 'stockholm syndrome'-d yourself into believing thi
122.
by rak1507 5y ago
What? So you can just claim something is 'fast' with no evidence, but then if it is slower than proprietary things, who cares? That's ridiculous - if you claim something is 'extremely fast' you should back that up w
123.
by rak1507 5y ago
K has this: http://johnearnest.github.io/ok/index.html?run=%20a%3A%3Ab*c... a::b*c; b:2; c:3; a results in a being equal to 6, and if you update b or c a will update too.
124.
by rak1507 5y ago
This is seriously cool. Nice one.
125.
by rak1507 5y ago
Python, sure, but not OOP. Most solutions will not be very large and there's really no need for OOP (ever) but particularly not for something like this.
126.
Context Is Everything(media.handmade-seattle.com)
1 points by rak1507 5y ago|0 comments
127.
by rak1507 5y ago
I was just testing with TIO, it looks like the version of `cal` on there is different to the common one. The ⎕SE.UCMD'Calendar 2021' version should work cross platform (as it doesn't rely on anything external).
128.
by rak1507 5y ago
It (should be) purely ⎕IO←0. https://tio.run/##jZK7SgNBFIb7fYrTbQKbyyYINum1srBNM27G7OLemJ... Potentially cal -y on macOS produces a different shape? What's ⍴↑cal? Try doing cal←⎕SE.UCMD'Calendar 2021' and rep
129.
by rak1507 5y ago
'AI, blockchain, security' to me this doesn't sound like a 'futurist', it sounds like someone who is easily convinced by buzzwords and marketing :)
130.
by rak1507 5y ago
Yeah agreed, Dyalog APL started out on Unix but is now more focused on Windows, I wish I could integrate it into scripts and things but it's often difficult/impossible to do so.
131.
by rak1507 5y ago
Neither of them seem to work for me - what am I missing? https://tio.run/##lcxBDoIwFIThvaeYNCYUI0VwydpTiJpKCzSB16bthq...
132.
by rak1507 5y ago
Just for fun, I tried it in APL. cal ← ⎕SH 'cal -y' ⍝ get output of cal command bymonth ← {⍵⊂⍨0=23|⍳≢⍵}⍤1↑2↓cal ⍝ partition into month groups lines ← {⍵⊂⍨0=8|⍳≢⍵}⍤1⍉bymont
133.
Counting Mosaics with APL(mathspp.com)
2 points by rak1507 5y ago|0 comments
134.
by rak1507 5y ago
I'd learn at least 1 from every major paradigm (see https://madhadron.com/posts/seven_languages.html ), but in particular I'd say Haskell and APL can be pretty mind bending.
135.
by rak1507 5y ago
Pure FP languages may be less popular/common, that doesn't mean FP ideas are harder to understand. In stackoverflow's developer survey https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2021 Clojure was the secon
136.
by rak1507 5y ago
'FP is less commonly understood and harder for the average dev to work with' citation needed - if anything I'd say the opposite is true, reducing state and mutation etc makes code easier to read and reason about.
137.
by rak1507 5y ago
Fair enough, it sounded a bit like you learned python specifically for this project.
138.
by rak1507 5y ago
APL/array languages.
139.
by rak1507 5y ago
Just curious - why would you use python if you don't know it?
140.
by rak1507 5y ago
Fair point. The equivalent of regular 'operators' +-*/&|etc in J are verbs, and restricting yourself only to verbs, there is no precedence and it is unambiguous, but with operators, it does get a bit more tricky.
141.
by rak1507 5y ago
That has nothing to do with RTL 'operator' precedence. Ok, sure, there's some other precedence stuff in J, but the actual thing that was the topic of this post is not related to it.
142.
by rak1507 5y ago
Came here to say something similar. This is the best option, and I would like this in every other language. Totally avoids any ambiguity at all.
143.
by rak1507 5y ago
Ok, my bad, I misinterpreted your comment a bit, sorry about that.
144.
by rak1507 5y ago
They can definitely be much shorter than other languages in golfing, no doubt about that. I wouldn't say they're golfed by default though really.
145.
by rak1507 5y ago
That's a nice subtle insult there - I can obviously understand what a for loop does. You can resort to explicit loops in array languages anyway. I doubt the lack of looping mechanisms is why they've been as successful in general p
146.
by rak1507 5y ago
Generally in all imperative solutions I've seen, there are more 'moving parts', manual updating a maximum variable, explicit iteration etc, these to me are distractions and boilerplate compared to a functional/array lang
147.
by rak1507 5y ago
No one's suggesting to compress code. I was just saying in general, shorter things tend to be clearer and easier to read. (as long as it's not overly 'golfed' or obfuscated)
148.
by rak1507 5y ago
Maybe conciseness isn't the only thing that determines understandability, but it's definitely highly related. (A 1 page proof is generally easier to read than a 100 page proof, no?) Kadane's algorithm was a simple example, an
149.
by rak1507 5y ago
Your point 5 is completely wrong. 'The process of coding something into APL's idiosyncratic logography can only happen after the idea is already clear by other means.' In fact, often I will write something in APL before trans
150.
by rak1507 5y ago
Why the 0xxxx dates?

More ›