ravi-delia

13 ms·

61.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
And if you don't want your code to loop back by accident you can just use lifetimes! Truly an elegant language
62.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Also a big fan of SandPond :)
63.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
In the normal case, Alice can write 'const const true = false' and Bob, on a second machine, can write 'const const true = 7', and there will not be an error. But if Alice writes 'const const const true = false&#x27
64.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
But what elevates it is that it's written so confidently and buries the insane lede so well that at each feature there's a fraction of a second where it seems recoverable before sanity kicks in. After, before, and next almost, al
65.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
This is incredibly good. It maintains the breathlessly approving tone of a language readme the entire time, it has incredible comedic timing (a lesser shitpost would have revealed that of course the file extension was .db right at the start
66.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
It's not for security, it's public service and entertainment
67.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
That's what I mean by "willing to hack"! Getting the compiler to use SIMD instructions is actually pretty easy- you just specify where to use them and let it handle them. Then you pinky promise that your array really is made
68.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
One big name is the Borel Conjecture- a very productive aspect of topology is developing finer and finer tools to detect differences between spaces. The Borel Conjecture essentially states that for a certain class of spaces, a well used and
69.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I believe reflection is usually permitted in tilings- you certainly wouldn't wait around until you worked out a chiral tiling to announce. But it's a direct descendent of the hat tile, and I wouldn't be surprised if they alre
70.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Math has problems where everyone suspects the proof will open doors and give valuable insight- I'm mostly plugged into topology where there are a lot of those. There are also problems that aren't interesting except in their diffic
71.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
SIMD support is huge, and if you're willing to do a little hacking (SBCL is very easy to extend) you can even use it without the intrinsics
72.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I've found it to be pretty performant, but I rarely push it so who knows. SBCL is often good at avoiding allocations if you type hint things, which I'm usually doing when I need performance (messing around with sims mostly). But o
73.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Installing and maintaining rail is already priced in, just like the actual market cost of the fuel is for planes. Once all costs are internalized (including land disruption, though the tracks are less negotiable for freight shipping so pass
74.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Oh yeah for sure. But as neat as edge detection in the eye is, it isn't learned. I'm enjoying seeing similar results in highly unstructured models like transformers.
75.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Holy crap 70% nuclear. Lets go France! There's no shot trains are even close to being as bad as planes.
76.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Technically true! But one, very few neurons have connections going both ways to each other- any two neurons will be lined up axon to synapse one way or the other. And two, the specific structures that compose most of the cortex are remarkab
77.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
So sayeth the Chomskyites. But the idea has been less and less broadly accepted over time. Some of my professors were still avowed fans, but most were willing to endorse at best extremely weakened versions. Now UG, after doing vast cross-co
78.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I doubt very much that the marginal external costs of plane travel is lower than train travel! It's possible that the net value is still worth it (depending on how much people value convenience), but objectively the marginal cost of on
79.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
The man has his points, and his takedown of behaviorism is still excellent, but no one has found any trace of universal grammar. And while GPTs have a crude world model at best, you can't fault their understanding of syntax, developed
80.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
That is honestly a much more interesting result than the title would suggest. We know the brain can't do backprop (neurons are one way), but the fact that there is convergence in algorithm is very fun.
81.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I mean depending on what you mean by "have", yes? But also that's been true since the 90s. Out of the box, less so. Clojure has destructuring assignment, but no matching. A lot of little lisps downstream of Clojure (Janet, Fe
82.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I do think about that pretty frequently. It wouldn't even be all that hard! Maybe Loom will push things over.
83.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Yeah, taste is taste. I do get it- it's why I like Clojure's syntax more than CLs, but man I don't get commas. Or even Elixir, I love the language but its always painful to come back to the syntax. Pipe operator aside, that
84.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Plus Go is just so nice with the automatic IO handoff. But in a functional language I really don't think it's as big a limitation- still large, but not as bad as it could be. The pattern of writing mostly small, pure functions and
85.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
It's...close-ish? It could really use default non-blocking IO, but honestly the reason no one's made one integrated solution yet is that giving a callback that pushes to a channel is mostly fine. I'd like something a little m
86.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
[see cousin comment for my admission of stupidity]
87.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Ohhh, I wondered why people were so hyped about that! In my head I rounded it off to not wanting to recompile the whole file- I should have realized how dumb that was. This actually makes a lot of sense. When I helped a friend set up Calva,
88.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I think this is mostly an issue of tooling! I admit I often find myself recompiling a full file because SBCL is just so goddamn quick it doesn't make a difference, so perhaps I'm missing something essential. But with tree sitter y
89.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
I know, I enjoy CL quite a bit. I actually currently have REPLs running for a few services, because I like managing them from the inside. But while you can , if you want, deploy major changes by redefining a bunch of stuff on production se
90.
by ravi-delia 3y ago
Others have responded, but without much depth. Common Lisp on SBCL (maybe the proprietary compilers are similar/better, I haven't worked with them) has a remarkably good type inference system. You need to declare, which is optiona

More ›