runT1ME

43 ms·

421.
by runT1ME 13y ago
No, you have a completely incorrect understanding of Monads. You're using jquery as a functor not a monad.
422.
by runT1ME 13y ago
I'm always interested to see intelligent criticisms of one of my choice languages. Let's take a look at what he has to say: Slow build times complaint > It is essentially impossible to practice TDD in Scala simply due to the
423.
by runT1ME 13y ago
What is the feasibility of using this (and a lot of other code) to take HN and actually real time-ify it? I wonder how easy it'd be to make that code generalized so you could 'real time' any site that is mostly updating text
424.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Come to #Scala and #Scalaz on Freenode IRC, it's a great learning resource. (REPL in the chat so you can get realtime help with code).
425.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Higher kinds are quite nice. 1. In scala you could write class MyClass[A[_]](a: A) and it can only take a 'container' (List/Future/Option). in C#/F# this is invalid: class MyClass<A<?>> {
426.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>pure functional languages don't support concurrent data structures which is what I deal with the most This is false, you were misinformed. >Sure. C++, Java, C#. C++ Has a good type system, IMO. The other two are broken . Lite
427.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>You also don't have any notion of kinds, which makes quite a bit of otherwise-idiomatic code hard to write. I'm not sure that is true. Otherwise this would not be possible: class MyExample[A[_]](a: A)
428.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>And you know why people liked it? Mostly because it had lambdas and traits - two features that are in Java 8. I don't think this is the main reason people like it. Java's lambdas are also inferior to Scala's. >a Haske
429.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Good comment. Didn't realize F# let you have inline functions, everything as an expression and partial application. Forgot about pattern matching too! I don't really see a need for workflows, I can do everything I need to use wo
430.
by runT1ME 13y ago
I can make the same comment about C#/F# guys when I show them Scala. Scala is a better, more powerful language. I quite like C# and do it for my main contract I have, but I am always missing features that Scala has, while I never hav
431.
by runT1ME 13y ago
This looks great. Seriously all of the answers you give seem simple and convenient ways of doing things. You could reduce your first example to def findById(userId: Int)(implicit s: Session) = Users.filter(_.id === userId).firstOption
432.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Variance is messed up, lack of higher kinded types, type inference is pretty awful, no implicit conversion, too much boilerplate for a small method call. sometimes I just want to write: public static String getFirstThree(String s) = s.
433.
by runT1ME 13y ago
> as an OO language that's still largely imperative at its core Why do you say this? vals and immutable data strucutres are clearly emphasized in Scala, so how can you say that FP isn't at its core? >Scala isn't a pure
434.
by runT1ME 13y ago
I don't think this is true at all. There was the one team at Yammer, but overall, it seems as if Netflix and LinkedIn are pushing forward with Scala adoption, and Twitter, FourSquare, Tumblr, Klout, Gravity, and many others are alread
435.
by runT1ME 13y ago
The main micro blogging site I use is a mixture of scala, java, with ruby/iOS for the front end. I dare you to write a fully featured, async web stack that handles many-core on the scale of hundreds of millions of users in C and ASM wi
436.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Actually, Crockford is completely wrong in his definition. He is confusing them for functors.
437.
by runT1ME 13y ago
> or even realize he's using one. Uh, this happens all the time. Scala programmers everywhere are used to the pattern for { a <- optionA b <- optionB } yield ("Both options have values! A = &quot
438.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Ignoring the lifestyle argument (SF/City life vs. Boise, Denver), there's a practical aspect too. I would take the right offer in SF and relocate there because if the company went under, or I didn't like it, or it somehow di
439.
by runT1ME 13y ago
FRP?
440.
by runT1ME 13y ago
A web developer making 30-70k is either underpaid or overpaid.
441.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Douglas Crockford gives an incorrect definition of a monad and confuses them with functors. If you learned about monads from Crockford, you didn't learn about them.
442.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>I want it to stop me from modifying the code later so that it accidentally becomes vulnerable to interactions that I’m not fully controlling. I want it to provide me with tools to specify how potential interactions should be handled, in
443.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>The Python code has the added advantage of actually being correct, assuming that the intended behaviour really is to add up the total of all entered numbers over time as the output suggests. Only in a single threaded environment. Howev
444.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Replacement for email.
445.
by runT1ME 13y ago
It's also possible you have a 60k loc python app because you aren't able to get near the amount of code reuse or abstractions due to the lack of static typing, and this is why you haven't run into issues with refactoring.
446.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>It's C#'s version of the lazy collection operations you find in most functional languages, just given friendlier sqlish names. (IE, "Select" instead of "map" and "Where" instead of "filter&qu
447.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Maybe (option) avoids race conditions in a concurrent environment too. I think you are missing a big part of what Maybe is good for.
448.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Why would you need workflows when you have LINQ. It's full fledged monadic comprehension and you can use it with Async beautifully.
449.
by runT1ME 13y ago
Telco is a commodity. You want to raise as much money as possible and you want to drive your margins down as it makes competition impossible.
450.
by runT1ME 13y ago
>Seen that "WAT" talk? None of that. You realize Dart literally has broken generics? That the team thought covariant mutable collections was a good thing?

More ›