samth

30 ms·

271.
by samth 11y ago
This is not correct. It's possible to write a sound static checker for termination of a Turing complete language. There are some terminating programs on which it will have to say "I don't know", however.
272.
by samth 11y ago
I think one of the problems here is that the discussion of how bad linked lists are switches back and forth between taking about Rust specifically and linked lists generally. Also, I think performance claims, especially ones as strong as th
273.
by samth 11y ago
I think the claims about linked lists there are rather oversold, especially the parts about functional languages. First, linked lists are common, useful, and efficient in languages such as Racket or Ocaml. I'd really want to see perfor
274.
by samth 11y ago
This is what's usually called a "liveness" property: eventually the system will do some particular thing. These two in particular are often called "progress" in some contexts, but that's rarely formal. In gener
275.
by samth 11y ago
In a small part of the world with many HN readers. Whereas the OP is about the globe.
276.
by samth 11y ago
The last time I counted, I think there were more packages between PLaneT and pkgs.racket-lang.org than Chicken eggs. Also, Chicken relies on eggs to provide a lot of things that the Racket standard library contains.
277.
by samth 11y ago
I didn't claim (and neither did kibwen, who unlike me is a major Rust contributor) that Rust's approaches around memory management didn't change. But your claim that "Lifetimes aren't regions" is false -- lifet
278.
by samth 11y ago
Actually, lifetimes are basically the same as regions, going back to FX87. Lifetimes in Rust are more like regions in Tofte & Talpin 94 than those in FX87, but where inter-region pointers are constrained by the lifetime of regions rathe
279.
by samth 12y ago
Actually, sweet.js is based almost entirely on various macro innovations developed in Racket (such as the Honu approach to macros in languages without parens).
280.
by samth 12y ago
I think you're assuming that a language built that way would have to adopt Racket's underlying meanings for things, probably because Arc is, in the grand scheme of things, pretty close to Racket. But because Arc makes some fairly
281.
by samth 12y ago
Typesafe (from their web site) sells a packaged version of their "stack" (similar to RHEL), plus support, plus what looks like a proprietary management tool (ConductR, which I think is pretty new). Also training and consulting.
282.
by samth 12y ago
Typed Racket operates on a per-module basis -- only some of your program has to be typed. But it's entirely static -- errors are caught at compile time.
283.
by samth 12y ago
No, it's a statement that the developers of Racket care about explaining how things work.
284.
by samth 12y ago
The cool thing is that if you had asked me a week ago, I would have said return-type polymorphism like this was impossible without types.
285.
by samth 12y ago
While indeed we are doing a major refactoring of the repository, the split into many packages has already happened. And you can download the Minimal Racket installer today!
286.
by samth 12y ago
No, this was a seminar at EPFL and wasn't recorded.
287.
by samth 12y ago
It's not a contradiction -- we've built it: http://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/ Also: https://github.com/clojure/core.typed
288.
by samth 12y ago
Java's type system is sound. There are even machine-verified proofs of this.
289.
by samth 12y ago
I encourage you to look a the benchmarks published here: http://haskell.cs.yale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/hask03... which includes Haskell beating nginx and Haskell beating SDN controllers written i
290.
by samth 12y ago
CL type declarations are cool, but they aren't gradual typing. It doesn't either reject your program if you get them wrong, or dynamically enforce that everyone else lives up to them.
291.
by samth 12y ago
I think the language you want is Ocaml.
292.
by samth 12y ago
This is like describing FedEx as only profitable because of government-provided investment in roads/airports/ATC systems/etc. Which is fine, but you should recognize that it isn't usually the way we account for things.
293.
by samth 12y ago
Homoiconicity is either a trivial property (we can define an AST!) or a not-relevant-to-macros one (probably best expressed as "we have quote", which is basically true of JS). This post by Dave Herman nicely expresses the problems
294.
by samth 12y ago
Actually, there was no category theory at the ML workshop. And the particular complaints you made were based on misunderstanding Andreas' joke, and on being annoyed that FP people are playful while being an "elite ghetto". Th
295.
by samth 12y ago
Is there something in particular you find "unsexy" about racket-lang.org? Personally, I like it a lot more than clojure.org, but that may just be because I wrote it. :) I've always found the official Clojure web presence to b
296.
by samth 12y ago
> It makes Racket look hip. And that's hard to do. Hey!
297.
by samth 12y ago
Andreas' comment is not about OO at all. It's about the second-class status of modules in ML, where the 1ML design that he described in the talk makes modules first-class values. And is your claim really that people in the functio
298.
by samth 12y ago
What sigstoat said. Put differently, we want you to think of Racket the same way you think of Python.
299.
by samth 12y ago
Do you worry about this when you write Python/Ruby/Clojure/Scala/etc?
300.
by samth 12y ago
Thanks for the feedback. Certainly there are lots of complicated concepts to learn in the macro system. On 4, if I run this program: https://gist.github.com/8fbc12877e2639c5f94c I get a backtrace like this: [samth@huor:

More ›