sklogic

61 ms·

601.
by sklogic 11y ago
> or a chance for medial care This is exactly how it works. It's called a "postcode lottery" here. > Education is as necessary as a public utility Of course it must be free. But when it's not, you're not payin
602.
by sklogic 11y ago
> They are not idiots. They are indeed. > If you pay half your annual income, you SHOULD expect to get some damn good service for your money. No. This is a blatant consumerism. It does not matter even a tiny bit how much do you pay -
603.
by sklogic 11y ago
If the school system was not that crippled they should have already known it in depth.
604.
by sklogic 11y ago
The idiots do not realise they're paying for a chance to learn, not for a product to be delivered to them no matter what.
605.
by sklogic 11y ago
3. Any other code written in a language better than JS.
606.
by sklogic 11y ago
Now try to take a look at some real languages. At the languages with well-defined, simple, orthogonal semantics. And, no, JavaScript is nowhere near any "powerfull, expressive language". It is embarrasingly low level for a suppo
607.
by sklogic 11y ago
WebAssembly is a way to finally get rid of that overgrown scripting abomination that people started to take for a real language. And arguably it is the only way to get rid of that thing, any other will simply create another insufferable abo
608.
by sklogic 11y ago
It is very confusing that two totally different things are called "visual programming". The first one does not really deserve it, it is just a visual UI design, while the programming part is nowhere near anything visual. The real
609.
by sklogic 11y ago
The biggest problem with OpenCL is that Google banned it (in favour of its own crippled RenderScript).
610.
by sklogic 11y ago
The problem here is that a single variant tag does not uniquely define a type, as all such type systems expect.
611.
by sklogic 11y ago
Thanks! An interesting one. It's unusual to see an SKI-based implementation of an eager language.
612.
by sklogic 11y ago
Only partially (see the discussion elsewhere in this thread). It's a work in progress. But I hope to be able to roll out a working prototype soon. The main component of this type system (weak sets unification) is already published.
613.
by sklogic 11y ago
There must have been some papers on it, but I lost a track. Will try to dig out something. Meanwhile, you can take a look a my implementation of such a mix: https://github.com/combinatorylogic/mbase/tree/maste
614.
by sklogic 11y ago
My solution allows incremental compilation. It is just a type system hack, and it does not even involve backtracking (my second favourite compilation technique), just a two pass typing instead of a single pass. As for the compilation speed,
615.
by sklogic 11y ago
And all the edge cases are related to the binary expressions - and you should be using Pratt for them instead. Left recursive PEG must be reserved for things like method, structure field and array access, which are ok with that algorithm.
616.
by sklogic 11y ago
The term was coined by Philip Wadler: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expression_problem The older versions of Bigloo used to contain an ML compiler built on top of Scheme (they dropped it later for some reason), so the
617.
by sklogic 11y ago
It's an interesting one, I'll add it to my collection. Although, to be fair, PEG (Packrat) do support left recursion [1], and it can also be combined with Pratt for the binary expressions very efficiently, at O(n). [1] http:&#x2F
618.
by sklogic 11y ago
It is actually an outdated view, to split a compiler into dedicated monolithic front-end and back-end parts. The more modern approach is very much the opposite. It is a nearly continuous, very long sequence of very simple transforms, rewrit
619.
by sklogic 11y ago
ML got ADTs and static type guarantees, but Lisp got macros, which allows to implement things like http://andykeep.com/pubs/np-preprint.pdf - which is significantly less boilerplate than in ML. An ideal language for co
620.
by sklogic 11y ago
If you really want to compile something on an embedded system, you'd be much better off with something like Forth anyway.
621.
by sklogic 11y ago
Thanks! Did not know of this one.
622.
by sklogic 11y ago
Yes, functional side of things is interesting and rarely covered in the standard compilers courses. There is an old but good book, often overlooked: "Functional Programming" by Anthony J. Field and Peter G. Harrison (1988). Despit
623.
by sklogic 11y ago
Not sure if there are any books around LLVM or gcc, but there is a lot of up to date texts. Grune at al., "Modern Compiler Design", Appel, "Modern Compiler Implementation in ML", and many more. P.S. Because of a slow-ban
624.
by sklogic 11y ago
It does not make any sense to reimplement yacc in the 21st century. There are far more powerful and yet simple parsing techniques, rendering all that automata stuff useless and outdated. Take a look at PEG, Pratt parsing and GLR.
625.
by sklogic 11y ago
Please stop recommending the Dragon Book already. It is not just heavy, it is mostly outdated and irrelevant.
626.
by sklogic 11y ago
Yes, "compile time metaprogramming" or "static code generation" vs. "run-time metaprogramming" and "dynamic code generation" are used more often. Once you've got proper macros, pretty much all th
627.
by sklogic 11y ago
C++ templetes are a very weak form of a static metaprogramming. Lisp macros are closer to an ideal level.
628.
by sklogic 11y ago
Yes, I'm talking about the compile-time (i.e., static) macro metaprogramming, as in Lisp, Scheme, Template Haskell, CamlP4, Converge, Nemerle, Rust, Julia, etc. As opposed to a dynamic metaprogramming (e.g., expression trees in C#).
629.
by sklogic 11y ago
Still no signs of understanding the value of static metaprogramming. C# used to be promising.
630.
by sklogic 11y ago
Yes, it is a eDSL on top of Lisp (but I also have a proper ML which runs on top of Lisp, so it does not matter much). The issue with the existing type systems is that they do not solve the expression problem , for this reason I had to buil

More ›