skrishnamurthi

11 ms·

91.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Thank you kindly!
92.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Too late to make changes, I'm afraid.
93.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Not MY forthcoming book (-: — "Handbook" means the chapters are written by many different people. The main chapter that deals with PLs is this one, though. What do you think it's lacking? (Did you actually read it? <-;)
94.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Sometimes it helps to read the text, not just the references.
95.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Indeed, he's guilty of all of the above.
96.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
That same one, yeah.
97.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
It's in a Handbook of Computing Education, so everything in the book is about "teaching". It would therefore have been especially odd to put that in the title.
98.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
I think we'll find that there are a dozen different _reasons_ kids will need/want to code, and each of those will lead to dramatically different environments and ways. For instance, do kids need intellisense? Yes, if they're
99.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Sure would have been nice to give credit, then… But more importantly, I can tell you that the design recipe isn't enough. That's why we set out to study the notional machine question (paper cited in another response). We most defi
100.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Looks rather like an abbreviated version of the _How to Design Programs_ design recipe to me…
101.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Maybe. I don't believe any claims about "easier" without reasonable experimental evidence. Even in the realm of operational strategies, there are huge differences; see: http://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publication
102.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Author here. I have great respect for Harel's statechart work, but it wasn't mentioned because it's not particularly germane to the topic at hand — the chapter is part of a computing education handbook. There are indeed other
103.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
The problem is that there are only so many concepts one can cover. The course structure, as @justinpombrio notes in another comment above, is that after an assignment comes due, the next class discusses the solutions. Essentially, once I pu
104.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
This isn't a way of learning programming. It's a way of learning about the variation in the language design space. That includes teaching the very point you're talking about. There is nothing in the mystery language appro
105.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Slightly better link: http://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/Published/pkf-te... The page will be updated over time with pointers to related things. [Edit: I guess this is just the link on HN. So ju
106.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
As @justinpombrio says, I would totally go with the 2017 version instead. Not only is it much better, we are actively supporting and developing this version, so bug reports are actually useful to us and future users.
107.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Sure. But the degree of clunkiness matters. Forth doesn't have the ability to build linguistic _abstractions_ the way Racket does. But if you want to add Forth to the evidence of the paper's thesis, that's fine, more the bett
108.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
You claimed "There's absolutely no evidence that formal methods approaches are effective in practice." and said the only real use was for compilers. I pointed out that they are effective in practice in domains completely unre
109.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Thanks kindly. Will look forward to chatting.
110.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
We've worked on Racket + Alloy for ~8 years now, including using the Racket REPL for similar purposes. And built several tools with it (e.g., for networking analysis). Email me (sk@cs.brown.edu) if you want to chat more.
111.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Ssh! Don't tell Amazon [ http://lamport.azurewebsites.net/tla/amazon.html ], Facebook [ https://research.fb.com/publications/moving-fast-with-softwa... ], etc.!
112.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Try reading https://www.hashcollision.org/brainfudge/ and see if that helps.
113.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
No, this is far too glib, and the last part is wrong. See https://www.hashcollision.org/brainfudge/ instead.
114.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
By the way, the name describes the product _exactly_. The infrastructure enables stopping functionality in JavaScript programs. It stop-ifies them. Hence Stopify.
115.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Yep. We're fixing that now.
116.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
But note that the Stopify portion is completely optional and composes onto the end of an existing JavaScript compiler. So you can offer a faster-but-no-stopification mode versus a slower-but-with-stopification mode. While modes can be annoy
117.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Just? What do you think the callbacks are that you supply to those calls?
118.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
It's not time-travel debugging.
119.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Y'all, the primary goal is meant to be a compiler infrastructure, not a user-facing product. The reason we have the demo site set up is to show people that the infrastructure composes with a bunch of existing compilers pretty seamlessl
120.
by skrishnamurthi 9y ago
Sure, but the name is half the fun. (-:

More ›