tonyg

10 ms·

91.
by tonyg 3y ago
The former.
92.
by tonyg 3y ago
Do get in touch if you do pick this up again, I'd be interested in collaborating or at least keeping track of how it goes; it was a bit lonely figuring out how to do X for Squeak in a vacuum :-)
93.
by tonyg 3y ago
As far as I'm aware, it was driven by the "piggybacking" of ACKs on packets travelling in the opposite direction, which turns out to have been a slight misfeature.
94.
by tonyg 3y ago
Lots of the complexity of TCP at a protocol level comes from treating it as a single duplex connection instead of a pair of simplex connections. And the article here shows that this complexity leaks up to the API level, too.
95.
by tonyg 3y ago
If you do ever return to the idea of generating the X11 protocol code, you might find https://github.com/tonyg/xcb-shim interesting. I wrote it to simplify X11 implementation generally. I've used it just once, so
96.
Python3 is removing crypt.crypt and not replacing it with anything(eighty-twenty.org)
41 points by tonyg 3y ago|76 comments
97.
Signalbackup-tools: Tool to work with Signal Backup files(github.com)
1 points by tonyg 3y ago|0 comments
98.
by tonyg 3y ago
In re the active discussion on Bun, JavaScript, and tail calls. I thought I'd tap the sign a bit.
99.
Why Object-Oriented Languages Need Tail Calls (2009)(eighty-twenty.org)
2 points by tonyg 3y ago|2 comments
100.
by tonyg 3y ago
> an algorithm that elegantly fits a recursive relationship is rarely one that naturally fits the tail-call paradigm. That's because tail calls are structured gotos (with arguments). They're not really about recursion or even i
101.
by tonyg 3y ago
This is not true. The compiler can trivially turn this into a jump, but the developer doesn't have enough context to construct any kind of loop: function ap(f, v) { return f(v); }
102.
by tonyg 3y ago
> That's only true if complex systems don't interest you. Gluing a few libraries together will certainly produce a complex system.
103.
by tonyg 3y ago
(Algol 60 was also an important influence on Scheme! So is Scheme a lisp or an algol? Yes.)
104.
by tonyg 3y ago
In computer science, the usual case is that the author fully formats the paper.
105.
by tonyg 3y ago
Yep. Further, ternaries are to cond as switch is to pattern matching. Ternaries can be used to give a chain of boolean expression decisions: a ? b : c ? d : e ? f : g which switch isn't so tidy for.
106.
by tonyg 3y ago
You're thinking of letrec.
107.
by tonyg 3y ago
The first problem with this argument is that referential transparency is a property of syntactic positions, not of languages. The second is that languages like Lisp, SML, C, Pascal and BASIC all have referentially transparent and referentia
108.
by tonyg 3y ago
Many perfectly reasonable subturing PLs exist. For example Gallina, the total functional language at the heart of Coq.
109.
A lightweight, high-productivity desktop environment for Google Cardboard [pdf] (2019)(stanford.edu)
3 points by tonyg 3y ago|0 comments
110.
by tonyg 3y ago
This is actually very nice! It exposes all of the awkward areas of JSON without trying to paper over any of them, while still achieving its goals. In particular it doesn't try to define any kind of an equivalence over JSON objects outs
111.
by tonyg 3y ago
It's right there on the homepage. What more do you want?
112.
by tonyg 3y ago
Yep. Delimited continuations and proper tail calls gives a superpower. (Even PTC alone...)
113.
by tonyg 3y ago
Oh! Neat: Shriram's group wrote a 2013 paper on semantics for Python. It's roughly what I would have expected it to be. It doesn't look like it addresses mutation of module bindings, for example, but perhaps the paper just do
114.
by tonyg 3y ago
Hmm. Off the top of my head, mind, but: - The bad API to foreign code that all the extensions depend on. - The nuts scoping rules, though I suppose throw enough static analysis at it and you might be OK. - Reference counting, which people d
115.
by tonyg 3y ago
I don't think it's even more work. (V8 has the dynamic deopt stuff already...) But at this point I guess we're dueling reckons. Python is hard to optimize in a semantics-preserving way, of course, because the semantics are so
116.
by tonyg 3y ago
This doesn't follow. Both Self and Smalltalk allow you to do those things. (You still need to specialise code for plain small ints vs oops either way for the subclassing one, and stack inspection can be done on a slow path, see the dyn
117.
Virtualizing Uxn(eighty-twenty.org)
68 points by tonyg 3y ago|4 comments
118.
by tonyg 3y ago
So far there's no indication you're wrong : - (
119.
by tonyg 3y ago
Strong isolation gives fault tolerance not otherwise available, no matter the language. If one part crashes, the other part is not necessarily affected, unlike the situation without good isolation.
120.
by tonyg 3y ago
Cool, thanks for sharing!

More ›