travv0

9 ms·

31.
by travv0 5y ago
> Btw LISP can be fast as C. Assuming you're talking about Common Lisp, you definitely need to make heavy use of type declarations and be using a very performant implementation for its speed to be anywhere as fast as C.
32.
by travv0 5y ago
Actually, he explicitly states the context: > in formal situations, in connection with talks, interviews and publications, not in ordinary conversation.
33.
by travv0 6y ago
func foo(maybeInt Optional<int>) { switch maybeInt { case None: panic("not so optional!!!!!") ... } } This function would never take an Optional in real life if it's j
34.
by travv0 6y ago
> So... pretty much everything I could do on .net framework runs on Linux and Mac now? No, which doesn't really matter since we're talking about .NET, not .NET Framework. Poor naming choice by Microsoft I guess.
35.
by travv0 6y ago
The cross-platform story of .NET hasn't been complicated in a while. It's fully cross-platform between Windows, Linux, and macOS and has been for a few years. Edit: I just saw the person that you replied to said the same thing, so
36.
by travv0 6y ago
And plenty of C++ projects also aren't projects of that size. I'm not sure what that has to do with whether or not OP should learn C++. Should OP not learn C because the Linux kernel is written in it?
37.
by travv0 6y ago
> C++ projects on the other hand can be huge and extremely complex. Think 4 hrs for a clean build, with 10+ people working on the same code base. I'm not sure what this has to do with the language itself or why you think other langu
38.
by travv0 6y ago
If you click the link, there's a TL;DR right up at the top, under the title.
39.
by travv0 6y ago
It's worth noting that Haskell has escape hatches for doing IO from outside the IO monad, so that wouldn't exactly solve this problem.
40.
by travv0 6y ago
What problems have you run into with Stack on Windows?
41.
by travv0 6y ago
Have you looked into using a heterogeneous map library in Haskell? I haven't used any myself, but a quick search shows that they do at least exist.
42.
by travv0 6y ago
Thanks for the example, always good to hear about some real-world experience with this stuff. I'm curious if you think that the rewriting of the system itself also helped improve the situation, as I've found that oftentimes if I r
43.
by travv0 6y ago
> The “types do not impede, they help [clarity of thought / program structure / catching many important classes of bugs]” claim is hogwash. You say this, but then never address this claim in the text below. Could you expand on
44.
by travv0 6y ago
I got pretty excited when you made me think it was Thursday afternoon.
45.
by travv0 6y ago
So let me get this straight: You don't like Haskell because someone used it to write an inefficient quicksort example online?
46.
by travv0 6y ago
We get it, everybody should be more like you. If only overweight people cared that they were overweight they could just stop overeating.
47.
by travv0 6y ago
> (C and Java aren't really statically typed; they rely on run-time typing for polymorphism.) Um, what? Having type information available at runtime is orthogonal to whether or not a language is statically typed.
48.
by travv0 6y ago
"Functional core, imperative shell" is exactly what IO in the Haskell type system enforces.
49.
by travv0 6y ago
If you're referring to bordeaux-threads, that's a compatibility library that gives a consistent interface to the various CL implementations' threading interfaces.
50.
by travv0 6y ago
> Question: How many LISPers truly use homoiconicity? Every time someone uses a Lisp macro they're taking advantage of homoiconicity. Homoiconicity is a characteristic of the language, not something somebody "uses."
51.
by travv0 6y ago
Haskell has https://hoogle.haskell.org/ which lets you search functions named by symbols, function signatures, etc.
52.
by travv0 6y ago
I use Emacs pretty casually, so it's cool to see the thought process of someone that actually knows their way around it when customizing it.
53.
by travv0 6y ago
I use Emacs pretty casually, so it's cool to see the thought process of someone that actually knows their way around it when customizing it.
54.
by travv0 6y ago
> Several thousand out of bounds, missing keys, null reference exceptions, hash collisions and the hair starts to get thin on top. What does any of that have to do with generics?
55.
by travv0 6y ago
You claim that they’re ignoring facts, but provide no facts of your own beyond “some companies use it in production,” which is undoubtably also true of Haskell.
56.
by travv0 6y ago
That’s a nice thought, but I haven’t seen examples of that myself. And your claim of real-world use seems to be the opposite of what I found with a quick Google search: https://redmonk.com/sogrady/2020/02/28&#
57.
by travv0 6y ago
Yeah, it’s kind of mind-blowing to me that this post is so highly rated when to me it just seems like a bunch of unsubstantiated claims like this, as well as blatant misunderstandings of fundamental functional programming concepts.
58.
by travv0 6y ago
Unless I'm really unhappy with my solution, I stick with the first thing I write that spits out the correct answer. Since a lot of the problems require you to do some potentially interesting optimization to get an answer in a reasonabl
59.
by travv0 6y ago
> an SBCL program can. SBCL will only perform TCO at specific optimization levels, so you can't even rely on it in SBCL.
60.
by travv0 6y ago
One other nicety I'd add that you don't get from the Python stacktrace is the ability to inspect each frame to see the local bindings, and even restart evaluation from a previous frame. I agree that the Python stacktrace looks nic

More ›