uryga

60 ms·

571.
by uryga 10y ago
I thought they were working on adding DOM stuff too?
572.
by uryga 10y ago
Python has a bunch of special cases like this that make the code more readable (according to it's creators): `x not in xs` --> `not (x in xs)` `0 < x < 10` --> `0 < x and x < 10` `x = y = 5` --> (expanded above) `i
573.
by uryga 10y ago
I learned the basics of programming with Processing[0] and it was great! Seriously. It's basically procedural (but not turtle) graphics with a very simple IDE. You can also do animations and interactive stuff (mouse/keyboard), tha
574.
by uryga 10y ago
Are you referring to the fact that in Java interfaces are basically pure virtual classes? That always felt like an implementation detail to me. For example, both Go and Rust have interfaces without inheritance.
575.
by uryga 10y ago
Thanks, I get it now! I know how guards work, I've just never seen a construct like `('a':_) <- x` (and misunderstood the task a bit :). My understanding is, that's basically inline do-notation, is that correct?. On
576.
by uryga 10y ago
Not a great way to convince OCaml fans to use something else.
577.
by uryga 10y ago
('a':_) <- x = x : f zs What's the `<- x`for? I know some Haskell and I've never seen that syntax. And `('a':_) = x : f zs` should be enough I think. Also I'm pretty sure each line is supposed to b
578.
by uryga 10y ago
> The reason we call inverses “arcsine”, etc. is because originally these were written as quasi-sentences , and the concept of a mathematical function was not well developed. So sin⁻¹ x would be expressed as something like: arc (sin. =
579.
by uryga 10y ago
@geouis asked you to email him some reading material on this in a sibling comment. if you do send them something, could you post it here too?
580.
by uryga 10y ago
afaik, and based on my limited experience, closures are used quite often in pure functional programming.
581.
by uryga 10y ago
"just physics", "stretches back infinitely" I feel like You could say this about, well, anything. Afaik, you could take any event and trace its causes all the way back to the Big Bang. But that seems a bit... impractical
582.
by uryga 10y ago
"the entire timeline leading up to turning on a quantum computer is also part of the computation" why?
583.
by uryga 10y ago
i dont have a good response yet, but your comment made me think about this and try to explore this problem, so thanks for that!
584.
by uryga 10y ago
Haskell namespaces are a bit annoying. let's look at the stdlib `replicate` function. `replicate 5 'x'` gets you `['x', 'x', 'x', 'x', 'x']`. But that's a standard haskel
585.
by uryga 10y ago
do you have any pointers for reading about "the C virtual machine"? i'd love an accessible explanation of how the model of the hardware predented by C differs from actual modern chips, but those keywords make it hard to googl
586.
by uryga 10y ago
Probably nothing :/ However criticisms can be valid without offering alternatives. (if that's what you were getting at)
587.
by uryga 10y ago
I remember trying that, and I think it only works in the scope where you declared the array. So for example if you pass the array to a function, the size info is lost. Might be because of the "arrays decay to pointers" thing
588.
by uryga 10y ago
Fair. I didn't mean to diss async comms in general - they're still useful. Just took the opportunity to get a few of my thoughts out.
589.
by uryga 10y ago
To be honest I'm surprised at how simple this UTC/Local solution is. I feel like we reinvent absolute/relative in many different areas, and act really surprised each time... That concept is so universal, it's beautiful.
590.
by uryga 10y ago
Not sure if this is the reason , but: 24 and 60 are both multiples of 12. This gives you the same benefit dozenal counting systems have - it's easy to divide stuff into 2,3,4,6 parts, the factors of 12. With 60 you get 2,3,4,5,6,10,12.
591.
by uryga 10y ago
Interesting, but I'm pretty sure our body's metabolism is tied to daylight, and this system would be pretty unhealthy for the "night-shift" people in the long-term. (I don't have science on this) Also I'm not e
592.
by uryga 10y ago
If you care about his availability, I'd say his local time is a pretty good predictor :) I used to like the idea of asynchronous messaging and thought it was the future of telephony/voip. But honestly, async is pretty annoying, be
593.
by uryga 10y ago
i think blowskis point was, people have been saying the same thing for 2000 years[1], so it's hard to take it seriously :) The example of sofists is supposed to be absurd - i dont think anyone today believes those ancient philosophers
594.
by uryga 10y ago
yes, tbh it reminds me of #IFDEF. not entirely sure how i feel about that: it kinda makes sense but i think the fallback version is better. (unless the css ends up really different, then the ifdef approach makes sense)
595.
by uryga 10y ago
My point was: There's no problem with casually checking out a website. But I'm probably not gonna install an app unless I'm pretty sure it offers me some value. Not rational? Possibly :)
596.
by uryga 10y ago
Well, it's not a lot of work. But it feels like way more work. It's visible even in the way we talk about it - "viewing a website" vs "getting an app". Looking at something is effortless, getting it implies e
597.
by uryga 10y ago
I associate Skype with being slow and heavy for some reason. However it's possible that I picked this opinion up from other people and just started repeating it.
598.
by uryga 10y ago
I don't how the "less processing" argument works. In your version, parsing a value also requires additional work - there's a whole { } to go through.
599.
by uryga 10y ago
that The Social Network soundtrack, oooooh yes
600.
by uryga 10y ago
>> Functions, by definition, are pure. >That's just not true. I think there's some naming confusion here. That's because programmers overloaded the original meaning of "function" so that it's equivalen

More ›