Dewie3

7 ms·

1.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> (1) where does Rust fit in this? It doesn't. Not any more than other languages anyway.
2.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Maybe these programming in the large languages don't necessarily have to be fantastic for programming in the large, and in the long term. But they have to be great for this at least in the short term. So imagine that such a language
3.
by Dewie3 11y ago
When pron posts on a thread about lang X, it tends to be 30% about lang X and 70% raving about the JVM platform.
4.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Ah yes, embracing your inner elitist.
5.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Ditto.
6.
by Dewie3 11y ago
That doesn't look like much of a trade-off in the context of the article, though. Namely living in civilization .
7.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> 2. Women are less prone to overconfidence > 3. Women are more ambitious Well okay.
8.
by Dewie3 11y ago
People here seem to like talking about trade-offs , specifically technical ones. Maybe intelligence is just another trade-off.
9.
by Dewie3 11y ago
For a second I thought someone had submitted this article with their phone and by mistake left one of those "sent from my <Samsung?>" in as a trailing message.
10.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Non-standard character set aside; is the terseness (one-letter commands and such) partly because of the slow input devices at the time?
11.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> It's circling the wagons around people who had the privilege and opportunity to learn these things before everybody else. The underprivileged Bloomberg readership.
12.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Funny that the original intent for the Go creators was to not have to write C++[1] -- which of course is in the C/C++/Rust/D space -- and that Rob Pike seemed surprised that more C++ programmers didn't make the switch. T
13.
by Dewie3 11y ago
You have some points which are to a point, and in general, true. But you present them in such a ridiculously hyperbolic way that it seems divorced from reality. Applicative is a pretty standard type class which are often used in introductor
14.
by Dewie3 11y ago
I think this is a bad comparison. If you're, say, reading music in order to play it, why would you need things like functions and renamings in order to read it? Just read it straight off - one bar at the time. There isn't any need
15.
by Dewie3 11y ago
That refactor is of a common pattern (I've seen it before; I've probably written it myself) into a bog-standard use of Applicative code. This use is pretty much the introductory example for Applicative. Do you use Haskell? Because
16.
by Dewie3 11y ago
I thought JS was intended to be a Scheme in disguise?
17.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Static FP languages just feel so natural for compilers - the AST can often be perfectly naturally expressed with algebraic data types. Then you want to traverse the tree and do certain things when subtrees or nodes are of a certain shape .
18.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Kind of like how calling programs for proofs seems to make most programmers uneasy. (Not that most programs that you'll run into are proofs in any interesting sense.)
19.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Does this brilliant webpage not know the concept of skimming and related approaches?
20.
by Dewie3 11y ago
And I need to scroll horizontally to read the whole page. Though I guess it's easy to copy/paste into a text editor and read it there since the text is so plain .
21.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> In that case it comes down to economics, It doesn't come down to it : it was about economics all along. All these philosophies -- polyglot, more monoglot, etc. -- have costs. You can choose to ignore it sometimes by staunchly rec
22.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Is an English-speaking conference in a non-English speaking country in this day and age really that weird? I don't get why. I guess conferences tend to have an explanation? Except when the explanation is "obvious" (warm subtr
23.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> e.g., for me it's German, English, Chinese I don't think we needed an example in order to understand "speaks more than his native language".
24.
by Dewie3 11y ago
I'm interested in programming languages. But I don't know if I'm really a polyglot programmer . Ideally I want to be able to rely on a handful of languages for the vast majority of things that I want to do. If I'm being
25.
by Dewie3 11y ago
In other words, not an anti pattern .
26.
by Dewie3 11y ago
> I totally agree with the author that the tickets we're assigned are all puzzles that I could lose myself in and inevitably get some feeling of satisfaction when I figure it out. But in the grand scheme of things, most of us aren&#
27.
by Dewie3 11y ago
aka, "Try not to worry your pretty little head with it if you can avoid it". This post has a high condescension density.
28.
by Dewie3 11y ago
You say that you stay with Ruby because of metaprogramming. Yet I suspect that it is in statically typed languages where we'll see metaprogramming that is both powerful and principled (legible, understandable, won't eat your lau
29.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Why is his profile picture the attractions road sign as seen in Scandinavia? :-)
30.
by Dewie3 11y ago
Everyone quits because they have the opportunity to do it. If he didn't have enough cash to be unemployed on an indefinite basis, or the willingness to start his own tech gig, maybe he would have become a farm hand in Wyoming just to g

More ›