Miky

8 ms·

1.
by Miky 8y ago
In both Gluon and Haskell, functions without arguments can be represented as functions over the unit type: f: () -> SomeType which can be called via: f () There are examples of this in the Gluon book ( http://gluo
2.
by Miky 8y ago
This is false. getChar is a constant.
3.
by Miky 9y ago
Next in this series: - Deep Learning vs. RESTful APIs - MRI scans vs. the sport of soccer - Listening to music vs. Earth, the planet
4.
by Miky 9y ago
Just because a piece of culture isn't exactly to your particular taste doesn't mean it shouldn't be preserved and it should be impossible for anyone to experience it in the future. And besides, that's a really selective
5.
by Miky 9y ago
Obviously. But good luck implementing a human-comprehensible analog differential equation solver on one, without the help of a genetic algorithm, that doesn't depend (as Adrian Thompson's circuit did) on the temperature, the quirk
6.
by Miky 9y ago
Not really. FPGAs are fundamentally digital and pretty much give you a bunch of logic gates to work with ("Field-Programmable Gate Array"). The author's proposed architecture would instead provide an array of components tha
7.
by Miky 13y ago
What if the database results in systematic human rights abuse?
8.
by Miky 14y ago
The whole point of net neutrality is preventing private actors from manipulating the flow of information.
9.
by Miky 14y ago
Once you've figured out on paper that 1 + 1 = 2, you don't necessarily have to put one apple next to one apple and count two apples to “complete the exercise.”
10.
by Miky 14y ago
Really? You're really saying that people should not care about rampant sexism in the gaming industry just because some people have it worse? I suppose we should stop working to help poor families in the first world because people starving i
11.
by Miky 15y ago
I was just trying to say that if using “Mr.” is becoming the norm in French, then it is becoming correct. I don't know if this is actually the case.
12.
by Miky 15y ago
Could you more clearly define what you mean by “wrong,” please?
13.
by Miky 15y ago
This article reminds me quite a bit of linguistic prescriptivism and descriptivism. Many people like to pretend that there's some platonic, right form of language. Splitting an infinitive is wrong, ending a clause with a preposition is wr
14.
by Miky 15y ago
I was under the impression that you could already do that in Ruby, although I don't use it much and very well could be wrong. Edit: Never mind, I just tried it and got an error. Weird. I could have sworn I'd seen it done somewhere.
15.
by Miky 15y ago
Something nice would be to have the threads appear at the point on the page you're scrolled to, instead of at the top. Having to scroll to the top is tiresome and makes you lose your place.
16.
by Miky 15y ago
The toy example is a microcosm of the important issue. The important issue is the use of monads in functional programming. How is a discussion not productive just because it's not framed in the most formal language possible?
17.
by Miky 15y ago
My issue is not with Roy. It's absolutely fantastic to have a functional language that compiles to JavaScript. My issue is with the use of monads in particular, and I think my comment pretty well communicates that it's solely about that. I
18.
by Miky 15y ago
I previously had a someone antagonistic comment, but I decided to remove it. I think that finding ways to notate asynchronous code cleanly is a pretty awesome goal, and I hope you find success in your project.
19.
by Miky 15y ago
I never said monads are made useless in a language with unrestricted side effects. I understand very well their utility even in the presence of side effects. However, if you'll take a look at the example monad code, the bind and return meth
20.
by Miky 15y ago
Monadic sugar is probably not the way to go for implementing an automatic continuation-passing transform. Why not just do macros?
21.
by Miky 15y ago
It makes me sad that having monad sugar is now just a given feature for a functional language. Especially when that language has unrestricted side effects and the example code using the monad syntax uses those side effects, completely obvia
22.
by Miky 15y ago
The language was not designed by chance. Some of the syntax was designed by chance. “Some of the syntax” is a very tiny part of a language. While this is interesting, presenting it as a “randomly-generated language” is extremely misleading.
23.
by Miky 15y ago
I think you'd find it pretty difficult to find an atheist who claims to strictly know with any kind of certainty that no gods/creators/things outside the universe exist (except maybe Hawking, but he's definitely not representative). Sure, p
24.
by Miky 15y ago
A programmer should, by that logic, see the complexity of God and see that He cannot be the product of chance. Perfect, omnipotent beings don't just appear by chance. Where did He come from?
25.
by Miky 15y ago
Have you seen all the libraries up on Hackage? Haskell probably has way more real-world stuff than you think.
26.
by Miky 15y ago
If Turing-completeness is the kind of powerful you're talking about, then Qi's would be more powerful. However, if you're talking about the amount of things the type system can verify, a Turing-complete type system would be subject to the h
27.
by Miky 15y ago
Thinking of values as functions is more misleading than it is illuminating. There are values that are functions, and there are values that are not, and the type system is extremely clear about which are which. It's just that all values can
28.
by Miky 15y ago
I'm pretty sure you agree with the post. Hint: the author is being ironic.
29.
by Miky 15y ago
He means that he can't say “value = 5” and then later say “"the value is " + 5”.
30.
by Miky 15y ago
He's not saying it's immoral of Google or anything, just that it doesn't help the rest of the programming world.

More ›