Peaker

8 ms·

1.
by Peaker 8y ago
And this is why they need human brains in The Matrix
2.
by Peaker 8y ago
A type-class or just a callback type, vs pattern-matching, yeah.
3.
by Peaker 8y ago
There's a huge advantage to not everything being async/await. Knowing exactly when you yield control can give you atomicity and more determinism for free.
4.
by Peaker 8y ago
Then what you have is not "anything". You have an expression problem: Either each element has some "handler" that does the right thing for that data type. Or you have a set of cases that each data can be, and you handle
5.
by Peaker 8y ago
Everything is of course possible, but at what cost? In my experience, with large projects, you get to pick 2: Dynamic typing Development velocity Reliability I've seen multiple large projects grind to a near halt in their development s
6.
by Peaker 8y ago
When do you have lists of lists of elements of any type? What can you even do given such a value?
7.
by Peaker 8y ago
That's great for functions you just wrote. It's not as great for functions you change in a large code base.
8.
by Peaker 8y ago
Rust is a great systems language. When I write applications, I don't need a systems language, and Haskell is easier to use. Also, Rust is a great imperative language, it's not as great as a functional language, and you can't
9.
by Peaker 8y ago
An average US citizen contributes far more to pollution than the average African or Asian.
10.
by Peaker 8y ago
There are various library-level implementations. Here's the first one that turned up on Google: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/target/row-types/master/ex...
11.
by Peaker 8y ago
Haskell has reasonable implementations of row types as well.
12.
by Peaker 8y ago
Life on Earth started within a few hundred million years, not 2 billion years.
13.
by Peaker 8y ago
I suspect the problem is mentoring. It took me months to get basic Haskell. The people I mentored, though, could clarify any misunderstanding and get explanations from multiple viewpoints from me -- after years of experience with these ab
14.
by Peaker 8y ago
Haskell record syntax with lenses is workable: import Control.Lens data MyRecord = MyRecord { _a :: Int, _b :: MyRecord } makeLenses ''MyRecord Then you can use it nested like: over (b . b . a) (+5) myRecord
15.
by Peaker 8y ago
I've mentored programmers in Haskell and they were also productive within a few weeks. I'm pretty sure I could get a student to write useful Haskell code in that time span with just mentoring and existing documentation material.
16.
by Peaker 8y ago
That's the Maybe type . The Maybe monad is this: instance Monad Maybe where return = Just Nothing >>= _ = Nothing Just x >>= f = f x (And is not really related to the discussion)
17.
by Peaker 8y ago
Destroying a language's safety for a single use case is a terrible trade-off. There are various possible solutions for circular structures that do not require destroying all static safety with nulls everywhere.
18.
by Peaker 8y ago
Isn't the bottleneck in any sequential access case the memory bandwidth? IOW: Are the scalar instructions slower than memory bandwidth?
19.
by Peaker 8y ago
Of course that's true. But Lisp is shitty at controlling memory use, indirections, and manual MM.
20.
by Peaker 8y ago
They're not really "inheritance". They can do what inheritance can do, and much much more.
21.
by Peaker 8y ago
I agree about constexpr, templates and exceptions. But C function pointers are not really emulating virtual functions. They're better and more powerful than virtual functions.
22.
by Peaker 9y ago
I can vet the guys who published this. This is legit, and they haven't published anything that can be used maliciously.
23.
by Peaker 9y ago
You don't have to write it - you just have to avoid -Wall :-)
24.
by Peaker 9y ago
Why do they reduce the amount of code? They add the ability for constructors to carry constraints, which aids expressivity in some cases. But the majority of GADT uses purely add safety. Can use ordinary ADT without a type-variable that is
25.
by Peaker 9y ago
But you can do this without S-expressions. DLang, for example, has free-form macros that they weirdly call "mixin" (as in, mixing in some text or declarations into the AST, syntax-wise). Each mixin must be a valid AST subtree on i
26.
by Peaker 9y ago
You can't use -Weverything on a real project. It's full of noise. You can enable many others though, but -Weverything is virtually useless.
27.
by Peaker 9y ago
Have you looked at https://github.com/Peaker/git-mediate ? Everyone I talked into using it had always initially thought "meh" but later thanked me - claiming it's a huge life-saver :) It makes solving co
28.
by Peaker 9y ago
Allocate for the worst case use in the bss. The program's static size indicates explicit memory requirements.
29.
by Peaker 9y ago
Programs could be explicit about those constraints, encode more of them statically and check them statically.
30.
by Peaker 9y ago
True, but we don't have much trouble with it though. We don't directly call syscalls but use our own wrappers that take care of this for us.

More ›