hepta

5 ms·

1.
by hepta 9y ago
Doesn't seem like valid JS, you wouldn't need mark.js if that were the case.
2.
by hepta 9y ago
Maybe we have to dig into the specifics: there's a lot of things that can be done with Name, regardless of where the name belongs, is that what you mean? If so, most typed languages let you say that Person can be a thing with a Name. I
3.
by hepta 9y ago
I do agree that there are problems where the "maps of facts" approach is better suited than ADTs. I'm not sure if those are the majority of problems we're solving. You can still do all that in a typed language, using dic
4.
by hepta 9y ago
There is code that doesn't `constantly cast ti and from Object`, most code won't need to, anyway. Generic information is kept during type-checking and then is discarded, this can be considered an optimization. There are some warts
5.
by hepta 9y ago
> The only down side is removed compatibility with other languages like C and C++ and C#, locking in the app to a specific language more. Using a Stream instead of a for loop does very little to make your code incompatible with C. It is
6.
by hepta 9y ago
I imagine there is a way to raise a cow for beef that I find ethical. I don't know if you can do so for dairy cows. As far as I know, the cow has to have young to lactate, meaning it must be impregnated frequently. Am I wrong? This is
7.
by hepta 9y ago
Yeah, I'd like to know what the experience is for people who use it regularly.
8.
by hepta 9y ago
I already use vavr, sadly such pattern matching is not exhaustive, which is the most important feature for me.
9.
by hepta 9y ago
I think both are not exhaustive (or don't have exhaustiveness enforced by the compiler).
10.
by hepta 10y ago
This seems like nitpicking as well. If the intention is that everything is an expression (that seems to be it, to me) then you have to have a Unit, no mater what you call it. I'd rather have a name that 3 academics know than override a
11.
by hepta 10y ago
What are your problems with spring boot? What bloat are you referring to?
12.
by hepta 10y ago
> Maybe passing around a random generator explicitly is not what we want. That's fair. What I often want is to pull a function out of my program and test it without a lot of work. This is easy if the function is pure. > My point
13.
by hepta 10y ago
You use a generator that receives a state and returns a random number and the modified state. You'd want some additional abstractions to make that work well.
14.
by hepta 10y ago
> That's the risk of reading articles like the OP, where they show you a couple functional tricks in an imperative language that inherently can't give you the whole picture. The other risk is that people (like me, a few years a
15.
by hepta 10y ago
If you're already proficient in Java/JVM I personally don't see a lot of reasons to use Go. Maybe for extremely small services or if you can't take the higher memory requirements.
16.
by hepta 10y ago
It relates to typing as a method of encoding invariants, yes. I was trying to say that it is unrelated to which "type" of typing. That is, I can perfectly imagine a statically typed language where you could encode such restrictio
17.
by hepta 10y ago
Even though that may be factually correct, it doesn't seem to be related to static typing. Haskell has guards but they are slightly different.
18.
by hepta 10y ago
Depends on your goals, Java isn't the best if your aim is to learn FP.
19.
by hepta 10y ago
I see now, probably just something to do with formatting/escaping, the <> are being swallowed. Yes, it's strange. I'd prefer to map a null in a DTO to an empty optional. I'd like even more to never have nulls in th
20.
by hepta 10y ago
I assumed the omission was for brevity, but there are annotations and 'final' in a lot of places. Similarly, methods for mutation (compulsory, no less!) are red flag in FP.
21.
by hepta 10y ago
Interop with Java seems unlikely unless they keep a JVM tucked away somewhere.
22.
by hepta 10y ago
It's a difficult line to place, for instance is pain avoidance plus memory enough? If I imagine a fish thinking "I can't do that again" that certainly looks like sentience, but the resulting behavior (avoidance) can occu
23.
by hepta 10y ago
You don't need to be a good chef to know a meal is awful. A lot of people use the language (me included) and make it work, doesn't mean it's without fault.
24.
by hepta 10y ago
In what ways is this different from ECS? It's strange to me that you can do the same thing in slightly different ways.
25.
by hepta 10y ago
My god, I feel much better with my puny abuse.
26.
by hepta 10y ago
The point (or the reason why I use it) is to express the possibility of absent values, same as Rust, Haskell, etc. That the language let's you have null references is another (bigger) problem.
27.
by hepta 10y ago
That's not what I meant. My reply to you needs the context of the parent comment. To "miss the known universe" was the explicit purpose of the designers. It was supposed to be simple (whether their definition is good or not i
28.
by hepta 10y ago
What if lodash itself was unpublished? I'm having a hard time drawing a line here, obviously a 10 line function is too far on the bad side of lazy, but I can't tell what is an acceptable dependency.
29.
by hepta 11y ago
It might be that the designers chose to focus on specific problems they found at Google, universe be damned. Maybe Go is just a good Google language.
30.
by hepta 11y ago
Wait a minute, is this a troll post? Interfaces? I get the tooling, maybe, and CSP out of the box, I don't understand what's great about Go's interfaces (compared to plain old boring Java, for instance).

More ›