higherkinded

5 ms·

1.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Okay but they are formal systems and don't have anything to do with AI either, do they?
2.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Don't.
3.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Suggestion to rely on AI for proof verification is just laughable. Neuron weights instead of formal definitions. So reliable.
4.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Curious! Instantiation by means of the language is actually slower than parsing stuff and instantiating the objects that way. Didn't ever think of that possibility before. Anyway, I understand that JavaScript is much more complicated t
5.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Lasting long against HN-mainpage-level load. That's what's hard.
6.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Wrong Amazon, you again!
7.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Add a <noscript> to your landing mayhaps? Takes a little while to figure out that I need my JS on for a proper representation.
8.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Effectful sizeof, what a delightful feature ! Though the compile-time magic with structs and functional macros are so tempting that I feel like it's high time to do some C.
9.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Not sure if I'm going to express an unpopular opinion on that matter but I'm pretty sure that ot was already said somewhere in the comments in some different form. Not sure if my opinion even counts to people like ones who authore
10.
by higherkinded 7y ago
"...so again, like I said earlier,.."
11.
by higherkinded 7y ago
For some reason I've thought about the other Amazon. Even São Paulo didn't help the title to ring a bell.
12.
by higherkinded 7y ago
>Youngsters these days What a marvelous start, good luck looking trustworthy. It's straight up the same as it was generations and generations before. I also love the emphasis on video games imposed in this article, from the very beg
13.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Who would've guessed? Getting a kilometer of solar panels installed as a road (sic!) in a region that has a cloudy skies most of the time. It's borderline genius. How did it get any approval at all? Who treated solar panels being
14.
by higherkinded 7y ago
The fact that someone needs to say that for it to be apparent is somewhat unsettling.
15.
by higherkinded 7y ago
>cross the bridge No one really wants that in any use cases of type-level numbers. Type-level numbers are generally used to do just opposite: silently (well, loudly, if you ask the compiler to check it) govern the structure in question,
16.
by higherkinded 7y ago
>Much like java and javac are different tools, python and pytype/mypy are different tools I get where you're heading. The `java` one is for JVM bytecode interpretation and the `javac` is for actual Java. Ok. Cool. I suppose tha
17.
by higherkinded 7y ago
And how's it helping you verify the correctness of your codebase at compile time (it still compiles the source to byte-code before evaluation)? Last time I checked, it didn't care too much about type annotations, and it didn'
18.
by higherkinded 7y ago
And that's a sad thing to hear. Before my death by thousand downvotes, I'd like to tell you why do I feel that way. Back in the day when I was way more inexperienced than I'm now, I was a die-hard Python fanboy. To me, it see
19.
by higherkinded 7y ago
I'd also like to point out that the majority of software engineers nowadays lacks the mathematical background, so it's probably worth including theoretical books like Abstract Algebra by Dummit and Foote on the 'must read&#x2
20.
by higherkinded 7y ago
No it's not, and you still have a burden of a proof on your shoulders. It probably is, indeed, kept up by some degree of anti-competitive practices but it's still not a monopoly but a member of what you call oligopoly, providing a
21.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Ok but I'm talking of ones based on composition.
22.
by higherkinded 7y ago
>which makes n-arity functions necessarily first-class Excuse me but tuples. You still have to observe them to evaluate them but that's all you need to simulate n-arity in the way you want. >more dynamic Well, Hindley—Milner is h
23.
by higherkinded 7y ago
That is exactly the thing that baffles me most. Procedural languages that are inherently distanced from math are used for math for whatever reason. That's basically what I've said in earlier comment.
24.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Haskell is its direct descendant, so of course it counts. It has all the traits required to be called that, and I'm implicitly talking towards it in the initial comment while still respecting the family. And for what I know, OCaml has
25.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Off the topic but, Why keep reinventing the wheel when there's an ML language family already? Why do people keep giving up these juicy Hindley—Milner-ish type systems and these brief and concise equations for anything? It just doesn&#x
26.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Well, yeah, Reader is that kind of thing. I guess that the complexity people are concerned about is that once you implement a parametric polymorphism, HKTs are inevitable and that probably requires some brain flexing in order to get the mea
27.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Trained human is likely capable of doing it exactly like the Puppeteer does minus the fact that the pointer may move instantly in case of the machine doing it. One wrong assumption covered, two more to go. The second assumption made here is
28.
by higherkinded 7y ago
Not sure why becoming way more simple and readable is a bad thing.
29.
by higherkinded 7y ago
It's "typeclass", not "interface". Though it works similar and is, in fact, just a way to define a constraint. As of your described way of desugaring the contract, looks way too cluttered. It's exactly the reas
30.
by higherkinded 7y ago
So the approach described essentially defeats the purpose of antivirus software as it's known. Malware so happens to be (usually) embedded in the legit software. If that real-world fact is the way to defeat their model, is it of any us

More ›