jfm3

18 ms·

1.
by jfm3 15y ago
I predicted something like this in an old HN comment: http://hackerne.ws/item?id=2247654
2.
by jfm3 15y ago
They don't have to read his email, just analyze it algorithmicly. They already generate some kind of index of how many times each interesting word is used, otherwise they couldn't provide ads or fast searching. They only have to view that
3.
Answering Before You've Heard The Question(maxschireson.com)
1 points by jfm3 15y ago|0 comments
4.
by jfm3 15y ago
Should be titled "Some Books I Think You Should Read, But Not To The Exclusion Of Your Social Life."
5.
by jfm3 15y ago
Another instance of "Anyone can create a security system that they themselves cannot defeat."
6.
by jfm3 15y ago
"How do you explain C, C++, Python, Ruby, Perl, Javascript, and PHP? None had very extensive marketing budgets." I think a lot of these have larger marketing budgets than you imagine. I can't fathom the amount of money Microsoft spends pro
7.
by jfm3 15y ago
"I'll be the first to admit that it comes off as trollish. It's just I see these pronouncements about a language that make claims, which frankly I don't think can be backed up. I like Lisp as a language. I really do. But to me that's not su
8.
by jfm3 15y ago
> yet under its own weight it has nothing to show for it. That's factually incorrect. There's plenty to show for it, you just have to scale to the size of humanity's computing concerns from four or five decades ago. Moreover, in no fie
9.
by jfm3 15y ago
This is factually wrong in a number of ways. Modern linguists don't throw out "every aspect of language but syntax" (as you yourself indicate later in your own post). There are falsifiability problems ("all books are the same universal bo
10.
by jfm3 15y ago
I still like Gabriel's idea of an MFA in programming. http://www.dreamsongs.com/MFASoftware.html If anybody ever made this happen I'd come running.
11.
by jfm3 15y ago
Is Mr. Shivers the motivation for that whole BBM essay? ( http://www.lambdassociates.org/blog/bipolar.htm )
12.
by jfm3 16y ago
"This is the nub of what I want to say. A language design can no longer be a thing. It must be a pattern -- a pattern for growth -- a pattern for growing the pattern for defining the patterns that programmers can use for their real work a
13.
by jfm3 16y ago
Finally, a HN post I can get behind.
14.
by jfm3 16y ago
I get it. `my_if` doesn't require separate recompilation of the functions that use it. Well played. I still see a subset of the functionality of a language with macros over sexprs as the syntax. It will take me some time, however, to com
15.
by jfm3 16y ago
Right, but I can add a sub-language with lazy evaluation, infix operators, and application syntax to Lisp... I fully recognize Haskell can do a very useful subset of the features of real dynamic syntax. It's still a proper subset though.
16.
by jfm3 16y ago
"Reason 1: Haskell shines at domain specific languages. "[...] if you can embed a domain specific language into the programming language you’re using, things that looked very difficult can start to appear doable. Haskell, of course, exc
17.
Syntax(jfm3.tumblr.com)
2 points by jfm3 16y ago|0 comments
18.
by jfm3 16y ago
You're not really addressing the arguments presented in the linked post, you're just being snarky. I can appreciate that, but the linked post makes some really good points. Also, the converse of the point you seem to be trying to make with
19.
by jfm3 16y ago
Amen. Whenever I read a joel-on-software or FogCreek blog post, I feel like I'm being exposed to a clever advertisement, where the clever factor decreases linearly over time. This isn't the first time I've seen appeal-to-authority argumen
20.
by jfm3 16y ago
The most interesting bit is that he thinks trivia-game ability is genetic. (Well, that and how he handles being a mormon.)
21.
by jfm3 16y ago
Fine grained concurrency will motivate the next big paradigm shift. I haven't seen anything better than actors or STM yet though.
22.
by jfm3 16y ago
Wait, I get it now. This as an ad hominem attack against the FSF that assumed the reader would hold "UNIX pipes" and command lines as bad things. I think you're on the wrong forum.
23.
by jfm3 16y ago
Why do you use words like "Unix pipes" when you don't know what they mean?
24.
by jfm3 16y ago
Should be a must-read for hiring managers at software / web shops.
25.
by jfm3 16y ago
This post isn't about learning programming languages faster. It is the author of the blog discovering the rudiments of what Alan Kay discovered decades ago regarding programming literacy.
26.
by jfm3 16y ago
"Jimmy Iovine Does Not Understand Math." Fixed that title for you.
27.
by jfm3 16y ago
"Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years" http://norvig.com/21-days.html "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html
28.
by jfm3 16y ago
A buyer might think they're buying your users, or your technology. In either case, the possibility that these things can become devalued if not further invested in might (wrongly) never enter the thinking. If you don't change anything, h
29.
by jfm3 16y ago
It's all true, and Yahoo is probably one of the better companies that could acquire you.
30.
by jfm3 16y ago
I agree that it is good to be a "generalist" or a "full stack programmer". I try to be one myself. Be careful when you hear these classifications coming from recruiters. Whenever I have heard "generalist" what was meant was "someone who c

More ›