jon_smark

6 ms·

1.
by jon_smark 1y ago
Sorry to nitpick, but for a good Bayesian, absence if evidence is evidence of absence. If you want the aphorism to be technically correct, you should say "absence of proof is not proof of absence". A note on the terminology: &qu
2.
by jon_smark 4y ago
Thanks for the reply. I hope that the array and list comprehensions land soon in upstream; it's a useful and hopefully not-too-controversial feature. I'm more ambivalent regarding the local allocations and the unboxed types. I tot
3.
by jon_smark 4y ago
Thanks for the reply. I'm hoping that modular macros land soon. I'm very ambivalent about the PPX mechanism, and I hope that modular macros reduces the need of PPX.
4.
by jon_smark 4y ago
Are the plans for typed algebraic effects solidifying, or are they still nebulous? Concretely, are you willing to take a guess as to when we are expected to see OCaml 6? ;-)
5.
by jon_smark 4y ago
Congratulations and a big thank you to the OCaml team! I hope that multicore support finally ticks all the requirement boxes that had prevented many from taking a serious look at OCaml. The language certainly deserves it: it hits that sweet
6.
by jon_smark 4y ago
I have to interject here for the sake of those unfamiliar with OCaml and who may take the parent comment at face value. Saying "it has quirks like using ;; to end statements" is misleading to the point of just being bogus. The dou
7.
by jon_smark 6y ago
> Conversely OCaml is an interpreted functional language. Correction: OCaml is not an interpreted language. OCaml programmes are compiled down to native code (or bytecode, or Javascript).
8.
by jon_smark 9y ago
Quite on the contrary: The OO part of OCaml is hardly used at all in the wild!
9.
by jon_smark 9y ago
Indeed. Considering the volume of transactions going to and from Coinbase, their adoption of Segwit would go a long way towards alleviating the current mempool situation, which would bring lower fees for everyone.
10.
by jon_smark 9y ago
As others have pointed out, your understanding is backwards. Mining is heavily centralised already (in China of all places!), and larger block sizes would only exacerbate the mining centralisation, which is probably why the biggest fans of
11.
by jon_smark 9y ago
> Segwit isn't a a block size increase. It allows for a tiny amount more transactions but it's very clear it's not enough. An actual block size increase (say to 8MB) would solve the current problems. But what about the new
12.
by jon_smark 9y ago
What about pandemics? (Either natural or engineered.)
13.
by jon_smark 9y ago
> It's a pyramid scheme in a sense that you depend on others to keep buying the bitcoin. Please don't use the expression "pyramid scheme" lightly, because there are actual pyramid schemes out there, and we want the ex
14.
by jon_smark 9y ago
OCaml has great support for concurrency (check out Lwt or Async libraries). Do you mean parallelism, perhaps?
15.
by jon_smark 9y ago
And yet the Pentium G4560 -- one of the cheaper models of their Kaby Lake lineup -- supports both ECC and non-ECC RAM. I suspect the only reason behind lack of ECC support on their mainstream processors is just market segmentation.
16.
by jon_smark 9y ago
There was a recent thread on a sub-Reddit about using the threat of the Kessler Syndrome as deterrence: https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/62n21j/wha...
17.
by jon_smark 10y ago
In the case of OCaml, the structural subtyping of object fields can never cause a crash, because it is verified at compile-time.
18.
by jon_smark 10y ago
I think the confusion in this discussion lies in different interpretations of the word "Ponzi". You're using an interpretation that defines as Ponzi any investment where the value is solely anchored on the collective confide
19.
by jon_smark 10y ago
The article lacks a crucial bit of context: particularly in the North and Center of Portugal, the last 8 months have been even rainier than usual (many areas already over 2000mm of rain in this period, instead of the 1000-1500mm that would
20.
Rootstock: Smart Contracts on the Bitcoin Blockchain(medium.com)
2 points by jon_smark 11y ago|0 comments
21.
by jon_smark 11y ago
> IF the observed expansion of the universe is indeed due to dark matter as we think of it, and The accelerating expansion of the universe is thought to be caused by dark energy , not dark matter.
22.
by jon_smark 12y ago
That impression is incorrect. I don't think the core devs and the overall community have ever been as vibrant as they are now. Take for instance compiler development: half a decade ago, updates were rare and marginal. Nowadays you ca
23.
by jon_smark 13y ago
Would you care to share an example? I've never encountered a justifiable need to write ;; outside the REPL. The only uses of ;; I've encountered "in the wild" were hardly reasonable: essentially top-level code that w
24.
by jon_smark 13y ago
> (...) I think it's clearly dying out at this point. You seem pretty adamant -- what makes you think that? I think it's quite the opposite: the language and the community never felt as alive and thriving as they are right now
25.
by jon_smark 13y ago
You should take a new/better look at OCaml, as most of the information you mentioned is wrong and/or out-of-date. For instance: * F# is not a superset of OCaml. OCaml has a number of powerful features missing from F#, like fun
26.
by jon_smark 13y ago
> Single vulcano explosion releases more CO2 than entire mankind in a decade. Funny, the scientific consensus is that on average, on any given year vulcano emissions represent only about 1% of human emissions [1]. I would very much like
27.
by jon_smark 13y ago
OCaml.
28.
by jon_smark 13y ago
What do you mean by "stagnation of OCaml"? There was a period some 4-5 years ago where it did seem like there was little development on the language, but things have changed quite a lot since then. Lots of developments in the core languag
29.
by jon_smark 13y ago
Since F# was derived from OCaml, I think readers may also be interested in taking a look at the OCaml-Java project: http://ocamljava.x9c.fr/ (It's essentially what it says in the tin...)
30.
by jon_smark 14y ago
There are several reasons why one would prefer OCaml over F#: - OCaml is not tied to .NET. Obviously the converse also applies: if you need .NET integration then F# might be a better choice. - F# does not support some of the more advanced

More ›