kephasp

9 ms·

1.
by kephasp 9mo ago
I've been using Haskell professionally for the last 5 years, I definitely hope I can continue!
2.
by kephasp 9mo ago
How can you prevent code from creating a handle in a new place?
3.
by kephasp 1y ago
Resumable code is extremely helpful and I'm pretty sure you're describing a chicken and egg issue: if resumable code was readily available in general, people would use it a lot more and it would look like a very normal tool that i
4.
by kephasp 1y ago
This is basically what we already have in Haskell. Debug functions that sidestep the typing system can be annotated with a warning and you can make this one an error while compiling for production. And in a more general sense, you can ask t
5.
by kephasp 1y ago
First, you can write a function that's generic on the effects used, so you could write use it in a way that calls an LLM and use it elsewhere in a way that cannot, with the same logic. But I see the need to change the code as a good th
6.
by kephasp 1y ago
Do you know papers or technical reports that demonstrate the scalability of authorization-preserving search indexes? I don't doubt they exist but what we hear about are the opposite cases, where this was obviously not implemented and s
7.
by kephasp 1y ago
One typical way to resolve this is to use Voluntary Oblivious Compliance (VOC). In this capability-based pattern, every storage service could provide an opaque handler to a user that represents their authorization and it can be used to rest
8.
by kephasp 4y ago
My team builds frontends in Elm and backends in Haskell and we experience the opposite: FP made the code very easy to reason about and plugging things together is easy too.
9.
by kephasp 4y ago
John Carmack is already advocating for the use of Haskell for video games.
10.
by kephasp 4y ago
You need to sketch it and possibly implement it yourself because actual examples don't exist. QED
11.
by kephasp 4y ago
I read about them a few times, but I never saw them proposed as the main access to recursion. Are there examples of that use?
12.
by kephasp 4y ago
> So the compiler of your immutable language will still have to insert locks No it won't, not at the myriads of places they're needed when there are mutations all over the place. Of course there are mutations in FP, so of cou
13.
by kephasp 4y ago
> Neither C nor C++ have built-in immutable data structures First of all, yes they do, you can use const on structs and objects and methods to ensure your C/C++ data structure is immutable. But this is moot anyway: > so those
14.
by kephasp 4y ago
But once it is created, all pieces of code accessing it can be executed in any order because there will never be a write on it again.
15.
by kephasp 4y ago
Look for actual examples in the wild that weren't error prone and I'd be surprised you'll find any. I get that you can imagine it. I'm saying it wouldn't work in practice.
16.
by kephasp 4y ago
You're misunderstanding ZFS' persistent data structure. It's the whole point that it's not doing a copy then modifying something. Also no one claims there's one immutable data structure that's faster than all
17.
by kephasp 4y ago
Of course I use combinators more often than I write recursive functions. But if someone finds recursion less readable, I still think they're missing something crucial. And I don't think recursion is a GOTO that should be avoided.
18.
by kephasp 4y ago
Experimenting around the state of the art or reimplementing the state of the art ourselves while being informed by it would be fine. I guess it would be a great exercise, as you said.
19.
by kephasp 4y ago
Do you have examples of this idea that were implemented and weren't insanely error-prone?
20.
by kephasp 4y ago
A mutable data structure will have such data dependencies all around. An immutable data structure cannot, because it will never be written in after creation.
21.
by kephasp 4y ago
> It's literally not possible for this to be true When you need a state that you can rollback, an immutable data structure lets you share the parts of the structure that didn't change between states. That's what ZFS does
22.
by kephasp 4y ago
I wonder if the loss of locality would be compensated by the better concurrency of the overall process… I'd be interested to see benchmarks.
23.
by kephasp 4y ago
> Do you mean to say the compiler will insert locks? I think you're right, it's the compiler that'll insert the locks according to the semantics of the language. > For an out-of-order superscalar machine, mutability has
24.
by kephasp 4y ago
When you use a mutable data structure, and your code is concurrent, you'll force the CPU to put locks everywhere in your code so that several cores won't see stale data in their internal caches. Even when you aren't writing c
25.
by kephasp 4y ago
Most so-called software engineers fail to do something crucial in engineering: they have zero knowledge about the scientific state of the art about programming. I agree that the absence of liability enables this.
26.
by kephasp 4y ago
Do you know an unsafe paradigm that has those advantages over, say, STM or Actors?
27.
by kephasp 4y ago
But a huge mutable data structure means you can't cache the content between cores of a CPU or between systems in a cluster. So you're describing a scenario where mutability incurs a serious performance penalty. And why are you say
28.
by kephasp 4y ago
Do you have any examples? Tons of system use immutability with extremely high throughputs, most notably WhatsApp. I don't need infinite memory to make a finite number of modifications to an optimized persistent data structure.
29.
by kephasp 4y ago
https://slack.engineering/taking-php-seriously/
30.
by kephasp 4y ago
It's not used by many, but it's used by niche environments that have a lot of money, especially in Fintech. When you want your code to be extremely reliable while really fast, there's nothing like languages like OCaml or Hask

More ›