oisdk

7 ms·

1.
by oisdk 4mo ago
It’s pretty annoying to comment “this thing was already present in CL 30 years ago”, then to have someone correct you (pointing out that this is a common misconception, and algebraic effects are not equivalent to conditions at all), and the
2.
by oisdk 9mo ago
There's no (practical) advantage to the circular implementation; it's just a curiosity. It is useful for understanding laziness and some interesting theoretical tools for traversing data structures, though. For a more in-depth loo
3.
by oisdk 1y ago
I'm afraid I don't think I'm making progress here. My overall point was that I felt your original comment was a little confused about algebraic effects. You seemed to think that the "algebra" in "algebraic effe
4.
by oisdk 1y ago
> that's my understanding of why these things are called 'algebraic' effects. This is a misconception. Algebraic effects are not algebraic because they come from algebraic data types, the two features are completely indepe
5.
by oisdk 1y ago
Well, I gave the example of a logging effect above. In the post there’s also an example of a key-value store effect. What’s missing from these examples exactly? All of these effects have simple operations (get and put for store, the `write`
6.
by oisdk 1y ago
For an algebra, you have some operations and some equations. The group algebra has the + operation, and 0 and -, and all the relevant equations. You can also form an algebra from logging. One operation might be “write to stdout”. And then a
7.
by oisdk 1y ago
I mean, the program snippet that I gave above contains 3 first-class values. If you write `x = y + z + 0`, or any other statement that uses the group algebra (or any other algebra), you can use algebraic effects to describe the semantics. T
8.
by oisdk 1y ago
> I'd assume "algebraic effects" are to talk about performing algebra on the effects. That is, you are specifically going to talk about how different things combine effects This is a misconception. The "algebra"
9.
by oisdk 1y ago
Generally speaking, it means that the effect is derived from an algebraic theory (in a specific and structured way). While equations are definitely part of most theories, you can absolutely have a theory without equations, and furthermore y
10.
by oisdk 1y ago
I'm just recommending the writeup, but only because I haven't watched the lecture series myself (although I'm sure it's good, I've seen other lectures by the lecturer that were excellent). As far as I know, they cov
11.
by oisdk 1y ago
> For one, if algebraic isn't aiming at the ideas in an algebra, then they absolutely should be using a different name. Algebraic effects are certainly algebraic, they're just not directly related to algebraic data types. Both
12.
by oisdk 1y ago
The "algebraic" in "algebraic effects" is not really related to algebraic data types, or sum or product types. I mean, I suppose they're related, since they both refer to algebra in the general sense, but there&#x27
13.
by oisdk 1y ago
I would encourage anyone interested in this question to check out the paper "What is algebraic about algebraic effects and handlers?" ( https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.05923 ) which is a write-up of the lecture seri
14.
by oisdk 2y ago
> F* is a programming language with proof support. Lean/Coq are theorem providers that can be used to model and generate code. Lean is also a programming language with proof support. It is very much in the same category as F* in thi
15.
by oisdk 3y ago
No there are not. There are studies in mice (like this one), studies in vitro, etc. > There's limited interest in it though because most of those things simply have no profit potential This is not true. There is a lot of interest in
16.
by oisdk 3y ago
> if you ever read the cases of people being harmed by their doctors advice and getting healed by going opposite to their doctors advice you would never have said such a thing. There are countless cases of shoddy care from doctors. The e
17.
by oisdk 3y ago
> do note that youtube is heavily censoring low carb stuff since "it's not mainstream approved" lol By "not mainstream approved" you mean it's largely discredited and confined to quacks and charlatans online
18.
by oisdk 5y ago
[The original paper which introduced Monads to Haskell]( https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/... ) is a fantastic read, and extremely easy to understand. It explains clearly why mon
19.
by oisdk 6y ago
Game of Thrones is medieval fantasy, and as the second-biggest medieval fantasy series of all time it will have a significant impact on people's perception of the medieval time period. I think that claim is pretty uncontroversial, whic
20.
by oisdk 6y ago
> extremely elastic view of “like medieval Europe”. No. Westeros is based on medieval Europe, culturally, politically, and historically. Obviously it's fiction, well done on spotting that, but it's a fictionalised version of m
21.
by oisdk 6y ago
> There are question begging, conclusion jumping and tenuous leaps of logic in the blog. Point out a single specific example of any of those things in the article, please. > Does GRRM truly encourage this view? The articles vaguely al
22.
by oisdk 6y ago
I never said we should hold fiction to the same standards as non-fiction, that's obviously silly. I said that critiquing works of fiction like GoT from a historial perspective is fun, interesting, educational, and positive.
23.
by oisdk 6y ago
The article clearly motivates the criticism, and explains why it's valid to critique the books from a historical perspective. * GRRM has made claims regarding the relation of the Dothraki to real-life cultures. It's in the second
24.
by oisdk 6y ago
> Not all branches of pure mathematics are equally worthy of study. Ok? What does this have to do with the point I was making? My point was, pretty simply, that "usefulness" is not the only thing we consider when deciding wheth
25.
by oisdk 6y ago
> You wrote that "Learning any mathematics is a complete waste of time." Yes, I was being facetious. My point is that by whatever measure pure maths is worth studying (i.e. those measure beyond "practical" application
26.
by oisdk 6y ago
> Learning mathematics had been incredibly useful to me. You have missed my point. We generally don't study only the "useful" things; if we did most of the most important mathematics we have today would have gone unstudie
27.
by oisdk 6y ago
> s/he certainly like they have some familiarity with graduate/research level mathematics in relevant areas You should not assume this about any anonymous person on the internet.
28.
by oisdk 6y ago
> I don't know what your work is, but for the vast majority of people learning HoTT is a complete waste of time. This is a bizarre thing to say. Learning any mathematics is a complete waste of time. > gives the (false) impressio
29.
by oisdk 6y ago
Yes! Basically I preferred solutions that avoided W, since you're then working in a subset of the language that is definitely terminating and affine. (although in this case I just didn't find I = WK) I should actually add a note a
30.
by oisdk 6y ago
W is equivalent to join, yes. M can't be typed in Haskell (without newtypes), so there's no real equivalent. Of course they're not really useful for programming; they're more interesting as a compilation target, formal r

More ›