richhickey

29 ms·

1.
by richhickey 9mo ago
Time to update your dictionary - slop: "digital content of low quality that is produced usually in quantity by means of artificial intelligence" https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/slop It is strictly
2.
by richhickey 1y ago
Well, at least I know how to form an argument that is not ad hominem. Remind me who you are next time 'KingMob' so I don't waste my time chatting with you again.
3.
by richhickey 2y ago
An advantage of using lists is that tx data tends to be built up serially in code. Having to look at your tx data in a different (set) order would make proofreading alongside the code more difficult.
4.
by richhickey 6y ago
Companies still compete to attract and retain top devs. What if those devs insisted that the companies they work for sponsor open source, and prefer sponsoring companies when making decisions about where they'll work? If companies spen
5.
by richhickey 10y ago
"datum" means "a thing given" - a fact or presumed fact. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/datum
6.
by richhickey 10y ago
If we can't agree on what words mean we can't communicate. This discussion is undermined by differing meanings for "data", to no purpose. You can of course instead send me a program that (better?) explains yourself, but
7.
by richhickey 10y ago
It contravenes the common and historical use of the word 'data' to imply undifferentiated bits/scribbles. It means facts/observations/measurements/information and you must at least grant it sufficient formattin
8.
by richhickey 10y ago
Data, and the entirety of human understanding and knowledge derived from recording, measurement and analysis of data, predates computing, so I don't see the relevance of these recent, programming-centric notions in a discussion of its
9.
by richhickey 10y ago
Without the 'idea' of data we couldn't even have a conversation about what interpreters interpret. How could it be a "really bad" idea? Data needn't be accompanied by an interpreter. I'm not saying that in
10.
by richhickey 10y ago
Data without an interpreter is certainly subject to (multiple) interpretation :) For instance, the implications of your sentence weren't clear to me, in spite of it being in English (evidently, not indicated otherwise). Some metadata i
11.
by richhickey 10y ago
Data like that sentence? Or all of the other sentences in this chat? I find 'data' hard to consider a bad idea in and of itself, i.e. if data == information, records of things known/uttered at a point in time. Could you talk
12.
by richhickey 12y ago
It seems counterintuitive, but composing transducers yields a reducing function that runs the transformation steps left->right. What you are composing is the reducing function transformations (right to left, ordinary composition), but th
13.
by richhickey 12y ago
While not mentioned in the blog post, the transducers implementation supports both early termination and result completion/flushing/cleanup.
14.
by richhickey 12y ago
I'm not yet seeing that, given: Signal a :: Time -> a SF a b :: Signal a -> Signal b thus (Time -> a) -> (Time -> b) not exactly: (x->a->x) -> (x->b->x) Can you point me to a paper that makes the connectio
15.
by richhickey 12y ago
Because mapcat's signature was not amenable to the additional arity, there's now also flatmap (note you can write the lazy collection version of any transducer fn using sequence as below): (defn flatmap "maps f
16.
by richhickey 12y ago
Yes, it's not just the 'reduce' function. You can think of many kinds of jobs in terms of seeded left reductions. Here's an example of some of the functions that can apply a transducer to their internal 'step'
17.
by richhickey 12y ago
I'm not seeing anything that looks like a reducing function transformer there. That all looks like variants of ordinary function composition, currying and partial application. Is there someplace that shows 'operator forms' ac
18.
by richhickey 12y ago
Kind of. The idea is to get out of the context of the 'whole job' (the ->r->r bit above) and focus on transformations of the step function (a->r->r) -> (b->r->r) {using your arg order above}. Not talking about
19.
by richhickey 12y ago
Precisely the opposite - these functions compose because they are representation-free.
20.
by richhickey 12y ago
These sigs are for the arities below only. map f: (a->b)->(x->b->x)->(x->a->x) filter pred: (a->bool)->(x->a->x)->(x->a->x) flatmap f: (a->[b])->(x->b->x)->(x->a->x
21.
by richhickey 12y ago
a la Haskell: ;;reducing fn x->a->x ;;transducer fn (x->a->x)->(x->b->x)
22.
by richhickey 12y ago
Your typical definition of map, filter etc includes concrete usage of e.g. lists. These don't. Transducers are not just currying or partial application of the map function over lists, they isolate the logic of map, filter etc from list
23.
by richhickey 12y ago
No, (map f) is not curried map. It returns an entirely different thing - a function of reducing function to reducing function, aka a reducing function transformer, aka a transducer.
24.
by richhickey 12y ago
The biggest difference is that MessagePack extensibility (which is not yet widely implemented) is based upon binary blobs, whereas Transit defines extensions in terms of other Transit types. Also, Transit can reach the browser via JSON. And
25.
by richhickey 12y ago
I am not, and have never been, a Ruby user.
26.
by richhickey 13y ago
I'd ignored this, trying to have a nice holiday with my family (without having to contend with wrongness on the internet :), but would like to introduce some facts. Datomic is not an append-only b-tree, and never has been. There's
27.
by richhickey 14y ago
If you are going to use quotes, please be quoting. I've never talked like that, and don't appreciate it being attributed to me.
28.
by richhickey 14y ago
Datomic Free gives you that capability right now, for free, no strings attached, and no need to use a Datomic db. Not open source, but free as in gratis, a la Creative Commons. We may trim down the deps a bit for that use case.
29.
by richhickey 14y ago
We don't have any support for materialized views at present, but they are on the list of enhancements to consider.
30.
by richhickey 14y ago
Yeah, Stu told me I should do that :) In all cases the output from Datomic Datalog is just a data structure. In the case of the query in the blog post, it is just a collection of 2-tuples of date + source code string. The source strings are

More ›