sideeffffect

7 ms·

31.
by sideeffffect 2y ago
Regarding 3), you probably meant the Prague Castle, not Karlštejn, right? Karlštejn is far from Prague.
32.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
In Scala 3, implicits live on under a different name. They're called _given_s. But they're reduced to just one use case: propagating a context through (and deriving one given form others). And Type Classes are subsumed under this
33.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
> [Odersky's] work is not focused on simplicity as Wirth's was - I wonder if he tried hard to adopt Wirth's simplicity mantra or not I would beg to differ. I think he's very much aiming at simplicity. Btw, the essence
34.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
There are even libraries for that! https://github.com/dirs-dev/directories-rs
35.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
I think he shows the performance of running JRuby on top of GraalVM. GraalVM uses Graal (the JIT compiler) in place of C2 (the JIT from HotSpot). But TruffleRuby is something different. It is another Ruby implementation (just like JRuby is
36.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
It even supports Scala (Scala Native, that is) https://github.com/lolgab/snunit
37.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
This seems to be missing persistent collections, like immutable Map, Set or Vector/Sequence. Those are very important when doing FP in practice. Is there some other established Go library that contains these collections/containers
38.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
Not true. They're is GraalPython, which is for Python 3 and supports also native code extensions. https://github.com/oracle/graalpython
39.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
We need Copyright very much, it's the only way to enforce the so called Copyleft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft
40.
by sideeffffect 3y ago
GC is by no way a solved thing. Let alone in Java! Consider these developments: * Distilling the Real Cost of Production Garbage Collectors https://twitter.com/stevemblackburn/status/15196411576216576... https:&#
41.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
It's been like this in the academia (Mathematics in particular) since ever. Also, some people say that it makes for easier (less ambiguous?) parsing. But the -> part is a bit weird. It "shouldn't" be def factori
42.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
The history of that ticket is really mind-blowing https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=6606
43.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> Constant matters Not in these exercises. They're focused on algorithms and their asymptotic complexity.
44.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Oh, I see. Nice! I'm afraid we don't have anything like ST in any Scala library that I know of :(
45.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> But what does he mean by "Objects" and "Classes"? To be hones, I'm not sure. > Everything good about objects that a pure functional programmer would want is captured by first-class modules. I just know that
46.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> Odersky's "values" primarily appear to be whatever will appease the masses, which is why Scala started with curly braces and OOP. I would agree that Odersky wants Scala to be popular and wants to accommodate even program
47.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> Scala is really an object-oriented language, first and foremost You're technically correct, which is the best kind of correct. Scala is not based on the Lambda calculus. The DOT calculus (which is what Scala is theoretically built
48.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
And you can do it with a state monad in Scala too. But Odersky's point is that (at least in Scala) it is even simpler (and thus should be preferred) to do it with raw (but still local!) mutation. https://www.youtube.com&#x2F
49.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Totally agree that these paradigms are badly defined. See my other comment where I explain it more https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34217547 My point here was that all "OOP" languages (that I know) allow you,
50.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Here's the recording of the talk KEYNOTE Simply Scala Martin Odersky https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRcD9Zc7eq4
51.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> though I'm not sure they have precise definitions Of course they don't. These "paradigms" like OOP or FP are just human made up terms _without any basis in theory_. Sometimes they can be practically useful when comm
52.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
There's nothing anti-functional in bundling related functions into an object. On the contrary, this helps with modularity, which is a good thing. You can then swap out the object for another object with the same interface, but where th
53.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Then it really depends what exactly you mean by OOP. Some people use the OOP features for modularity and structuring of the codebase, without any side effects/unmanaged mutation. Often they don't call it "OOP" then, but
54.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
It's awkward to do Functional Programming, when all the libraries (including the standard one) for your language built around mutation. F# (and other FP languages, like Scala) have standard libraries which come with (and are built arou
55.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Nope, it was wrongly configured code cache https://lichess.org/@/thibault/blog/lichess-on-scala3-help-n... https://old.reddit.com/r/scala/comments/zh3o6x/lichess_runni...
56.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Are there any officially supported Google products under github.com/google ?
57.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Maybe you will appreciate https://github.com/sormuras/bach/ ?
58.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Aren't Quarkus (and possibly other frameworks/libs) built on top of it?
59.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Scala's purpose is, at least to me, pretty clear: Functional programming (ranging up to Pure FP) on the JVM with a powerful type system. That's just something that Java, Kotlin, nor Clojure don't offer. And there is significa
60.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
I think "better Haskell on JVM" (in contrast to "worse Haskell") is a good identity for Scala to have. (Please note that this is an intentional hyperbole.) Of course, there are areas where Haskell is stronger than Scala

More ›