sroerick

8 ms·

1.
by sroerick 5d ago
I wonder if we will see a mass (math) exodus of mathematicians to open weight models.
2.
by sroerick 7d ago
I just say jippity or sometimes "the jippity"
3.
by sroerick 8d ago
Facebook is the first to market with a polished openclaw? Good for them. I'm sure many others will criticize other aspects of Meta, and rightly so. But imagine using a Claw agent with zero tech support available
4.
by sroerick 9d ago
Can you elaborate on this? how would you work on a larger THREE project? would you create models independently?
5.
by sroerick 11d ago
LLMs are better at OCaml than any other language, and being able to read and think in OCaml is very helpful to understanding LLM generated OCaml code. Also, it may very well be the decade of formal verification - if so, OCaml is a good plac
6.
by sroerick 11d ago
Couldn't agree more. Even when the models could barely write it, the compiler was so good
7.
by sroerick 12d ago
Lol
8.
by sroerick 12d ago
This is funny. I was trying to get agents to talk to each other on XMPP. one of them wrote their own chat room on a Lisp Habitat that I run. then it starting talking (On XMPP) about how nobody was receiving or responding to its messages. On
9.
by sroerick 14d ago
I don't know people or talk to people so I'm happy to hear otherwise. Which industries? I definitely look for libraries which are handcoded and I consider them to generally be of a much higher quality, but it increasingly seems li
10.
by sroerick 14d ago
That may be true - but I hadn't used Claude Code and I was still in the "its impossible to vibecode successfully" mindset
11.
by sroerick 15d ago
Man, as a former extreme skeptic, I watched a video from Eric Schmidt in early 2025 where he said that by the end of the year nobody would be coding, and that one was dead frickin on.
12.
by sroerick 19d ago
> Steve Russel realized that the Lisp specification of EVAL can be translated to machine language to produce an interpreter. So just to be clear, you are here confirming that the first implementation of Lisp was in fact an interpreter?
13.
by sroerick 19d ago
This is just the Wikipedia page for "interpreters" so perhaps this is fake news but > The first interpreted high-level language was Lisp. Lisp was first implemented by Steve Russell on an IBM 704 computer. Russell had read John
14.
by sroerick 19d ago
I agree with this and I'd also say - I've been vibe coding in OCaml since before the training data was good. All the stuff I lost in training data I gained back in having great compiler feedback. I don't think agents are near
15.
by sroerick 19d ago
It may do the opposite! My sense of LLMs is that simplicity beats training. If you have 1/5th the context to consume, that's going to generate better code than the comparable typescript, even if the language is an esoteric one.
16.
by sroerick 20d ago
I mean - how specifically are you using knowledge graphs?
17.
by sroerick 20d ago
> Describing it as interpretation is often wrong, and leads people to the extremely common (even here on HN) mistaken belief that Lisps are strictly interpreted and never compiled. Well, I literally said in my post that basically all Lis
18.
by sroerick 20d ago
Hey, I'm probably punching out of my weight class here - I'm basically a Lisp beginner. But I will say that I don't think the manual for Lisp 1.5 gets as much airtime as the original John McCarthy eval statement, which does d
19.
by sroerick 20d ago
I asked a similar question above, but can you talk more about the ergonomics of keeping the source and the image in sync? Is this generally a manual process in CL?
20.
by sroerick 20d ago
Awesome. Got any more info? Were any of the Lisp Machines image based?
21.
by sroerick 20d ago
Can you explain how you sync back to code, in practice? In other words - if you modify the run time, are you then able to mirror those changes in your codebase and then reboot?
22.
by sroerick 20d ago
I am not a Lisp developer by trade, but I accidentally made an interpreted Lisp as a habitat for LLMs. My research has mirrored exactly what you are saying. I think conceptually, Lisp was an interpreted runtime. However, the combination of
23.
by sroerick 20d ago
I've been playing around with a fully interpreted Lisp as a habitat for LLMs to code in, and honestly it's really great
24.
by sroerick 20d ago
Can you elaborate on this?
25.
by sroerick 25d ago
Hi, thank you both for this. I built my own, worse, harness in my own, worse, lisp and I will also be joining the chat
26.
by sroerick 26d ago
Cool! I used Larbs.xyz for a while. I love a good dotfiles repo. I guess I think there's a lot more in Omarchy than a dotfiles repo, I was very impressed with the demo video. Even just creating the menu and updating system is non-triv
27.
by sroerick 26d ago
The demo video is comprehensive and impressive
28.
by sroerick 26d ago
My understanding is that it only goes to Omarchy, and only with explicit permission from the user, so maybe "automatically" is a misnomer - but the diagnosis process feels very snappy
29.
by sroerick 26d ago
I think it's implemented and demoed in the Quattro release
30.
by sroerick 26d ago
Omarchy Quattro is pretty dang good. It's a lot more than any shell script I've written, certainly. If you've written a more complex one I'd love to see it. Having agents in the default environment, having everything con

More ›