taylorallred

9 ms·

1.
by taylorallred 4mo ago
I know Mojo is aimed at ML, but I'm actually really interested in trying it for game development :)
2.
by taylorallred 5mo ago
Pair this with Fil-C( https://fil-c.org/ ) and now you have C but as a truly bonafide scripting language.
3.
by taylorallred 7mo ago
Another interesting article on error handling: https://www.dgtlgrove.com/p/the-easiest-way-to-handle-errors
4.
by taylorallred 7mo ago
It makes me think that it's worth sitting down and considering what all the valid outcomes for a piece of functionality are. A user typing in a string in the wrong format is not necessarily "exceptional", whereas running out
5.
by taylorallred 7mo ago
Rust shines in user-space systems-level applications (databases, cloud infrastructure, etc.) but definitely feels a bit out of place in more business-logic heavy applications.
6.
by taylorallred 7mo ago
I was really interested in lisps for a couple of years, but eventually I came to the conclusions: it's just hard to read. I know they say "the parens disappear" but even if that is the case, it simply requires you to jump aro
7.
by taylorallred 7mo ago
Not speaking for all Go programmers, but I think there is a lot of merit in the idea of "making zero a meaningful value". Zero Is Initialization (ZII) is a whole philosophy that uses this idea. Also, "nil-punning" in Clo
8.
by taylorallred 8mo ago
I like the goals of this language a lot and I've wished something with these goals already existed. But, I'm not sure if this syntax/approach is quite what I want. Really cool project, though!
9.
by taylorallred 8mo ago
I have always felt like Swift is the king of application development. The syntax and ergonomics really lend itself to UIs and the like. It's a shame that the Swift compiler is on the slow side.
10.
by taylorallred 8mo ago
It seems to me like parser combinators are always more trouble than they're worth. People often have the impression that parsing is difficult and should be outsourced to another library, but often it's pretty simple to hand-roll a
11.
by taylorallred 8mo ago
I agree with the sentiment of this article but the question that fascinates me is "when do you need a language feature instead of a library in order to accomplish X, Y, or Z?"
12.
by taylorallred 9mo ago
Meanwhile: not eax and eax, 1
13.
by taylorallred 10mo ago
I see people waxing poetic over Ruby a lot saying that it's a language "built for the human". The thing is, every language is built for humans (or at least should be) but we tend to have different definitions for what "b
14.
by taylorallred 10mo ago
I have admired many parts of Zig and its philosophy but I've never seen it as a language that I want to use. What I've noticed is that Zig users care most about explicitness, simplicity, and minimal indirection. This leads to a lo
15.
by taylorallred 11mo ago
Thanks for those links. Have you tried using arenas that give out handles (sometimes indexes) instead of mutable references? It's less convenient and you're not leveraging borrow checking but I would imagine it supports Send well.
16.
by taylorallred 11mo ago
For those who are interested, I think that arena allocation is an underrated approach to managing lifetimes of interconnected objects that works well with borrow checking.
17.
by taylorallred 11mo ago
Piping syntax is nice for reading, but it's hard to debug. There's no clear way to "step through" each stage of the pipe to see the intermediate results.
18.
by taylorallred 1y ago
I love seeing these kinds of explorations in the realm of language design. I've wondered about expanding the notion of boolean operators like this. For all its flaws, one thing I've always liked about JS is the overloaded (||) and
19.
by taylorallred 1y ago
I'm less concerned about people not adopting other frameworks. I'm concerned about people not knowing/learning the fundamentals of how websites work. It's apparent in job interviews that developers from bootcamps are onl
20.
by taylorallred 1y ago
"So-called "natural language" is wonderful for the purposes it was created for, such as to be rude in, to tell jokes in, to cheat or to make love in (and Theorists of Literary Criticism can even be content-free in it), but it
21.
by taylorallred 1y ago
I really appreciate how this article explains why certain design patterns became a thing. Usually, it was to address some very practical problem or limitation. And yet, a lot of younger programmers treat these patterns like a religious dogm
22.
by taylorallred 1y ago
What's amazing to me is that often all it takes to go fast is to keep things simple. JBlow once said that software should be treated like a rocket ship: every thing you add contributes weight.
23.
by taylorallred 1y ago
Writing a lot of assembler would certainly make me more effective at designing systems such as compilers and operating systems. As it stands, I do not work on those things currently. They say you should become familiar with at least one lay
24.
by taylorallred 1y ago
One thing that has always worried me about AI coding is the loss of practice. To me, writing the code by hand (including the boilerplate and things I've done hundreds of times) is the equivalent of Mr. Miyagi's paint-the-fence. Ea
25.
by taylorallred 1y ago
This is why I’d love to see some more examples of people sitting down and using these tools in day-to-day work rather than just hearing “they’re great!” or “they suck!”
26.
by taylorallred 1y ago
This is true. After making my earlier comment, I went home and tested MSVC and Clang and got similar numbers. I had 1.5s in my head from using it earlier but maybe some changes made it slower. Either way, it's a lot of code and stays o
27.
by taylorallred 1y ago
I'm curious about that point you made about dependencies. This Rust project ( https://github.com/microsoft/edit ) is made with essentially no dependencies, is 17,426 lines of code, and on an M4 Max it compiles in 1.
28.
by taylorallred 1y ago
I'd be very interested to see a list of features/patterns and the cost that they incur on the compiler. Ideally, people should be able to use the whole language without having to wait so long for the result.
29.
by taylorallred 1y ago
Of course not. But it wouldn't surprise me if nobody thought to use a unity build. (Maybe they did. Idk. I'm curious).
30.
by taylorallred 1y ago
These languages do more at compile time, yes. However, I learned from Ryan's discord server that he did a unity build in a C++ codebase and got similar results (just a few seconds slower than the C code). Also, you could see in the art

More ›