throwaway487550

6 ms·

1.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
How could I write this in Rust? fun map f [] = [] | map f (x::xs) = (f x) :: map f xs; And boy, no TCO. What a shame.
2.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
> Rust's traits are type-classes. And the functor typeclass in Rust looks like...?
3.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
Protobuf does implicitly, via code-generation, what could be done explicitly via defining algebraic types and pattern-marching on receive, a-la Erlang.
4.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
Still, we want more things to be boldly and shamelessly borrowed from ML and Haskell * Universal pattern-matching (everywhere) * Obvious syntactic sugar for defining and applying curried functions, partial application. * Type-c
5.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
No. They never produced anything even vaguely similar to J2EE, NodeJS or PHP. Old School things, like ML, MIT Scheme, T3 Scheme, Common Lisps and Haskell are unattainable to modern narcissistic idiots.
6.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2NI6t2r_Hs among other things. These were places where old-school (with classical understanding, if we follow Robert M. Pirsig) people tried to reduce grounded in reality concepts to optimal
7.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
How abstract concepts, introduced to establish artificial symmetry, could be used to describe aspects of reality which does not rely on any abstract notions whatsoever? Some processes are symmetrical to an outside observer, which does not i
8.
by throwaway487550 8y ago
Nowadays it cannot even be fully comprehend how places like MIT, Stanford AI lab, Xerox Park research and, of course, Bell labs were islands of intelligence and sanity compared to the modern day's ocean of screaming bullshit. '&#x