Viewing profile — Peaker

And this is why they need human brains in The Matrix

A type-class or just a callback type, vs pattern-matching, yeah.

There's a huge advantage to not everything being async/await. Knowing exactly when you yield control can give you atomicity and more determinism for free.

Then what you have is not "anything". You have an expression problem: Either each element has some "handler" that does the right thing for that data type. Or you have a set of case…

Everything is of course possible, but at what cost? In my experience, with large projects, you get to pick 2: Dynamic typing Development velocity Reliability I've seen multiple lar…

When do you have lists of lists of elements of any type? What can you even do given such a value?

That's great for functions you just wrote. It's not as great for functions you change in a large code base.

Rust is a great systems language. When I write applications, I don't need a systems language, and Haskell is easier to use. Also, Rust is a great imperative language, it's not as g…

An average US citizen contributes far more to pollution than the average African or Asian.

There are various library-level implementations. Here's the first one that turned up on Google: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/target/row-types/master/ex...

Haskell has reasonable implementations of row types as well.

Life on Earth started within a few hundred million years, not 2 billion years.

I suspect the problem is mentoring. It took me months to get basic Haskell. The people I mentored, though, could clarify any misunderstanding and get explanations from multiple vie…

Haskell record syntax with lenses is workable: import Control.Lens data MyRecord = MyRecord { _a :: Int, _b :: MyRecord } makeLenses ''MyRecord Then you can use it nested like: ove…

I've mentored programmers in Haskell and they were also productive within a few weeks. I'm pretty sure I could get a student to write useful Haskell code in that time span with jus…

That's the Maybe type . The Maybe monad is this: instance Monad Maybe where return = Just Nothing >>= _ = Nothing Just x >>= f = f x (And is not really related to the discussion)

Destroying a language's safety for a single use case is a terrible trade-off. There are various possible solutions for circular structures that do not require destroying all static…

Isn't the bottleneck in any sequential access case the memory bandwidth? IOW: Are the scalar instructions slower than memory bandwidth?

Of course that's true. But Lisp is shitty at controlling memory use, indirections, and manual MM.

They're not really "inheritance". They can do what inheritance can do, and much much more.

I agree about constexpr, templates and exceptions. But C function pointers are not really emulating virtual functions. They're better and more powerful than virtual functions.

I can vet the guys who published this. This is legit, and they haven't published anything that can be used maliciously.

You don't have to write it - you just have to avoid -Wall :-)

Why do they reduce the amount of code? They add the ability for constructors to carry constraints, which aids expressivity in some cases. But the majority of GADT uses purely add s…

But you can do this without S-expressions. DLang, for example, has free-form macros that they weirdly call "mixin" (as in, mixing in some text or declarations into the AST, syntax-…