Viewing profile — kenbot

It's time for this terrible "Objects in the large, functions in the small" idea to be put to bed. FP can do side-effects, asynchrony etc just fine, it's just about controlling them…

Hopefully! We'll find out soon. Fingers crossed.

I went into more verbal detail in the actual presentation; the argument is something like: 1) Programming is maths 2) Programming is about abstraction and finding patterns 3) CT de…

Hi everyone, author here. One thing to remember is that each slide had a lot of verbal explanation around it, so I'm not surprised that it's confusing by itself! We took a video, s…

Hi Jeremy, author here. Firstly, thanks for all your great stuff on Math/Programming, it's been a great source of inspiration! I would have liked to include Universal Properties, b…

The vast differences between software and buildings correspond to the vast differences in designing them. In context here, "minute detail" is obviously a relative term comparing th…

They have almost nothing in common, and it's accidental when they do. For instance: - Designing software in minute detail beforehand is generally neither necessary nor possible. - …

There's certainly great value in reading application source code, but it has nothing to do with physical Architecture. I do wish people would let go of this tired and completely wr…

"Weak" and "strong" are not well-defined terms, and you'll find different defs around the place. I deliberately used "weak" in the title as a loose umbrella term for the sundry mal…

Hi Manicdee! The point is that with any unityped representation you can come up with, the name tells you nothing certain; any conclusions you think you can draw from it are pixie-d…

Lisp for the 21st century and it's.... _more_ object oriented?

A superset of ... what the? Why do you keep trotting out this garbage thread after thread? Every language takes influences from others, if that's what you meant. Scala is influence…

There's a lot of "seems" going around from people who haven't used the language, or dynamic-typing folk who obviously aren't going to pick a language that bets the farm on static t…

You can write any program with a Turing machine. That's a silly definition of a type system. I've never heard this usage anywhere else.

> Can you not write any program using either? While you can make do with either, they have complementary strengths and weaknesses, which are useful in different situations. See "Ex…

How is Scala faltering?

You ran with this "three complete type systems" line in the last thread, and it's still totally wrong. ADTs/pattern matching are not "a complete type system". Structural types are …

Erk, no it isn't. If your semantics require an optional value, then encode it that way explicitly. Don't inflict special cases and bugs on everyone else.