Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#51

Post by pjmlp »

f00_ wrote: post #41
pjmlp wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it is still a huge fight to get many devs to stop writing "C with C++ compiler" style anyway. The C++ community that cares about C++Now, CppCon, ACCU kind of material, does care about applying functional programming ideas to their daily coding.

is it bad that I prefer C to all the shit in C++? Now I don't even write C/C++ regularly, so my opinion is probably shit. But I really like the simplicity of C over all the features of C++.

What is so simple about more than 200 documented cases of UB and all the ways one can write unsafe code without even knowing about it?

C++ has stronger type safety, offers the libraries and language features to only go down to C like unsafe coding as last resort.

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#52

Post by crimsonalucard »

ece wrote: post #43
crimsonalucard wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about either. He is illustrating a problem that only occurs in functional programming: There is no concept of time in pure functions. In imperative programming when two actors approach the same spot, whether the application is parallel or not, one actor ALWAYS arrives first and the other will arrive subsequently. Therefore the Second actor can read the state of the first and act accordingly... This is not th…

But one actor can always read the state of the other actor, and modify their actions accordingly. The state of each actor is immutable, so each action taken based on the state is sure to be conflict free. As opposed to imperative programming, were each actors position might not get updated correctly or in time until too late. Deadlock and starvation don't happen when you have pure functions with no side effects and i…

If two actors moved to one spot at the same time which actor occupies that spot? How can an actor act accordingly if they moved at the same time?

In functional programming this can happen... in imperative programming it NEVER happens, because the actors move imperatively, aka step by step or one at a time. This is the problem he is talking about.

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#53

Post by leggomylibro »

JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

Along the lines of 'functional' programming, Jonathan Blow reposted an old email of yours which I thought was a nice format for getting across some points about reliability, consistency, and minimizing side effects:

http://number-none.com/blow/blog/programming/2014/09/26/carm...

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#54

Post by pera »

JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

Actually I really like the format of your presentations: just yesterday I watched your live coding session with vrscript (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydyztGZnbNs) and it was fantastic because, first, you were showing to your audience how to work with Racket (and some of the features in DrRacket), and second, you build from zero a demo in a very casual, easy going way. I honestly don't think that a standard slide-based presentation would have been better in any way...

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#55

Post by hdhzy »

JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

Ha, it's funny because for me the format is just perfect. There are numerous presentations on the internet focused on one specific topic but your free form style is just like I'd talk with a friend. The interdisciplinary nature and hands on examples are nice added bonus.

Please don't change this unique approach too much.

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#56

Post by bluejellybean »

dgritsko wrote: post #46
JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

While this may be true, please don't let it cause you to shy away from "full ramble mode" when the opportunity presents itself! I know I speak for many when I say that I have learned much from hearing these sorts of talks of yours over the years. Your willingness to share your wealth of experience is inspirational, regardless of the format.

Agreed, full ramble isn't something many people do well and it's fun too watch. Random but useful information will fall out of peoples brain and it's great!

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#57

Post by laythea »

f00_ wrote: post #41
pjmlp wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it is still a huge fight to get many devs to stop writing "C with C++ compiler" style anyway. The C++ community that cares about C++Now, CppCon, ACCU kind of material, does care about applying functional programming ideas to their daily coding.

is it bad that I prefer C to all the shit in C++? Now I don't even write C/C++ regularly, so my opinion is probably shit. But I really like the simplicity of C over all the features of C++.

C + classes does the job for me. I hate decoding code - that's the compilers job!

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#58

Post by laythea »

vog wrote: post #22
rootlocus wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was a keynote at a Quakecon, a conference for game players, not a technical presentation for software developers.

If the audience isn't even technical, isn't that even more a sign that more effort should be put into the presentation, especially for a keynote?

Yes but is the aim here not to bedazzle a star struck audience, rather than properly educate?

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#59

Post by savanaly »

JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

For me, at least, it's not a problem that it doesn't optimally communicate targeted information. I watch talks like this for entertainment and maybe to pick up some information by osmosis and the undirected style is good for that. This was a very good talk by the way, and reinforced my positive feelings towards functional programming, thanks for doing it.

Re: John Carmack on Functional Programming (2013) [video]

#60

Post by cm2187 »

JohnCarmack wrote: post #44

I am aware that my presentations aren't optimal for communicating targeted information, and it does weigh on me more and more as the years go by. So far, I haven't been able to justify to myself the time required to do a really professional job, so I just show up and talk for a few hours. I like to think there is some value in the spontaneity and unscripted nature, but I don't kid myself about it being the most effec…

Actually I prefer it a lot more to something scripted. It's normally hard to stay focused watching a guy talking for 1 hour on a youtube video. But with your presentations, I find myself looking for more at the end of the hour!
Post reply on HN