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

GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#91

Post by p0llard »

pc86 wrote: post #64
p0llard wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably depends on the definition of leading; I'd guess that Haskell is probably used more than any other (Turing-complete, to exclude Gallina, etc.) functional language within programming language research, but you're right that in terms of usage in industry etc. Scala is probably on top.

Programming language research is a pretty small and arbitrary space with regard to overall usage, isn't it?

Yes it is, but if "leading functional language" means "on the cutting edge of research into functional languages" then that might well be used to describe Haskell.

If leading refers to overall usage in industry, then sure, it's not really relevant.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#92

Post by p0llard »

fnord123 wrote: post #42
p0llard wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably depends on the definition of leading; I'd guess that Haskell is probably used more than any other (Turing-complete, to exclude Gallina, etc.) functional language within programming language research, but you're right that in terms of usage in industry etc. Scala is probably on top.

> I'd guess Why would you guess? > functional language within programming language research Why is this [more] important? Why not e.g. Erlang which almost certainly pumps more bits per day than Haskell.

> Why would you guess?

Because I'm basing it on my experience doing research in PLT, but this is of course purely anecdotal and my areas of research interest lie away from the likes of Haskell, so I would not wish to make a false claim by stating it as fact.

> Why is this [more] important?

I never said that it was, only that depending on what is meant by "leading", industry usage might not be relevant. Since Scala is by far the more used language I think it's fair to assume that (without meaning to put words into mouths) the original commenter might have been talking about PLT research as opposed to usage in industry.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#93

Post by monocasa »

celticninja wrote: post #82
mumblemumble wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My reading was that the complaint was that it implied false inclusiveness, which can come across as solipsistic to those who weren't included. A little bit like how the final stage of Major League Baseball's playoffs are called the World Series, even though 29 of the teams are based in the USA and the 30th plays in a stadium ~25km outside the USA. I imagine that is at least a little bit irritating to professional bas…

Except the World Series is named after the original sponsors of the competition and is not meant to infer worldwide participation. I'm not from the US and I am not from somewhere that plays competitive baseball and I know that,therefore I assume in the competitive baseball world this is known widely enough.

Nah, it being named after the New York World newspaper is just the sports blogger equivalent of an old wive's tale. It really was built off of the US exceptionalism of the gilded age with the idea that nobody could beat the US at it's own game anyway so why bother inviting them.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=467571...

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#94

Post by hombre_fatal »

andlAP wrote: post #57
corford wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems fair enough to me... they're footing the massive bill of organising, transcoding, archiving and documenting all this. It's OSS, so if you want to do something similar but without GH branding nothing stops you (assuming you have enough cash on hand to pull it all off).

> they're footing the massive bill of organising, transcoding, archiving and documenting all this. Which is done out of self interest and completely pales in comparison to the time that OSS contributors have donated. > It's OSS, so if you want to do something similar ... Yeah, yeah, just because you can does not make it right. See Google groups.

Unfortunately for utopianists, self-interest is how things get done that would otherwise never get done. It powers most open source work.

If a company or individual does something just to slap their name on it, so be it.

The combined open source effort vs Github's effort shouldn't be compared as it doesn't make sense. Just like it doesn't make sense to compare the work of a translator vs. the work of writing the original material—the translator is still doing valuable work regardless. The translator isn't "taking credit" for the original work.

You should compare what Github is doing with other endeavors doing the same thing.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#95

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

> In addition to this technical documentation, we have also included a selection of artistic, cultural, and historical works, to help describe the overall cultural context in which this archive was created.

Since a lot of the culture described later is specifically related to Western culture, I find it interesting that the Bible is not included.

For good or ill, the Bible had a profound cultural effect on Western civilization, and specifically the King James Version on the Anglosphere.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#96

Post by talideon »

dgellow wrote: post #44
talideon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given there are other README files covering a number of other major languages, I think you might be a little harsh. That file is really only meant to cover the Anglophone world and even then is only an initial compilation.

The tech tree isn't translated as far as I can tell. Though my point was that the projects talks in a universal way but the listed sources are really from one cultural group. The translated files are translations of the file "Guide To the GitHub Code Vault" (GUIDE.md), I don't think that's really relevant here.

The solution there is for somebody to contribute a translation, even if they can't contribute a list of sources. TheTechTree.md is comparatively new compared to the other files, as can be seen from the history: https://github.com/github/archive-program/commits/master/The...

Context like this matters.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#97

Post by amkolap »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #94
andlAP wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they're footing the massive bill of organising, transcoding, archiving and documenting all this. Which is done out of self interest and completely pales in comparison to the time that OSS contributors have donated. > It's OSS, so if you want to do something similar ... Yeah, yeah, just because you can does not make it right. See Google groups.

Unfortunately for utopianists, self-interest is how things get done that would otherwise never get done. It powers most open source work. If a company or individual does something just to slap their name on it, so be it. The combined open source effort vs Github's effort shouldn't be compared as it doesn't make sense. Just like it doesn't make sense to compare the work of a translator vs. the work of writing the orig…

This is a rambling discussion style that cannot be responded to. The GitHub shills win. May you enjoy your undeserved SV webshit salaries.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#98

Post by lincpa »

p0llard wrote: post #38
threeseed wrote: post #8

Some curious selections there: - 4 books on SQL but none on key/value, graph, document, time series, bigtable etc databases. - 3 books on C, 2 on JS but none on Haskell (leading FP language) or Scala (first to bridge FP/OOP). - None on search engines / algorithms even though it's the most widely used aspect of computing. - None on anything mobile even though it's the dominant computing platform.

In general they seem to do a good job of missing out books which cover the mathematical basis of theoretical computer science; if the aim is to provide a starting point for humanity to recover technical knowledge following some disaster, I'd argue that a survey of the past 100 years' research into theoretical computer science is orders of magnitude more useful (who wants to repeat (i.e. waste) another 100 years on th…

the Grand Unified Programming Theory: The Pure Function Pipeline Data Flow

It has been included in GitHub Arctic Code Vault. :-)

https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#99

Post by justinclift »

Ugh, there's a basic PostgreSQL book listed on there, which (from the Amazon reviews) seems to be the worst possible pick. eg it's rated as 1 star. :(

https://www.amazon.com/PostgreSQL-Development-Essentials-Man...

That's really unfortunate, as there are a tonne of PostgreSQL books around, many of which are very good. eg:

https://www.amazon.com/Practical-SQL-Beginners-Guide-Storyte...

https://www.amazon.com/PostgreSQL-Running-Practical-Advanced...

Conversely, the MySQL book right above it in the list seems to be one of the highest rated ones on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Learning-MySQL-MariaDB-Heading-Direct...

As GitHub uses MySQL internally, this seems like favoritism.

Re: GitHub Arctic Code Vault: Tech Tree

#100

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

bovermyer wrote: post #3

The books under Fiction, Culture, and History - meant to demonstrate our "current culture" - include a number of pretty bleak titles.

I'm now reading _East of Eden_ for the first time.

If it's about "who we were and how we got here" I'm surprised that that there's no Steinbeck.

Post reply on HN