Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
1–10 of 234 posts
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#2Clicking through the page, I'm still not quite sure what I'm seeing.
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#3Not very informative homepage... A lang+db? Fast on one machine? Or does it distribute?
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#4That's ... er ... cryptic.
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#5The code looks heavily obfuscated. It's more like "source available" than open source. E.g.
g(_M,W-=1i?_M(i,M_(i+1))+(2*n0Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#6Clicking through the page, I'm still not quite sure what I'm seeing.
It's rather obscure to say the least, but it's apparently an open source release of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_(programming_language)
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#7Clicking through the page, I'm still not quite sure what I'm seeing.
Click on k, then k.zip.
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#8For people not accustomed to the style of Whitney, you can read various HN threads from the past to learn more about why he writes programs the way he does.
It’s deliberate and powerful.
Here is a recent one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39026551
There was an epic post some years ago but couldn’t find it now from my phone.
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#9The code looks heavily obfuscated. It's more like "source available" than open source. E.g. g(_M,W-=1 i?_M(i,M_(i+1))+(2*n0 Edit: Looking at it a bit more, I can't tell if the code is obfuscated or if the author really wrote it like this...
Does writing in this way has any advantage in practical terms (not aesthetically reasons)?
Re: Arthur Whitney releases an open-source subset of K with MIT license
#10The code looks heavily obfuscated. It's more like "source available" than open source. E.g. g(_M,W-=1 i?_M(i,M_(i+1))+(2*n0 Edit: Looking at it a bit more, I can't tell if the code is obfuscated or if the author really wrote it like this...
That's just how Arthur Whitney writes code.