doboyy

I liked your first post, but this one is in line with the article.

I feel this is a more accurate assessment. The relationship between abuse/quality of parenting and anxiety/disfunction can't be thought of as linear.

When parenting starts qualifying as abuse, there is a pretty steep increase. Otherwise, genetic temperament and environmental interactions have more influence.

Very cool. I'm not a super big horror fan, but when this whole pandemic thing started, I consciously went on a ~2 month horror binge for fun, watching a bunch or horror films (of varying quality) and games. Now I wonder if there was something subconscious about that.

Might've damaged my psych though....

I thought most of this was just normal life tbh

I thought they were better on the road that season? It's not clear sign stealing helps much oddly enough.

Unless you are doing web stuff, you'll face significant resistance from your platform with no clear gain imo

If you're doing dynamic dispatch then there is still code that's living for each specialization. Sort of solves linking because symbols don't have to be generated and compile times because you hand write the code.

To be fair, I'm only considering basic data structures and algorithms where you can get away with something like foo(void *ptr, size_t size). Maybe generics is too broad a term for that.

I really don't like the monomorphization approach to generics (I think that's the concept?), where the function/struct essentially gets duplicated for each type. It seems to mess with linkage, increase binary sizes, and increase compile times.

Other than that, Rust does seem to be an improvement and less... stressful to program in.

Typesafe generics via a better void* would make me super happy. There are definitely other quality of life improvements that could be added or reworked that wouldn't affect the simplicity too much.

This is a very beautiful piece. Thanks for posting it.

8 days per week. 5 days of work. The calendar has been conspiring against us.

If status is not tied to a sense of self then I don't know what is.

You mentioned in another comment that the skills you've learned are not you (roles?). They are just things you have. You've just said that identifying these roles as an abstraction is an essential part of understanding the self.

All of these things increase order in a society, and therefore, survival value. This is what I was responding to.

I didn't say that more of a sense of self, whatever that means, makes more community based cultures.

I'm treading into Marxist territory, but I think industrialization, technology, and their societal consequences are a large part.

If I dropped the first part, there would be no downvotes.

Basically allowing societies to function (people assuming roles, shame, and whatever). It should be of no surprise that a damaged sense of self often correlates with poor integration into a society.

God forbid poor people catch on to this noble lie

Language designers and enthusiats will forever be disappointed at how many social and human factors are at play, which coincidentally, is a large part of the motivation for programming languages

No doubt, but they are all non standard which is irritating for people who expect that out of the box.

This is bait but whatever. Keeping some properties of C is very hard if you go this route. It also seems you'll end up playing lanaguage design whack-a-mole problems which manifests its self in C++ and co.

Don't do allocations in the call until the API becomes annoying and unpleasant to use. Also weighted upon the domain and performance implications of the particular API

By nature of being a buffer means it can probably be used in subsequent calls. You dont need to read everything all in one go

Unfortunately, it's often algorithmically less efficient and more error prone, so everybody ends up replicating what git is doing with 'strbuf' but in slightly incompatible ways. The effect makes dealing with strings in C unnecessarily unpleasant.

The thing you are pointing to could have its length prefixed. I've always assumed that this isn't the case because nobody could commit to the size of the length prefix. Is it string8, string16, string32, or string64? Using a sentinel value to denote length is less opinionated and more portable.

I do this, but I like to just return the actual struct and also avoid typedefing pointer semantics. Can double as a dynamic array too. It's true. We all have string libraries...

I'd say one property of good ideas is that they are able to survive much longer than bad, so, yes, they have a higher probability of reaching a general consensus. Bad ideas can also reach consensus. Consensus is not always an indicator of quality, and I don't believe good ideas are destined to reach consensus.

I can't really argue with the historical impact of OO, because it's obviously had a ton.

OO is always so loosely defined that a no-true-scotsman argument is almost inevitable, but I'd certainly say a subclassing model is one of the defining features of the OO languages we talk about.

The good parts listed as OOP don't seem exclusive to it though. They fall more under just plain, old, good program design regardless of the paradigm. But subclassing, while occasionally useful, does.

I'm constantly torn between these two perspectives. Practically speaking, 6mb is fine. Ideologically, not as much.

In general, complexity is indicative of a poorer design, and the fact that an entire operating system + utilities can be delivered in a comparable size to a gui app is hard to look away from.

The author says, "Once you accept bloat, it’s very hard to claw it back". The fear is that bloat increases at higher rate in proportion to its capability and computing power.

I'm cognizant that I'm very much in the minimalist camp with regard to computers, so I do make sure to peek outside and remind myself that stressing about an executable size is a bit unwarranted. But that being said, we must remain vigilant!

Yeah, I think an api of that sort would quickly turn into a headache if it subtlety did code dispatch through a common interface on objects that are hardly related in reality. From a programming perspective, that kind of opaqueness is more of a mental burden than relief.

I can see a database interface being useful if you constrained the scope of what an entry is and don't allow those operations to actually modify the objects.

The extent of the scope could start at what are traditionally considered OS resources, not random blocks of texts, newsgroups, or pixels, but things that would generally be more useful to query.

Not being allowed to actually modify an entry through 'delete' presents a problem. The database and the code that is allowed to modify its state would have to be synchronized/notified on an update.

In this way, the database is a front-end to the OS.

Yeah, I've thought that the reputation on psychedelics regarding enlightenment and such things is a bit overblown by culture and different promoters. I'm skeptical that anything of that nature would reveal itself if you didn't have prior expectations of it.

That's not to say the experience isn't worth having though. At the very least, it shows how fickle our brains and our perception of the world around us is. Also, I've never laughed so hard in my life, so that's good.

The definition of a highly skilled worker kind of hinges on the fact that there are few. If everyone was skilled then we'd raise the bar.

Your argument makes sense, but I'm suspicious that there is that wide of a gap between the 2 classes of people described.

I agree wholeheartedly, and hoped to get across everything you said. I took care to mention in the bottom of both of my posts that your beliefs can be wrong/misguided, and CBT could help with something related to self-esteem. I don't know if could stretch that into political beliefs. I also don't think principles and self is a static thing. I should've been more explicit about that.

I'm not really proposing a solution, just an observation that these things, who you aspire to be/principles vs. how you live your life, seem to be coupled with psychological problems.

I think we are pretty much on the same page honestly.

Because software isn't as cooperative and scalable as Alan Kay says. We are getting better at this, but probably at a painstakingly slower rate than he would like.