spooky_deep

You don’t want a language with non-determinism, arbitrary IO, impure functions etc. for build configuration ideally.

I guess the answer to your question is OCaml has unmanaged side effects.

They don’t know how good they really have it :)

Horrible. Would’ve been much nicer if they’d reached for Scheme.

CMake was never declarative AFAIK?

CMake today is effectively an eso-lang / Turing tarpit with some “modern” declarative conventions that people try to push.

You need unbounded recursion no?

None of those are close to peak HBO content sorry.

They already are?

All popular models have a team working on fine tuning it for sensitive topics. Whatever the companies legal/marketing/governance team agree to is what gets tuned. Then millions of people use the output uncritically.

Do the problems get harder each day?

Paris is not bike friendly (much better than a decade ago of course)

Why the Copenhagenize Index when Copenhagen is not particularly bike friendly by Dutch standards?

100%. Only a North American could consider Montreal bike friendly.

What’s a good way to include Unison code in a more traditional Git monorepo?

I can say why I bounced off of Nix.

Lots of package combinations didn’t work and I was not skilled enough to figure out why.

The error messages are terrible.

They don’t provide enough versions of packages. I want Python 3.10.4 exactly. But Nix packages by default only provide 3.10.something

I would love to use Nix everywhere, but it’s just too cumbersome for me.

I’d bet that most PC Windows gamers care a lot more about Steam than they do about Windows. If Microsoft did anything drastic - like blocking Steam like Apple do on iOS - it would hurt Windows severely.

You mean PS3 Linux?

Google blessed Python at a time when Java didn’t even have lambdas.

A good compiler will make the lists disappear in many cases. No runtime overhead. I actually love single linked lists as a way to break down sequences of problem steps.

Property based testing is fantastic.

Why is it not more popular?

My theory is that only code written in functional languages has complex properties you can actually test.

In imperative programs, you might have a few utils that are appropriate for property testing - things like to_title_case(str) - but the bulk of program logic can only be tested imperatively with extensive mocking.

The irony here is UV is written in Rust.

Python is slow due to design decisions in the language. For example operator dispatch is slow without some kind of static analysis. But this is hindered by how dynamic the language is.

Roc Lang could be a nice fit. They are very precise about numbers.

When DuckDB queries across multiple sources (say, Postgres and a CSV) does it first load all data into DuckDB or is it smart enough to only pull minimal data needed for the query on the fly?

Type checks are proofs across all inputs. Tests are proofs across a given set of inputs. They are complimentary. If you want really robust code, use both.

Scala still offers lots over modern Java.

The issue for me is that Scala design lacks focus. They say yes to too many features.

Yes it was too rigid. Too much boiler plate. The design space of functional UI is still being explored.

At least with a smartphone it’s pretty clear when someone is filming you. Google Glass was too much of an enabler for creeps.

A few commits recently.

There are lots of competing MLs you can use instead:

- F# (Fable)

- ReasonML

- OCaml (Bucklescript)

- Haskell

- PureScript

IMO the problem with Elm was actually The Elm Architecture.

Is there a video or anything of this version of Wave?

Python with type hints still lacks the performance benefits of static typing in a compiled language setting?

The ISPs already do this. Most mobile networks are even opt-out, not in, to this feature. The new law is unnecessary overreach. They either don’t know what they are doing technically (alarming) or are just authoritarian (very alarming)