5 Weeks of Go

uriel · 1 day

I should chuck in Xavier Leroy as well.

uriel · 1 day

I think a better approach is something like mix-fix syntax which lets you make your own syntactic sugar. Otherwise there'll always be another abstraction that could use some (e.g Haskell could really use some nice sugar for applicative functors)

kracov · 1 day

Would like to see B5 here too.

aflarge · 1 day

Weyoun.

Damar: "Are you at all different? you believe the founders are Gods."

Weyoun: "Oh, but that's entirely different - the founders are Gods."

I liked Dukat as well, but I prefer villains who are sly and friendly, not antagonistic.

aflarge · 1 day

Even Ross let S31 get away with their shenanigans with the romulans.

aflarge · 1 day

And First Minister of Bajor.

aflarge · 1 day

Mostly due to the fact that the federation is trying to maintain peace.

aflarge · 1 day

Combs played a semi-sympathetic character once in B5. It was quite hard for me not to think of him as an evil, or at least antagonistic (Shran) guy.

uriel · 1 day

Either does automatically bubble up the stack.

uriel · 1 day

So? Haskell was the first language with monad infrastructure, so it makes sense that most of the languages with monad infrastructure descend, at least in part, from Haskell.

uriel · 1 day

So? You just asked "Who is better than them to create a new language". And I answered.

If you want more alive people, how about Don Syme? Or Bob Harper? Or Martin Odersky? All of whom have a great deal more experience in programming languages work than those two you mentioned.

uriel · 1 day

Simon Peyton Jones? Robin Milner? Dennis Ritchie? Dijkstra? Wirth?

uriel · 1 day

You can easily use monads for side-effects with strict evaluation. Hell, Haskell has strict Cont monads and IO is also strict. Lazy evaluation and separation of execution and composition are different things.

There are plenty of Haskell inspired languages, such as Idris, Agda, Clean and Disciple.

iheartralph · 1 day

I'm reminded of an amusing scene from the Castle.

uriel · 1 day

Lazy evaluation is hardly necessary for monads modelling exceptions. Disciple is an example of a strict language where monads might be useful for this (we don't have exceptions, yet, but I assume we'll get them at some point).

Do notation is minimal syntactic sugar. Lots of haskell-inspired languages have it, and Scala has for comprehensions which work reasonably well for monad stuff.

(Scala is notoriously bad at optimising that stuff though, it doesn't like lots and lots of lambdas)

Rachel53461 · 1 day

Even Haskell has a type based definition of equality (Eq), and a more direct, definitional equality that can't be directly reified in Haskell code.

Even mathematics doesn't really understand equality - are the functions f(x) = x + 1 and g(x) = 1 + x equal? They are defined differently, yet they are equal extensionally. Whether or not extensionality should be part of equality is an open question in some circles, such as type theory.

uriel · 1 day

They are not the best of the best, by any measure.

uriel · 1 day

That's exactly what I mean by "monad infrastructure"

uriel · 1 day

Sum types are fine replacements for exceptions if you have all the monad infrastructure to back it up.

shenglong · 4 days

Remember that the BASIC Dijkstra was referring to here is nothing like MS QuickBasic or Visual Basic.

quietsquare · 4 days

It's a functional abstract spec. We prove functional correctness via refinement from this spec through Haskell and down to C.

We define bugs as errors in the program. The spec is at least consistent, but the exact notion of what even constitutes an error in the spec is difficult to nail down - the spec could be said to be incorrect because it doesn't specify what you expect, but what you expect is not necessarily correct either.

In any event, we use the guarantees from the spec to prove higher level security properties and other more immediately useful things. Even if there are "errors" in the spec, we have shown various higher level properties to be true about the kernel as it is implemented. If we have proven that a program matches an "erroneous" spec, then that erroneous spec still implies useful high level properties, so I don't see the problem.

PeterJerome · 4 days

That's not Jesus, Rom, Cor are Paul. Lev is some ancient jewish pharisee.

apotheosis970 · 4 days

This only affirms my belief that Takei really is the best looking member of the original cast.

quietsquare · 4 days

We just don't verify software that needs them. If we really needed to represent fractions, ratios of integers might be better.

nwhitehe · 4 days

Yup. screw that.

Two-Year Club	reddit mold
reddit gold Since August 2010	Verified Email

kamatsu

TROPHY CASE

kamatsu

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login