eudox

For those who haven't heard of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning

Mandarin as in Mandarinate, not as in the language.

No, it isn't. There's a difference between McCarthy's "Maxwell's equations of software" and the full-blown Common Lisp standard, which was designed by and aimed at industry.

>The problem was that the Chavista regime bungled the state-owned oil company so badly that it didn't have enough money even when crude prices were high, and really doesn't now that they're low.

Naturally, the problem is but a mere implementation detail.

>You see a lot of mixed-income neighborhoods in Houston - places where people are building $700,000 homes where 80% of the same street are 1000 square foot shacks with people living in them making $20k a year. Luckily for them, their lots are worth half a million dollars. I don't know if this is the result of the lack of zoning, but I don't see this happening in other cities in Texas, so I have to think it's somehow related.

This is a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" kind of thing. If neighborhoods are income-segregated, there is no end to opinion pieces about this awful late-capitalist crypto-apartheid. If neighborhoods are mixed-income, then the hand-wringing is about rich people living behind walls next to a shanty town.

Replacing malloc/calloc/free etc an application-specific xmalloc/xcalloc/xfree is seemingly a fairly common pattern. There's one example in libiberty[0] (-liberty, get it?) where, for instance, the return value of malloc is checked for NULL and the program terminates if so.

[0]: http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/gcc/libiberty_5.html

The included header file uses the macro system, among other things, to bring C99 up-to-date with more modern programming techniques, using what we've learnt in the past decades since C was conceived.

In fairness however the short POD type names are purely cosmetic.

Actually, cubicles are a good thing.

The frequency illusion is indeed real but there has been a definite uptick in posts about Gopher here.

Yes, that's the point. But it's very hard to point to the effective engineering limit.

For example: the ultimate limit to computing power is Bremermann's limit, but that's only reached in the surface of a black hole. The effective limit of computation – how much you can compute in Baryonic matter – is going to be far lower. How low is a hard question to answer.

Probably not.

The only context where Argentina can be in the same sentence as Australia is in a list of countries in the Southern Hemisphere, or countries whose names start with an 'A'.

A better way to read this map: countries in the deep red are places where people have tamed this inhuman, unforgiving Earth, and people can lead happy and self-defined lives.

Countries in the deep green are where people are at the mercy of nature and die of 20th century causes.

People in the former complain that it is too "antiseptic" or "artificial", occasionally gawk at the latter and chastise everyone for not living in misery, always from the comfort of a city where the vast infrastructure that supports their lives is perfectly out of sight and out of mind.

>Singapore: 16000%

So the takeaway from this is you should aim for high biocapacity deficit, right?

I mean, I live in a deep green country, and it's a filthy dump.

>they only shifted the problem once again

Shifting the problem is a sometimes a good thing.

In this case, because it means the energy can now come from effective sources (nuclear) instead of carrying petrochemicals in the vehicle.

>Agricultural output is still growing, but there are physical limits.

And people frequently confuse engineering limits with physical limits.

>What they saw was that, not only did the star's light output occasionally dip by 20 percent - the weird behaviour scientists first spotted last year - but over the course of the observations, its entire stellar flux actually dimmed.

It would be interesting if this turned out to be like the OnOff star from A Deepness in the Sky.

In that case, though, the immutability is a property of the operations rather than the data. And you can have mutating versions of most of those operations that alter the data they are working on, e.g. a mutating map.

Equality, like copying, is often more complicated than that. You often run into a problem where you need a domain-specific equality function for your objects.

Which is not to say that automatic derivation of generic functions is not useful, but it's not really a game changer.

Algebraic data types and pattern matching are equivalent to having a class hierarchy and implementing the same method for each class.

The idea that Haskell or OCaml or SML are specially suited for compiler writing is a nineties truism that is thrown around a lot, never backed by any evidence whatsoever.

>It lets you search by type signature. If you know the inputs and output then you know the type signature. So in short, yes.

In short, no.

>He was elected democratically, but then he behaved like a dictator.

He was elected democratically to behave like a dictator. Most dictatorships advertise quite clearly what they intend to do.

So there you go. That's how Communism is compatible with democracy. It burns the same fuel: the promise of mass political power.

>since 2004

That's after two Chavez elections. Then the people were voting for Communism well before the elections were rigged in an observable way

Firstly, that's not how replies work. Secondly, no, they were not rigged elections. A couple of links:

https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/297.pdf

http://eeas.europa.eu/eueom/missions/2006/venezuela/index_en...

Of course democracy is not incompatible with Communism. How could it be when the people are enthusiastic supporters of Communism?

Venezuela elected Chavez in at least three internationally verified and observed elections (1998, 2000, 2006).

That's not quite how I'd put it. The documentation is pretty scarce, but if it's anything like Rust, you have to be explicit about ownership and somewhat explicit about lifetimes.

That is, it's not just "rewrite your program until the prover succeeds".

>arbitrary lisp program

Well, Carp is a dialect of Lisp so it's free to impose whatever semantics it wants. It's not a dynamically-typed language (where it would indeed be impossible to statically manage memory).

Parsing is the smallest part of writing a compiler.

That comment puzzled me as well. I don't know what the author meant.