lvass

There's no type checking on function dispatch unless guards are explicitly added. The arity dispatch for functions captured into first class is done at compile time and require explicitness. That said, I think you can create your own dispatch macro that's probably as efficient as possible for doing what you proposed.

>Why do you make me lose the ability to use Elixir's admittedly powerful Pattern matching on arity feature?

If every first class fuction had to check for arity at runtime, wouldn't there be a performance cost? Also would reduce drastically the amount of errors caught at compile time. Maybe a different mechanism for dispatching like that (a macro?) could be done, how useful would that be?

I've barely used the dot syntax since Kernel.then was added. It's good that it exists even if you never use it.

No license except CC0/unlicense permits laundering authorship like Copilot does.

>Copy to clipboard, paste into your interactive Python window

python-shell-send-statement, it's built into Emacs's python mode.

On the other hand, it may filter less dedicated people from showing up at your door.

If you chose to use cooperative concurrency, it's because you can make it cooperate. Use preemption otherwise.

Function calls?

>just login in GitHubs vscode

Imagine if you had to do that to every program you want to configure. Sure, rsync/git cloning your config may be less straightforward than logging in somewhere, but it's far more convenient when you have to configure dozens of programs anyway.

>Whatever the case may be, of the group of students that were subjected to these abusive experiments only one became a terrorist

Source? What is the incidence of terrorism in that group and in the general population?

What scam are you referring to?

Full or no filesystem access is very, very far from proper sandboxing.

Do us a pastebin, please.

Just use C-x 8 in Emacs and you'll get any symbol by name, with autocomplete.

Last time I checked, even transfering photos from an iphone to another device was complicated.

Webapps don't really have semantics. Accessibility is the toolkit's job, leaving that to the web platform invariably generates half baked results in an app.

>What alternatives do you have?

Gemini for pages and if you really need an app, wasm and webgl/webgpu. HTML/CSS/JS can definitely be replaced by better, already existing things, but browsers will still need to understand those for many years going forward, even if everyone suddenly stopped developing with them.

Of course it is, Dolphin is very real and great. The stuff your arrogant self does however, probably doesn't matter anyway.

Don't we have enough evidence from China it was the other way around? They seemingly imposed the most restrictive lockdowns in the world, and it took them the longest to get rid of the largest scale crisis.

Someone would say "business as usual", somewhere.

Mohammad doesn't post at r/AcademicQuran.

Not owning the software you use is terrible at any level, but this is much worse than usual. Looks like each day that passes stallman's ideas become more relevant, yet software people seem to be forgetting them. Please do not be one of those people, facilitating proprietary software is becoming increasingly evil.

But programming in that OOP definition today effectively means you're using a functional language, erlang, pretending processes are objects, or using a dead language.

You don't have to use an unsupported, no longer updated, OS on any Apple hardware made in the last 20 years. Just upgrade to GNU/Linux.

I haven't even noticed ads using uBO.

Can someone explain why/whether a language like Rust requires mutability? Wouldn't it be better if we could just have the compiler guarantee that functions marked as such are doing TCO, so algorithms would look better and had the full benefit of persistent data structures?

Incompetence is often more harmful than even malice. Imagine how terrifying it would be if, their incompetence not only led them to create a very flawed AI for the risk profile, but also led them to believe that AI is always right.

What did you expect, someone that believes AI is bad would be publishing papers to advance it? He's not a hypocrite therefore he doesn't understand what he's talking about, is what you are implying. Where is the evidence that his knowledge is "antiquated"? What has changed since then and when did he show not knowing that?