> That should make arr[1] possible but arr[1] = 9 impossible.
I believe you want `=`, `push`, etc. to return a new object rather than just disallow it. Then you can make it efficient by using functional data structures.
7,576 karma · joined January 28, 2012
I believe you want `=`, `push`, etc. to return a new object rather than just disallow it. Then you can make it efficient by using functional data structures.
I feel the story being told would be more equivalent to what Microsoft is doing rather than Google.
That said, advertising is like a virus, and every company and product is eventually infected by it. It's too tempting to not monetize your customer's eyeballs once you have enough of them.
The `assoc` on the second binding is returning a new object; you're just shadowing the previous binding name.
This is different than mutation, because if you were to introduce an intermediate binding here, or break this into two `let`s, you could be holding references to both objects {:a 1} and {:a 1 :b 2} at any time in a consistent way - including in a future/promise dereferenced later.
2. Good dental health has always been part of the screening to join a professional army
It seems the debate seems to center around whether language models are meta-models (in the category sense) or mere encodings (information theory)?
Magnesium plays a part on vasodilation regulation as well, and many people are silently deficient on it. It’s hard to detect deficiency w/ blood samples, because the body works hard to keep blood concentration stable. You will know you do if you get muscle cramps or twitches.
- Cut stimulant use (coffee, energy drinks) and alcohol
- Drink plenty of water
- Check blood pressure
- Talk to a dentist and check if you grind teeth or suffer from jaw stiffness
- Supplement Magnesium (chelated/glycinate, 300mg/day)
I’m ignoring issues of the ear canal (wax, secretions) since you mentioned it.
Studies point to tinnitus being either caused by changes in blood supply on the inner ear, of neurological origin or trauma. These are all measures I took and greatly improved my case (and when I neglect one of those, it comes back).
There are two kinds of adjustments: an adjustment transaction (pontual), or re-interpreting what happened (systemic). The event sourcing pattern is useful on both situations.
Sometimes you need to replay events to have a correct report because your interpretation at the time was incorrect or it needs to change for whatever reason (external).
Auditing isn't about not changing anything, but being able to trace back and explain how you arrived at the result. You can have as many "versions" as you want of the final state, though.
So what (public) companies do is over hire during growth, then lay off later to transfer the value created by these workers to shareholders. Rinse, repeat.
There are situations where they may decrease the bit depth of the final image if there’s not enough dynamic range, there are situations where even though the file is “uncompressed” the camera already does noise reduction and essentially compresses detail in the image, and so on…
Apparently what the article talks against is using it like software factory - give it a prompt of what you want and when it gets it wrong, iterate on the prompt.
I understand why this can be a waste of time: if programming is a specification problem [1], just shifting from programming language to natural language doesn’t solve it.
Also, code review should be ego free: 1) criticize the code, not the author 2) don’t be too attached to code written, the objective is the product and not number of LoC contributed 3) it’s okay to start from scratch after learning about a better approach, or even make more than one and compare approaches.
Where most teams fail is treating it as a gatekeeping process rather than context sharing, make PRs too small to be meaningful or only waste time arguing about code style and other minutiae.