saiojd

Ok, your comment is shocking to me: I've been having annoying muscle twitches lately (probably from drinking lots of coffee), and one thing I found online was that magnesium supplements could help. I eventually ended up trying it, but the twitches just keep getting worse and worse; I didn't realize until now the magnesium is probably what is worsening things. Could anyone ELI5 what' the relationship between calcium, magnesium and muscle twitches?

It really doesn't have to be. For instance, in Julia IDEs \omega would complete to ω, which takes 2 extra characters to enter (\ and tab). Its not hard to imagine this concept, but applied at the OS level...

Although I am not good at making bread by any means, I've tried salt/no-salt with pizza dough and it clearly made a difference.

I feel like, what is confusing you is that the parent is talking using broader/more general terms, rather than about specifics i.e. the state as an object which you can pass inside functions. His point, I believe, is that what causes problems/bugs is often when partially invalid state is shared, not so much specific implementation details like "are the modifications to the state visible because of mutation or because a copy of the state is passed around explicitly".

You've created value for shareholders, at the detriment of society. "Congrats".

Oh, I definitely understand the mindset behind the decision, I just feel it's worthwhile to relax that kind of razor-sharp focus when millions of people are using your tool. Since you seem knowledgable about git, would you mind telling me how complicated implemented directories would be? (out of sheer curiosity, it's not like I care all that much about directories in git lol)

I see! I understand the obsessiveness, I believe, but to me WFH (which I dislike) seems more of a way of "checking out/focusing on the rest of my life" than to truly indulge in work. I find it interesting that you have a similar understanding of things but a very different point of view.

I'm going to be charitable in interpreting your answer, but, if I'm being honest, I find your tone very dismissive... (I would even say, reminiscent of StackOverflow, and not in a good way.)

We could easily get into arguments over the specific uses of committing empty directories against the difference it ends up making in terms of stability and extensibility. Instead, consider that: 1) this behavior is very surprising, and 2) it offers no advantages to users, only disadvantages to some. Hence, it is unergonomic. My complaint was precisely that for extremely popular tools (such as git), it is worthwhile in general to sacrifice ease of implementation for ease of use, because the developper effort is amortized over the number of users.

Your description summarizes what I've been trying to express so concisely – it's almost shocking. I'm left wondering on what side of the split you stand on.

Great work. I wish usability/ergonomy was taken more seriously for popular tools that everyone uses (like git). Another stupid pain point with git is the inability to commit empty directories. I mean, come on.

How can you be so convinced that plants feel nothing given that we have absolutely 0 understanding of what consciousness is?

Functions are polymorphic in many languages that let you annotate the their types. The concern is not really for dispatch here, it's for readability/correctness.

Thank you, this is exactly it. The problem with inheritance is specifically overloading, and not anything else. Composition as it is being used currently has its own drawbacks (need to manually delegate every method, no clear model for instance construction, the need to duplicate fields across classes, etc.). I wish overloading was just removed from inheritance or that composition had better language support.

For the sake of argument, there's really nothing wrong with combining map/reduce with side-effects, especially for things like counters were the alternative of threading the variables everywhere can end up being much more complex very quickly.

Useful trick, I'll try that, thanks.

I mean, I still need to recompile the module no? Or do you split your project into several small modules to avoid this? (I've avoided this so far as I found the module system a bit tedious tbh, as it requires to explicitly list everything you need to export, as well as manually import stuff from the parent module).

Do you know what the differences end up being when it comes to compilation? (not a rhetorical question - I'd like to know)

I mean, I could, it's just that its pretty hard to know in advance which structs I will have to modify... Most of the time I only need to do minor edits like add 1 field. By that point I need to recompile anyway if I am to switch to NamedTuples...

You can't possibly be serious. As things stand, even just redefining a struct field requires restarting the interpreter, which forces you to wait ~10-30 seconds for everything to compile, over and over again. Maybe you only use Julia for small scripts, and can afford to never restart the interpreter?

I've read a bit on type invalidation and I know it's a hard problem (in fact it's hard for me to even wrap my head around it, lol). Still, it's unfortunate. One thing I would like to know is if the difficulties with invalidation are a symptom of the dynamic semantics, or of the compilation model.

Namedtuples are cool, but I'm not sure I understand the tradeoffs between using them and using structs. Can I just replace all structs in my project with named tuples, without having a performance hit?

OK, I was being hyperbolic. It's just that the interest is low compared to other features, as most people involved in the project are used to dynamic languages and don't feel the need. It's been in discussion for a long time, with no action so far. From what I've seen, the general attitude is a bit dismissive of the utility of static verification ("its different in our language because X" type attitude)

That's interesting, I didn't know Racket worked like that. What I meant wasn't so much that its a new idea, rather that it's a good one.

A few months ago. First time to plot is noticeably better than it was a few versions ago, but still extremely slow compared to Python. The article gives a benchmark of 9 seconds. I mean, come on.

The main problem I had was simply that what any time I needed to modify a struct field, or anytime my program crashed, or any time the buggy IDE extension crashed, I needed to recompile everything. I also haven't found anyone particularly interested in basic things like interfaces, despite the language supporting type hierarchies (why can't we enforce contracts for types? The whole language is built around overloading...)

Overall this is very frustrating as the language is excellent is many regards, in particular multiple dispatch and the compilation model are just great. The "just ahed of time" compilation is one of those obvious-in-hindsight ideas IMO, better than full interpretation or full compilation for nearly all use cases, if only it could be cached between interpreter sessions or if you didn't need to restart all the time...

I've tried Julia and really liked it, but the user experience was pretty bad. The language really needs faster interactivity or a strong type checker. I found myself waiting after than compiler a lot more than in some AOT compiled language like Rust... I fear the language suffers from being overused by people who are familiar with Matlab and Python and draws too much inspiration from them, much like how Rust draws too much inspiration from C++.

Keep telling yourself that if it helps. ;) While at some level ads probably do help consumers (indirectly), my impression so far is that at a fundamental level they are about companies competing for money, in a way which wastes everybody's time. Since your point of view is so vastly different, I'm curious in which ways you feel like they give consumers choice?

Nice work and great presentation.

Gradient decent doesn't per se, but retraining ("fine-tuning") on another dataset forgets most of the training done on the first dataset.

I agree somewhat, the errors it misses are precisely the ones which are confusing.

It's not introduced at all, its already there for sets

Of course it's perjorative. The issue isn't with staying at home, it's with staying at home and doing nothing. If you have all your needs provided for you should seek out to do something meaningful.