stefncb

Noroc!

If anything, it encourages a consistent style, since you don't have to use whatever style your dependency uses.

Also, if you work with people that name things like that, it's not really Nim's fault?

How would you write the let macro in Io syntax? I can't think of a good way.

Lisp is just less familiar, not necessarily wrong.

I like it personally. I find it weird that everybody seems to be getting caught up in the syntax and choice of naming conventions. The language itself is so interesting and people dismiss it because types are snake case.

That was extremely creepy until I remembered my username hah. Yeah that's my name.

N=1, but I read the ones I'm interested in top to bottom. I didn't read this one specifically, but I finished the ones about lenses and mechanical watches in one sitting.

If it's about something that's really interesting to me, his work is absolutely fantastic. If it's not, I'll still take a peek because I like playing with the animations.

1. You can use a type variable as a normal one, as long as you do it at compile time (a variable of type type is required to be comptime). You can use a TypeInfo at runtime if you like though.

2. The type system is deep enough to describe the type of values, but not the type of types. That's what higher kinded types are for, and for better or for worse that's not part of zig. Also, type variables can only exist at compile time, so there is no runtime value.

The type of Tea is 'type', not Tea. Unlike in C++, types are values in Zig, so it would be like calling Tea::drink() in C++.

You need an instance of Tea in order to call drink, and if it's const it won't compile because drink takes type *Tea, not *const Tea.

I don't know what GP did, but you don't need to write a complete parser. You can write a subset that can find the patterns you're interested in, which is much easier.

It looks quite nice, but website is unbearably slow. Does anyone else have ~0.5s lag on scroll?

I'm guessing it means people don't use Firefox, and people _really_ don't use Firefox android.

It's interesting that they can narrow me down to less than 0.1% with just my language list (en-US,en,fr,ro). My user agent is practically unique as well, since I'm running an unusual configuration. I've never thought of that as a disadvantage when it comes to tracking, hah.

Okay, that's somewhat confusing. So a declaration is when the identifier enters the scope, and a definition is for a variable specifically. So a declaration that's not a definition could be a forward declaration for a function, or a typedef.

No, I think they do mean declare. In C89 you can define a variable anywhere, like so:

    int x;
    f();
    x=3;

The improvement was allowing declarations anywhere.

They're both straight edged, as you can see in the wireframe view. It's just that with modern programmable GPUs you get to fake the roundness.

Essentially, in the lighting calculations, instead of using the real normal from the polygon face, you interpolate it with its neighbors, making it look smooth.

That's actually interesting, because if they'd said low ratio, it would probably have confused people. I think it's math having the strong order dependence; when people say a high a to b ratio, they likely mean a 'good' ratio contextually instead of mathematically high.

Every operating system has different fonts installed by default. Unless you use custom fonts, you can't be fully consistent, but the website has some groups of similar fonts that should get you the same style regardless of operating system.

It happens for me too, but only some of the time.

gdb <path> -p <pid>

To be fair, writing systems like those have much more uniform characters. They don't have these immense width differences like with i and m.

In this case, I honestly found the first result (stackoverflow) more useful. It was more comprehensive and direct. Phind told me to use tsan, use mutexes (not a debugging technique), and use a reverse debugger. The first stackoverflow link told me to use tsan among some other very useful things. And the second result was for a reverse debugger.

This is made even worse by the verbosity of Phind's answer; it could've simply given me a sentence about tsan, mutexes and reverse debugging, but it decided on a highschool essay which took as much to read as it took to skim five different methods in some stackoverflow answers.

I really don't think it's there.

This article is specifically talking about C, a language well-known to be _full_ of traps and bad design decisions. Most of the arguments have _nothing_ to do with generally "unsafe" languages, and instead criticise C for its sometimes terrible design.

Don't get me wrong, it's a good argument for not using C, but a bad one for not using "unsafe" languages. I just think it missed the point a bit.

Maybe, maybe not, but that's not the point. The original comment was blaming the plugin, which is not fair.

The chatgpt output comes in chunks from openai's servers themselves, it can't get computed instantly. There's no way for this plugin to do what you want it to do.

I personally read it as 0.1 and 0.2 are both equal to 0.3000-whatever. Maybe it's because English is my second language.

Looks like the title got messed up in the process; the + sign was definitely not supposed to be 'and'.

There are indeed lots of options. In this case, 1 is limiting and 2 is slow because of cases like integer operations. A very common way to make it "fast" is specialising at runtime based on usage, so it's kind of like option 1 but dynamic.

I'm quite sure the owner didn't get there by just adding a turbo :)

I'd love to see it though.

You can't just put LLVM on it and expect it to go fast, and I can't put a turbo on a 2CV and expect to use it on the motorway now.

It's _a lot_ of work to make a language like python "superfast", and most of it is really the dynamic typing part. LLVM doesn't do that for you.

TIL!