> Everyone had their own pretty-printing settings for viewing [DIANA] however they wanted.
1,544 karma · joined August 14, 2022
> Everyone had their own pretty-printing settings for viewing [DIANA] however they wanted.
It may be time to find another metaphor for this second group: "postcards" might work better than "bookmarks".
Sorry, but where did you got this definition from? I've always thought OOP as a way of organizing your data and your code, sometimes supported by language-specific constructs, but not necessarily.
Can you organize your data into lists, trees, and hashmaps even if your language does not have those as native types? So you can think in a OO way even if the language has no notion of objects, methods, etc.
m3=m5=m7=1
for ...
...
m3 = m3==2?0:m3+1
m5 = m5==4?0:m5+1
m7 = m7==6?0:m7+1Jokes apart, I think you're being too drastic. A good auto-complete is a nice feature, just like auto-indent, tab-complete, etc. Can it be abused? Sure. So what? Should we stop making it better for fear of abuse?
The reference to AI is far-fetched, too. We're talking about tools to help you with the syntax, not the semantic. I may forget if the function is called read, fread, or file_read, but I know what its effect is.
And finally, consider that if something is easier to parse for an editor, it most probably is for a human too. Not a rule, not working in 100% of cases, but usually exposing the user to the local context before the concept itself helps understanding.
Interesting idea! However, I'm not sure I would prefer
"Mix water, flour [...] and finally you'll get a pie"
to
"To make a pie: mix water, flour [...]"
As of the "you're going to indent your code anyway" claim, this seems to completely ignore one-liners, either embedded in other documents (onClick=...) or fed to the shell as a quick way to get some work done without spawning new tools.
> Normally, when we do a factoring problem, we are trying to find two numbers that multiply to 12 and add to 8. Those two numbers are the solution to the quadratic, but it takes students a lot of time to solve for them, as they’re often using a guess-and-check approach.
Wait... don't students apply the closed-form formula? Do we teach them that maths is about guessing? Next what? that pi is a rational number equal to 22/7, maybe?
It could work if "maybe(T)" is completely opaque to the user; both checking and accessing its payload must happen through helper macros; the checking macro ticks an invisible flag if ok; the accessing macro returns the payload only if the invisible flag is ticked, otherwise it triggers a runtime error/exception.
Not impossible. However, you would need to replace all "p.ok" with "maybe_check(p)", which is not unreasonable, and all "p.value" with "maybe_value(p)", which might be too much for the final user...
Case in point: I've been very disappointed lately when I wanted to try Ghostty on my laptop and the binary compiled for Debian failed to run due to an invalid instruction. I don't want to force the same experience to others.
I don't think this would help. The real issue with arbitrary position is that you can't load 16 bye to a 128-bit SIMD register if the memory is not aligned. The solution I found is to unroll the first iteration and mask out the results found before the initial offset.
Has anybody had any first-hand experience with Linux on such laptops?
We're applying a patch over a patch over a patch... no surprise the end result looks like a patchwork!
Instead, what is missing is an automatic deallocator, one that's automatically called when the variable goes out of scope. For example:
{
vec(int) v={}; /* no extra room allocated */
vec_push(v,1); /* space allocated */
... use v ...
} /* here the space is dellocated, then v is released */
This example doesn't use the same definition of vec as TFA, but something more similar to 'span' by the same author.Please don't stop participating in social media just because a halfwit like me hasn't agree with you once!
grab("n" ...
map("n" ...
to grab("Tab" ...
map("Tab" ...