Do you mean you run a build and it tells you in the error message? Or is there an IDE/editor where you could hit a key-combo with the cursor on that line, or near the `_`, and it would show a popup of possibilities for auto-completion?
Lisp is very cool. But one thing I do not like is that the syntax style `(fun a b c)` loses out to the less-symmetric "OO" style `a.fun(b, c)` when it comes to IDE auto-completion. And for me the IDE help is important to provide a smooth developer experience and minimize wasted brain energy. I'd like to find a way to make the editing and auto-completion work better. I think the way IDEs (and maybe our brains) work is: "here is a thing X, now what can I do to/with it?". That translates to typing in your editor: "X.[cursor here]", and then the IDE lets you see and search the things you can "do" with X. But if, in Lisp, you write "([cursor here]", you are immediately confronted with: "what is the signature of that function again?", but the IDE has nothing to go on. Maybe there is different style of editing, where we could type the arguments, and then trigger the auto-complete.
What other industries can try this? For a restaurant built on a cement foundation... maybe the cement company can release a product to fix the cracks in their flawed mixture, and then demand 10% of every pizza sold in the building. ... I think the industry needs to get away from OS vendor tyranny, somehow.
Thanks. I've learned a lot of languages and enjoy doing it, especially when much of it is a step up, so not a problem there. I may need to just dive in and try it out on a larger project. It was only after doing that with C++ where I really understood what I liked and what I didn't. A lot of the latter is the tooling/IDEs, which doesn't show up reading about the language. One thing I'm not sure about with Rust is porting a UI class hierarchy from C++. Base class `View`, sub classes `Button`, `VStack`, `TextField`, etc. I see how to replace virtual functions with a trait and impls for the various types. But for stuff (fields or methods) shared in the base class, this looks like one area where Rust is uglier than C++.
I started a new project recently and chose C++ because I wanted cross platform, and a language that let me write the highest performance code I could imagine. C is so lacking in abstractions, I don't think I can deal with it. But C++ is such a pain, I keep looking at Rust and feeling temptation. I'm doing some number crunching, and geometric algorithms, among other things. Not sure if Rust is as good as C++ there.
I cancelled my Apple/Goldman card after they were totally useless on a transaction dispute. Frontier Airlines gave me a "refund", and printed me a "receipt" for it, and then later refused to give me the refund. When I showed the "receipt" to Goldman/Apple support they would chew on it for 4 weeks and then come back with. "Judgement for merchant. Reason: no evidence." I'd say: what was that "receipt" they printed, just a lie? And they would say "sorry" and reopen the investigation, repeat the same result. Lame. And I will try to avoid Frontier for the rest of my life.
My problem with PG is it just doesn't seem to help much with my situation. I want to write apps that work offline and sync data across devices using the 'cloud'. I think that means Sqlite on the client, but ?? for the server. I have yet to find a good book explaining techniques for this kind of replication/syncing.
Yeah, I did. I want something low level and cross platform, including mobile. I think when I tried the C# for iOS stuff, nothing worked. But it's probably too much VM/runtime for me anyway, for this project.
I've been using modern C++ for a personal project (a language interpreter) for the last year+. I constantly think of switching to C, because of the mental burdens of C++, and because of the problems with tooling (Visual Studio's IntelliSense still barely works, because I use C++20 modules), and compile times get ugly because of the way the language failures force so much into interfaces (even with modules). But on the flip side I've gotten so used to classes, member functions, generic programming (templates), namespaces... I may be hooked.