Going by the example in the Github, it looks like a right-to-left Lisp with Arabic keywords. Does that fully describe the language or is there more to it than that?
I'd be interested in hearing about the parts that are more influenced by Arabic than Scheme. Are there any beyond the keyword language and writing direction? Like a new keyword that does something useful but has no equivalent in Scheme because the concept isn't easily expressed by an English keyword?
As someone who knows very little about Scheme or Arabic, what are some aspects of this language that might be novel or interesting to someone with a background in mainstream languages?
Hey, I like checked exceptions too! I honestly think it's one of Javas's best features but it's hindered by the fact that try-catch is so verbose, libraries aren't always sensible about what exceptions they throw, and methods aren't exception-polymorphic for stuff like the Stream API. Which is to say, checked exceptions are a pain but that's the fault of the rest of the language around them and not the checked exceptions per se.
That texture healing looks super nice. Is that something fonts can just do or does it require special editor support?
Seconding this request, this is the number one thing that has me keep going back to other apps.
If you don't need to reuse the collection or access its items out of order, you can also use Iterable
which accepts even more inputs like generators.
Out of curiosity, what is that spoilered book?
...What are they actually launching though? I mean I love the payment scheme but I can't get excited over this without an actual good product being sold.
The one case where I prefer video is when I know next to nothing about the topic and the other choice is mediocre to low-quality writing. Most people aren't great technical writers, and it's easy to skip over steps either because the writer assumes too much prior knowledge or simply because it takes effort to put that information in. On the other hand, videos are the opposite where it takes effort to cut stuff out, so you usually get all the steps which is what I need when I don't know anything.
If I have the option of a well-written, step-by-step tutorial though, or if I already know the topic and have a vague idea of what I'm looking for, then text is much better for being able to search/skim/go back and forth at my own pace.
I consider YabaIRyS more of an epithet than a nickname. I can't imagine anyone using it to replace her name like "I wonder what YabaIRyS (IRyS) is doing", only as a description replacing yabai like "Bruh, YabaIRyS (yabai)" in response to something she did/said.
Forgetting Faufau is pretty indefensible. It's been a long time, but that puts it in the same boat as Kronini and Sanana which I did remember.
I wasn't sure if Fuwa-chan and Moco-chan count as nicknames or if they're just how you say their names in Japanese. I guess dropping the last syllable is what makes it a nickname as opposed to just their real name + Japanese honorific?
I guess it depends on what you mean by using monads, but you can have a monadic result type without introducing a concrete monad abstraction that it implements.
At a library level, couldn't you have an opaque sum type where the only thing you can do with it is call a match
method that requires a function pointer for each possible variant of the sum type? It'd be pretty cursed to use but at least it wouldn't require compiler plugins.
![](https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/7ebeb019-d04b-4816-ac9b-5e4f66dcb52b.jpeg?format=webp&thumbnail=512)
YouTube Video
Click to view this content.
Really? I would argue that pocket calculators are AI
The behavior is defined; the behavior is whatever the processor does when you read memory from address 0.
If that were true, there would be no problem. Unfortunately, what actually happens is that compilers use the undefined behavior as an excuse to mangle your program far beyond what mere variation in processor behavior could cause, in the name of optimization. In the kernel bug, the issue wasn't that the null pointer dereference was undefined per se, the real issue was that the subsequent null check got optimized out because of the previous undefined behavior.
No idea how hard it would be but it would be nice to have code blocks with syntax highlighting like on Github, so you could write something like
```python
def f(x):
return x
```
and get
Hah, the house is symmetrical now
lesswrong.com: I remain unconvinced by the central AI doom and Effective Altruism stuff, but the peripheral posts on rationality, math, short-form sci-fi stories, musings on random topics, etc. have been massively influential on me.
Do you care about modeling the cells? If not, you could represent each row with just a number. When X plays, add 1 to all the rows that include the position they played, and when O plays, subtract 1. If any row reaches +3 or -3, that player wins.
As for rotation/reflection invariance, that seems more like a math problem than a Rust problem.
Apparently there's a recut version of the archive with some extra footage. If you watched the original version, you might have missed it. Bae is hosting a watchalong which will be the perfect excuse to rewatch the concert VOD before it goes away.
> My main point is that PRQL makes no distinction. If you didn’t inspect that SQL output and already know about the difference between WHERE and HAVING, you would have no idea, because in PRQL they’re both just “filter”.
Hmm, I have to disagree here. PRQL has no distinction in keyword, but it does have a distinction in where the filter goes relative to the aggregation. Given that the literal distinction being made is whether the filter happens before or after the aggregation, PRQL's position-based distinction seems a lot clearer than SQL's keyword-based distinction. Instead seeing two different keywords, remembering that one happens before the aggregation and the other after, then deducing the performance impacts from that, you just immediately see that one comes before the aggregation and the other after then deduce the performance impacts.
> As far as removing arbitrary SQL features, I agree that that is it’s main advantage. However, I think either the developers or else the users of PRQL will discover that far fewer of SQL’s complexities are arbitrary than you might first assume.
That's fair, I was just thinking of things that frustrate me with SQL, but I admittedly haven't thought too hard about why things are that way.
What are the implications of WHERE vs HAVING? I thought the only primary difference was that one happens before the aggregation and the other happens after, and all the other implications stem from that fact. PRQL's simplification, rather than obscuring, seems like a more clear and reasonable way to express that distinction.
I don't know if PRQL supports all SQL features, but I think it could while being less complex than SQL by removing arbitrary SQL complications like different keywords for WHERE vs HAVING, only being able to use column aliases in certain places, needing to recompute a transformation to use it in multiple clauses, not forcing queries to be in SELECT... FROM... WHERE... order, etc.
Council is doing a karaoke relay into a collab in about an hour! All karaokes are unarchived.
Original announcement tweet: https://twitter.com/hakosbaelz/status/1679510538966167552
Streams: Ceres Fauna Karaoke Ouro Kronii Karaoke Nanashi Mumei Karaoke Hakos Baelz Karaoke IRyS Karaoke Group Collab
I tried to post this before and I don't think it went through, but maybe it did so sorry if this is a duplicate post.