I see this comment on all language postings and I just don’t get it. I’m much more curious about the motivation behind the language. If the syntax was that of APL, Forth, or Prolog would you just instantly ignore it because it doesn’t look like Java. I think if the language motivation is compelling then you can decide to dive into a tutorial where the syntax will be explained step by step. I don’t see how syntax can be judged before it is understood. Do you accept/reject languages over simple syntax like curly braces vs begin/end or significant white space, or abbreviations you don’t like eg. def, fun, defun, function, procedure.
Well then what are you reading. It’s well known that Pfizer and Moderna required immunity from lawsuits in order to provide the vaccine and every country gave them that immunity. Here it is from CNBC.
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effec...
Perhaps you were thinking about compensation from the government, but the original poster was talking about actually holding Pfizer and Moderna liable.
At a minimum it would be nice to know good colors for the pseudo classes active, focus, hover, link, visited and their various combinations for a light and dark theme. Additionally material UI adds disabled, before, after.
This got flagged yesterday and I was pretty disappointed by that. The single post said it was FUD and linked a different study, which was on sperm, not eggs. And this study on rats is about a publication in the journal of virology, which I assume raises it above the level of FUD.
Instinctually I’m bothered by passing an allocator to everything. LISP’s dynamic variables spring to mind. One could set an arena allocator at the top of a loop in a dynamic variable and then everything inside the loop would use that allocator. The bottom of the loop could free everything. Although I do really like knowing if something might call an allocator, perhaps a function specifier to indicate it allocates.
Although I’m intrigued by another idea I haven’t thought through. Haskell requires all function side effects to essentially propagate a description of the side effect up to main() where Haskell executes the side effect.
There is also the idea of imperative shell, functional core that I don’t fully grasp. In any case perhaps all side effects should execute at the top level or maybe in a parallel environment and here passing an allocator would not be so onerous.
I know a ‘C’ code base that treats all socket errors the same and just retries for a limited time. However there are errors that make no sense to retry, like invalid socket or socket not connected. It is necessary to know what socket error occurred. I like how the Posix API defines an errno and documents the values. Of course this depends on accurate documentation.
I think a file layout describes the exact arrangement of bytes in a file. A schema is higher level. It describes what is stored, not how it is stored. A database could be one file, or a file per table, or a file per column. Data could be stored across multiple drives.
Does it make any sense to have specialized models, which could possibly be a lot smaller. Say a model that just translates between English and Spanish, or maybe a model that just understands unix utilities and bash. I don’t know if limiting the training content affects the ultimate output quality or model size.
I actually prefer text as #fff and background as #000. Lower contrast just seems harder to read. I suppose it depends on brightness setting.
Also from an article in Nature.
“Impact of text contrast polarity on the retinal activity in myopes and emmetropes using modified pattern ERG” 09 July 2023.
“Recently, reading standard black-on-white text was found to activate the retinal OFF pathway and induce choroidal thinning, which is associated with myopia onset. Contrarily, reading white-on-black text led to thicker choroids, being protective against myopia. Respective effects on retinal processing are yet unknown.”
In CA we have many intersections where one wants to turn left, but there is not a dedicated left turn signal. When the light turns green, you pull out into the intersection. Ideally you pull out enough that the car behind you can also get into the intersection. On busy roads you may not be able to complete the left turn until the signal goes red. If you chose not to pull out, then nobody would ever be able to turn left. I believe CA passed a law some 20 plus years ago that you must be able to clear the intersection before the red light, which is in conflict with what is sometimes necessary. There are situations though where the direction you are headed is backed up, such that if you pulled out you could end up stuck in the middle of the intersection long after the red light. I believe the law was intended for this situation. So don’t pull out if your direction of travel is blocked.
I’m in the US. If you’re on say hwy 395 heading to Mammoth Mountain, the highway is frequently one lane in each direction. If the max speed limit is 70mph, you may come up on a semi truck doing 60mph and you will want to pass using the lane with on coming traffic. This means you need to do 85mph to pass. For this reason our max speed limit laws are woefully inadequate at accounting for real life conditions.
I don’t know TLA+, but I find it interesting that the author indicates one of the strengths of TLA+ is it’s shared global memory when as programmers one is advised to never have global shared memory.
I came away with a different interpretation of Rich Hickey’s talk. I think he was advocating against using slots, where a slot would be a struct field. A slot has to have a value and if a value is not available then null is put there and now null must be dealt with. Instead I think he was advocating for using dictionaries. You either have a key or you don’t, but you never use null. However it seems that now you would have a bunch of “key in dict” checks which are less efficient than “value is null” checks. Plus confusion about what exactly has been supplied in a dictionary. Although there may be cases where code can just sequence through what exists without worrying about what doesn’t exist.