• hvrosen

    hvrosen

    9 months ago
    #language-design-philosophy A data structure that’s orthogonal at its core? Why is that so hard to think of? Why is there such a strong tradition in CS/PLD to think in composition by nesting but not of orthogonal composition? What if we (language designers, at least) are missing something here? Why do I post such an underspecified topic? I think there is little doubt that perceiving orthogonally is a fundamental feature of human cognition, and that current language design fails to support this. And, yes, I don’t even know how to argue for this. This may be frustrating to try to think of. I must admit; I’ve learned to appreciate the feeling that there does exist something, that it must exist, but I can only just almost try and grasp it. What do you do in similar mental configurations? Grab a whiteboard? Begin writing an essay? Write some code that assumes the
    thing
    exists in order to reach your intuition for it (“air coding”)? Your..+ thoughts on this experience + ideas for an attack on this problem .. are welcome! 🙂 ❤️
    hvrosen
    Tom Larkworthy
    +1
    10 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Breck Yunits

    Breck Yunits

    9 months ago
    Does anyone have recommended reading (books, papers, articles, Wikipedia pages) on the topic of "Types of thoughts"? Other ways to put it might be "Ontologies of Thought" or "Templates for Thought". Rhetorical devices would be a subset of the broader category I'm thinking about. I'm looking to add to a grammar nodes for thought patterns like "Playing Devils Advocate" or "Thought Experiments" or "Listicles" or "FAQs".
    Breck Yunits
    Jimmy Miller
    +3
    9 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Kartik Agaram

    Kartik Agaram

    9 months ago
    I just remembered this fun bit of scifi about an alien computational universe http://akkartik.name/post/wangs-carpets cc @daltonb @Srini K who've expressed interest in computation as simulation (https://futureofcoding.slack.com/archives/C5T9GPWFL/p1635811447034700; https://futureofcoding.slack.com/archives/CEXED56UR/p1639608107032600?thread_ts=1632872466.023400&cid=CEXED56UR)
    Kartik Agaram
    c
    +1
    4 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • d

    Doug Moen

    9 months ago
    This is a question about writing compilers. I need to design an IR. Mine is for a pure functional + imperative language. What currently seems popular is SSA with block parameters, not phi nodes, which at least handles the imperative side of my language. My special concern is supporting efficient compile time evaluation (as well as partial evaluation). I guess I want the IR to be a compromise between supporting a fast interpreter (for compile time evaluation) vs supporting conventional compiler optimizations. Does anybody have experience with this?
    d
    Alex Bender
    2 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Matthew Linkous

    Matthew Linkous

    9 months ago
    In Unix everything is a file which makes allows simple, reusable tools like
    ls
    ,
    cd
    ,
    cat
    , etc to be used across the whole system. However, files have their drawbacks as well: primarily that they're difficult to merge or detect changes which is useful for syncing, collaborating, and/or subscribing to data. Has anyone seen any alternatives to this paradigm? My startup is currently exploring the idea of append-only logs as our core primitive instead of files. We're not building a new kernel but we're attempting to create a new programming environment with collaboration and reactivity as core tenants. Would love to hear other perspectives on the subject!
    Matthew Linkous
    Daniel Krasner
    +1
    10 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • karki

    karki

    9 months ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29590681
    Ask HN: How would a programming language look if designed by non-programmer
    Since it’s hard to find such a person, who understands CS/Math/can program machines but never used “normal” programming languages
    I do wonder how it’d be designed, maybe current approach sucks?
    OOP is beautiful itself, it enables normal people to model complex systems that’ll be running on computers, but can we get even better?
    karki
    j
    2 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Srini K

    Srini K

    9 months ago
    My answer to this question got to the top of the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29625625 It was a hurried response for sure, but I guess it was still a nice reminder
    Srini K
    Matthew Linkous
    +3
    11 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • hvrosen

    hvrosen

    8 months ago
    Hi all; 🎆🎆🎆 Happy & Inspiring New Year !!! 🎆🎆🎆 ( A ) What are some ideas/things/projects you would like to ponder/explore/learn/prototype/build in 2022? • ( B ) Same question, assuming 2022 were a sabbatical with free time & resources & ample collaboration available?
    hvrosen
    i
    +4
    11 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • curious_reader

    curious_reader

    8 months ago
    A quick "thinking together" question for @Jack Rusher regarding clerk, I recently found this article and was reading about queries there: https://www.metoki.ch/wissensmanagement-mit-logseq-vielversprechende-alternative-zu-roam-research/#7-queries (apologies for being it a german article )I always wonder, like how far is clear away from logseq or any other base functionality of a Personal Knowledge System?
    curious_reader
    1 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • daltonb

    daltonb

    8 months ago
    I’m struck by how rare it is for basic control systems knowledge to show up in our projects; my impression is that the common approaches to closed loop feedback are: • Ad hoc event handling and state management • An exercise left to the user • ‘I’m sorry dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that’ I think we tend this way because the underlying substrates (CPUs, peripherals, ISAs, PL grammars) are so well characterized as to allow formerly unthinkable consistency with open-loop methods. It seems like there’s a lot of low hanging fruit here, and it gets at the heart of what ‘liveness’ is about. I’m curious if anyone here has experience working with controls/dynamical systems, or pointers to FoC type projects being approached in this way. PS if you’re not familiar with controls, a wikipedia trip makes it seem like a lot of daunting math, but the basics are actually pretty simple. Basically you’ve got your current system state, a function to compute the next state, and then whatever parameters you can actual directly control (“direct manipulation”). If you’ve ever used React or FRP, they get halfway there, then overcomplicate and oversimplify it at the same time. Here’s a friendly intro if you’re curious:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-OqgFE9SD4

    .
    daltonb
    Corey
    +3
    9 replies
    Copy to Clipboard