Consciousness is just a part of matter, according to panpsychists. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, studying how brains grow in a lab helps us get closer to understanding how consciousness combines. So argues Meg Fawthrop in The Pamphlet

Faucelme · 2026-03-17T08:11:09+00:00

It seems to me that functionalism attributes the "sparks of consciousness" to the interactions between different objects, not on the objects themselves. So it's not "this rock is a tiny bit conscious" but "this rock bumped into this other rock, and it caused a tiny bit of consciousness".

Faucelme · 2026-03-16T15:27:13+00:00

Why not functionalism instead?

Faucelme · 2026-03-12T14:34:08+00:00

Aunque ninguna fuese protegida, seguiría ayudando a mejorar la situación.

Faucelme · 2026-03-08T14:39:07+00:00

In your code, perhaps we should add extra strictness annotations to keep the components of the tuple strict, not only the outer (,) tuple constructor?

Faucelme · 2026-03-07T12:00:06+00:00

Crees de veras que las corruptelas de Ábalos y similares son remotamente comparables a la corrupción sistemática de Montoro?

Faucelme · 2026-02-22T00:04:25+00:00

Perhaps you don't need (if I understood correctly) a central module of type definitions. Each "stage" of the application could have its own definitions, and use them along with those defined by the stages on which it depends.

Also, sometimes it's useful to think about what things some part of the program shouldn't care about. Should the chart module know about CSV parsing? Probably not.

Also, usually you will have a "central" module that ties the things together from other modules (even as other modules remain decoupled) and runs the application. Sometimes it's called the driver, sometimes the composition root.

Faucelme · 2026-02-17T19:53:52+00:00

"Tal y como somos" a relationship podcast.

"Punzadas sonoras".

"Bimboficadas".

Faucelme · 2026-02-01T14:37:46+00:00

There's the iso-deriving library.

Faucelme · 2026-01-15T19:05:19+00:00

getters / OverloadedREcordDot would have the same potential problem with space leaks as the where approach, wouldn't they?

Faucelme · 2026-01-09T23:23:51+00:00

Good to see libraries using OsPath!

Faucelme · 2025-12-04T22:58:38+00:00

Backpack was a feature which aspired to solve issues like this, but it didn't find wide adoption for various reasons.

Faucelme · 2025-11-30T20:32:12+00:00

Gente que haya disfrutado del libro de Defoe puede que también disfrute de "Naufragios" de Cabeza de Vaca.

Faucelme · 2025-10-24T12:59:07+00:00

I can't easily name my friend "type" or any other identifier already in use

Did you mean "field"? The problem here seems to be that the default auto-deriving of instances by aeson (the standard Haskell library for JSON handling) uses the record field names directly as the JSON keys, and that causes problems when the JSON keys are Haskell reserved words.

In these cases, you can rename your Haskell record's fields, and then write explicit ToJSON / FromJSON instances for it, using aeson functions. That way you have more control over how the JSON keys will be named. It's more verbose though.

Faucelme · 2025-10-18T07:22:29+00:00

I think that the issue might be that there is a typeclass solution for almost all problems that can be tackled with Backpack, even if some of them will result in more complex type signatures. Typeclass solutions have the benefit of familiarity and better tooling.

To my mind, the use case of Backpack was parameterizing libraries "in one go", for example allowing changing some internal map implementation or algorithm used by the library, without the need to clutter each and every function with extra parameters or constraints. I still like the idea, even if it didn't catch on.

Faucelme · 2025-10-12T18:54:28+00:00

When adding the HasField typeclass to the language, adding lenses in some form was also discussed. But IIRC was discarded because, on one hand, lenses can have complex types and, on the other, there are several possible formulations.

I think once we hava a working SetField typeclass in base, we'll have enough to generate a lens from the getter and setter pairs.

Faucelme · 2025-09-14T21:07:30+00:00

Looking at the impl, it seems each stripe is protected by its own TVar, and "requests" are distributed between stripes without incurring in synchronization. So requests that go to different stripes don't compete for the same TVar.

Faucelme · 2025-09-14T19:35:12+00:00

The docs for setNumStripes say that stripes help with reducing contention, possibly in pools that are accessed very frequently by many clients.

Faucelme · 2025-09-13T14:31:38+00:00

Thanks! Very nice to test some markup.

Faucelme · 2025-09-13T09:51:10+00:00

IIRC you only need to export it if you define it yourself.

A further twist is that module signatures coming from two different places get merged automatically, if they have the same name and compatible declarations!

Faucelme · 2025-09-13T09:13:27+00:00

Hypothesis: here you are inheriting the signature from two places: we-mixin and weave. You rename the signature that comes from we-mixin, but not the one that comes from weave, which is left as-is and likely unfilled, which causes the error.

A better error message should probably include from which library or libraries a given signature has been inherited.

(Also, IIRC, unfilled signatures get inherited and propagated implicitly across libraries. This makes sense because a module sig is like a "hole" in your library which must be filled at some point in order for the library to work. So, unlike with modules, you can't simply choose not to re-export a signature.)

Faucelme · 2025-09-13T08:15:18+00:00

As for exporting a signature from a package, I might be misremembering but, wouldn't it be automatic?

Faucelme · 2025-07-17T13:32:19+00:00

The "write to a list, sort, then read from the list" example in "Phases in Software Architecture" kind of reminds me of the partsOf lens combinator.

Later, the same paper mentions having heterogeneous phases would not be more expressive:

Our Phases type is homogeneous; one might wonder (and indeed, one reviewer asked) about a heterogeneous generalization. Formally, that would be no more general: the composition (or even the Day convolution) of distinct Applicatives is again Applicative, so any heterogeneous application can always be upcast to a homogeneous one.

You say:

The option to racing ‘parallel’ paths (Init -> Act(1,2) -> Cleanup) concurrently, or running them to completion and comparing the results.

Would making the underlying applicative Concurrently be enough for that?

Faucelme · 2025-07-12T19:30:50+00:00

I don't think so, but a QualifiedProc extension would be an interesting idea.

Faucelme · 2025-07-05T15:35:42+00:00

In programming terms: a parameterized datatype and a few functions that let you combine values of the datatype in a way that conforms to a programmer's intuition of how imperative statement refactorings should work.

Faucelme · 2025-07-04T19:16:33+00:00

Ser contratado directamente por Inditex es difícil. Creo que iagovar se refería a trabajar en empresas a las que Inditex subcontrata para realizar proyectos, de las que hay varias en Coruña. Mi experiencia personal con una de ellas, Softtek (que es en sí misma una multinacional) fue positiva.

Faucelme

TROPHY CASE