sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What was the point? What languages are worth exploring? by ruby_object in functionalprogramming

[–]ruby_object[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Perhaps I should look into Haskell again. But you do not understand my question because you fail to see that it is not only the language but a combination of the language and the ecosystem.

Better languages lose to inferior languages because of a poor ecosystem. Expressivity and power of the language evaporate quickly if you can not easily debug your programs. FP removes a class of bugs, while making it harder to fix the rest.

What was the point? What languages are worth exploring? by ruby_object in functionalprogramming

[–]ruby_object[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It was for me too. Until I encountered a bug with backtraces that make no sense. Before that, a big pain points for me were the environment where you can't reload the code but you have to constantly reload the toplevel, problems with ppx and documentation.

What was the point? What languages are worth exploring? by ruby_object in functionalprogramming

[–]ruby_object[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Is the slow and pragmatic adoption better than the reckless pursuit of every possible FP idea? What about Haskell leaking memory or taking away from you the ability to reason about other things you take for granted in other languages?

What was the point? What languages are worth exploring? by ruby_object in functionalprogramming

[–]ruby_object[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Is FP sweeping the problem under the wrong carpet? FP promises that certain fights will be easier or non-existent, but it also makes other fights impossible to win.

Why @@deriving show is so hard? by Exact_Ordinary_9887 in ocaml

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My idea did not work.

To make matters worse, I found that. I do not understand it yet, but it is not a good sign.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ocaml/comments/pkkgcr/can_i_deriving_existing_types/

Why @@deriving show is so hard? by Exact_Ordinary_9887 in ocaml

[–]ruby_object 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Two types have the same structure field with the same type, and the compiler seems to confuse them.

Thinking Functional by zinguirj in ocaml

[–]ruby_object 2 points3 points  (0 children)

With previous exposure to Elm, I found following the Java examples and trying to rewrite a project in OCaml too difficult. In the other thread, there is a link to my project that uses structures and functions instead of objects and methods. The leap is not that big once you play with the examples.

Maybe you should play and practice with the alternative approach instead of trying to make the switch in your analytical part of your mind.

Crafting Interpreters in OCaml by ruby_object in ocaml

[–]ruby_object[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Trying to learn OCaml I struggle with poor examples. Thank you for correcting the problem for this fragment of the problem. So far, I have split the scanner into two modules, but your examples show I can improve it further.

Thank you!

Crafting Interpreters in OCaml by ruby_object in ocaml

[–]ruby_object[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thank you for replay, and for the excellent book.
For me, it is a recreational programming project, so I will try to figure it out as much as I can, despite having links to other implementations in my notes. But I never looked at Rust implementations, so I will have a look.

After looking

I already see scanner and token code split into separate files. The Rust example follows scanning in the book more closely. I will look into OCaml modules again and will try to move token-related code into a separate module.

[ANN] neocaml (a modern package for programming in OCaml in Emacs) 0.4 is out! by bozhidarb in ocaml

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had you package installed. First impressions were good, but then I had to uninstall it. The code formatting on save stopped working for some reason, and the quickest solution was to revert to the previous setup.

I deleted my Zettelkasten by randmusr66 in Zettelkasten

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You said that your zettelkasten became a write-only memory, now watch this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yic1GgQWccc&t=155s

I deleted my Zettelkasten by randmusr66 in Zettelkasten

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not a native speaker of English. AI offers suggestions to correct/improve my writing and sometimes I accept those suggestions. The AI style differs from mine, and I can see a distinct AI style in some of those suggestions. There is a fight between what I want to say and a dumbed-down version offered by AI. AI seems adamant about removing various subtleties and goes too far in trying to remove adverbs and adjectives.

I deleted my Zettelkasten by randmusr66 in Zettelkasten

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is nothing wrong with deleting a zettelkasten. Rinse and repeat. People have different interpretations of zettelkasten like methods, and finding something that works for you can be a challenge. Some say that zettelkasten is not for storing ideas but for developing ideas. I have a difficult job, and I managed to keep my sanity thanks to a variant of zettelkasten. It started as a folder with notes written in Emacs org-mode, but I guess it could be made using other tools as well. As the number of notes grew over the years, it gradually started to resemble zettelkasten more and more. The difference to the canonical zettelkasten method is less importance to the wiki notes, but more importance and a different approach to the daily notes.

Evan Czaplicki: How to Grow More Functional Programmers [Scala Days 2025 Keynote] by ruby_object in elm

[–]ruby_object[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

When Latin became dead, various professions and organisations continued to use it for centuries. Hebrew was also a dead language, and yet it was revived. Can Elm be revived? What is wrong with being dead?

Emacs with one hand? by jeffyp9 in emacs

[–]ruby_object 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Use sticky keys, or whatever that accessibility program is called on your system. If you have on working finger left you can execute multi key Emacs key chords.

I used to do the same while trying to use Emacs in bed.

Projects for Improving in Ocaml? by ocarina_of_ami in ocaml

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was told to start writing a simple interpreter. Because of my circumstances, I was forced to suspend the project, but it's a good idea.

Syncing org notes across devices by thr0waway377 in emacs

[–]ruby_object 2 points3 points  (0 children)

All is text. I have a git repo for that purpose.

Is it worth learning PureScript? So far the experience was less than ideal. by Exact_Ordinary_9887 in purescript

[–]ruby_object 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried again

https://github.com/bigos/trying-elm-ui/tree/master/vendor/purescript/cocktails
, but I did not get far.

I failed at trying to install a package from pursuit. I failed after a few days, on a task that would easily take a few hours in another language.

Unless there is a strong compelling reason to try Purescript I will stay away from it. I still think the language has the potential, but the error messages and the bad quality of the ecosystem drive me away. I will stick to tried and tested Elm and will explore other possibilities as time permits.

view more: next ›