Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "ThePrimeTime" channel.

  1.  @5dollasubwayfootlong  you evidently missed prettu much all of PLT education if you don't know the difference between the eager and lazy order. I'd recommend you to avoid embarrassing yourself and to stay away from topics that are so far beyond your comprehension. Learn some computer science first, then come back to discuss what is low level and what is not.
    2
  2.  @5dollasubwayfootlong  it does exist, while it does not have a right to do so. Preprocessors are abominable and should have never existed.
    2
  3.  @pcos2401  my "issue" is a lack of tolerance for stupidity and incompetence. Hardly an issue.
    2
  4.  @htspencer9084  It is a warranted arrogance. Facts matter. Truth matter. Feelings of those scolded for perverting the facts do not matter.
    2
  5.  @tiranito2834  one year of experience repeated 30 times is still one year of experience.
    2
  6.  @tiranito2834  kiddo, once again, you have no faintest idea of what you're babbling about. Ever tried specifying formal operational semantics for C and Java? You'll see very little difference between these two. If a presence of garbage collector makes.a language "high level" for you, you simply don't know anything at all about programming languages.
    2
  7. There is one thing that make C++ more powerful than Rust in some important use cases: there is a `goto` in C++. More so, a computed goto extension in most of the compilers that matter. No `goto` in rust, meaning - no efficiently compiled DSLs, no fast parsing, no threaded code, nothing.
    2
  8. Not to mention that a full set of MISRA C rules, powered by static analysis, is still by far the most safe development methodology possible, outclassing even SPARK, and leaving Rust and alike far behind.
    2
  9. The right question would be "why some people still use Linux, are they brain-damaged or something?"
    2
  10.  @Legac3e  in the Postoffice example the coders were writing a typical, boring piece of accounting software, and yet, the bugs they left there resulted in deaths and shattered lives of dozens of victims. Nobody could have known in advance that this was a work with a risk and responsibility levels close to the work of civil engineers.
    2
  11.  @Legac3e  P.S. regarding the barriers - it is not necessarily too bad. Civil engineering have all those barriers, yet kids still build Lego bridges. It should not affect learners and hobbyists.
    2
  12. Scala is quite big in hardware (e.g., see Chisel).
    2
  13. What is convenient with wasting so much display real estate on an information you need 0.01% of the time?
    2
  14. ​ @anon_y_mousse  mouse or not, it is still needed very rarely. I understand if it is a hidden tab that pops up when you hover that mouse thingy over, but a lot of people have this mostly useless information in front of them, like, 100% of the time, and it is weird indeed.
    2
  15. Yes, CS-illiterate people tend to prefer exceptions, purely on the basis of incompetence. CS-literate people may tolerate exceptions if runtime supports first class continuations.
    2
  16. And know what? You're right. Not necessarily Haskell, of course, but I tend to significantly downgrade my opinion of people I'm interviewing if they do not have at least some knowledge of a wide range of languages and paradigms. And if they do - I give them a chance to show off.
    2
  17.  @nitsujism  You need to maintain FPS for a human user. It's not going to break the logic of you're running at 0.001FPS instead - the rest of the system will behave the same way, user himself is an understanding part. For audio - again, it's quite easy to bag the data and to test on historic data, so real-time is not always required. Delay line is trivial to simulate. As for logging, of course it'll be extremely dumb to use io steams, to use any kind of system calls, etc. All the proper logging frameworks use lock-free communication from real-time threads to non-realtime logger threads, with potentially quite large buffers accumulating the logged data. I'm in no way advocating for just sprinkling printfs here and there, it'd be barbaric. As for segfaults, quite often simply running a debug build can make your segfault go away (or to mainfest somewhere else). Valgrind, or address sanitiser, or just a more elaborate logging would be far more precise in locating where exactly your data got corrupted (which can be very far away from where the segfault happened). Debuggers only delay finding the root cause of the problem by diverting your attention to unrelated code paths.
    2
  18. And, just like pretty much any other branch of this industry, self-inflicted complications. The real complexity of most of the problems is orders of magnitude below what bad engineers make them to be.
    2
  19. ​ @finnaplow  you still must learn all the basics despite many things being automated. You won't be able to reason wirhout an interdisciplinary fundamental knowledge, and AI will not replace this necessity.
    2
  20. Competence exists. Talent does not. And competence is not nearly as important as people want to believe it is.
    2
  21.  @ForeverZer0  I should have added that competence does not mater much above the certain point. Of course a dentist who does not know even the basics is useless. But some "10x" dentist who spend every weekend reading dentistry journals and training on stray cats is not any better than a regular average sufficiently competent dentist, and the real difference in their performance is in a way they're managed. A 10x dentist in a chaotic, undefunded practice is worse than an average one in a perfectly managed and well funded one.
    2
  22. ​ @daniilpintjuk4473  That's not always possible. Either your code is heavily concurrent, or you're wasting the hardware capacity. Having said that, yes, you must always do your best to avoid concurrency where it's not needed. E.g., a single FSM with predictable timing is better than an interrupt-driven system, as you can always reason about the worst case timing and make sure it meets the hard real-time requirements. No way to do it with concurrency present. Yet, there's a form of concurrency that's even harder to debug and that's pretty much unavoidable in any modern system - multiple communicating devices, e.g., a number of MCUs communicating, each can be perfectly single-threaded and sequential, but their interaction still only makes sense in real-time and cannot be paused.
    2
  23. I heard people call it "shekel" (with a soft 'l') a few times.
    2
  24.  @AlLiberali  not just Israeli, it is an ancient Sumeran word, and spelled very similar to "SQL"
    2
  25.  @SimonBuchanNz  lexical scoping also appeared first in Algol60, before it was all over.
    2
  26. They belong to very different flavours of functional programming.
    2
  27.  @OverG88  scala can hardly be called a functional language.
    2
  28.  @OverG88  you cannot call a language functional if you MUST use imperative features to use it. It can be a functional-first language, but not properly functional. The crippled JVM runtime limits the FP capabilities of Scala severely. A simple test for you: translate some arbitrarily complex tail-recursive code into CPS and then into SKI combinators (if you want a Y-combinator, define it via SKI). Execute the combinators with your allegedly functional language. If code still works - your language have a right to be considered probably a functional one. If there's no way an ad hoc translation would work without any funny tricks - then, sorry, it's not a functional language, period.
    2
  29. Well, it is the fastest.
    2
  30. You're missing a systematic, comprehensive knowledge and instead getting mythical thinking. If you don't know how things work and how everything is connected you're only capable of cargo cult programming.
    2
  31.  @T0m1s  do you mean you prefer lesser, crippled debuggers that cannot even be scripted? Or you're advocating for using LLDB, which is perfectly fine in most cases but still not quite there yet, not on par with gdb on features. Pretty much nothing is.
    2
  32.  @T0m1s  you should not program at all, if you cannot debug without a "user friendly interface".
    2
  33.  @T0m1s  it is only miserable if you don't know how to use it. When people with visual debuggers waste their time stepping through code, inspecting values, all that crap, GDB debugs for me unattended, run by scripts.
    2
  34.  @dolurosu  programmer who does not even know the basics? I doubt there's any value in such a programmer.
    2
  35. Well, you're among those who's going to be replaced by stochastic parrots and then whine about it. If you did not use the knowledge of algorithms in your job, you, most likely, were doing it wrong.
    1
  36. RL in a nutshell.
    1
  37.  @josevargas686  indeed, languages with built-in eval at least allow runtime metaprogramming. There are even some hygienic macro implementations for JS.
    1
  38. I'm just dragging my .emacs from more than 20 years ago nearly unchanged wherever I go, did not ever feel a need to refine it further...
    1
  39. Not all the compilers. Only those made before 21st century, and those made by people who lived under a rock for the last 20 years.
    1
  40.  @PassifloraCerulea  lexing is outdated, lexerless parsing is better on so many levels. People use PEG or GLR to parse these days, both are lexerless and allow different tokens in different contexts (as in, no tokenisation is needed at all).
    1
  41. Not just javascript, the whole stack of web technologies is an overengineered pile of trash that should have never existed. Imagine an alternative universe where instead of browsers we had sandboxed Tcl/Tk execution environments?
    1
  42. It is a crappy way to generate boilerplate though. Declarative DSLs are much better.
    1
  43. I thought ADHD would make them fail in ever delivering anything, getting bored half way through. Programmers need far more focused and attentive attitude.
    1
  44.  @souleymaneba9272  no matter how many years of experience self-taughts add to their lack of fundamental knowledge, they will never get anywhere close to those who have such knowledge. It is extremely rare for a self-taught to have a systematic and thorough understanding of a subject.
    1
  45.  @souleymaneba9272  do you realise that most diplomas are utter trash? Only people with deep fundamental knowledge can be proper, worthy engineers.
    1
  46.  @souleymaneba9272  so you did not know that most degrees are worthless? There is a chasm between properly fundamentally educated people and everyone else.
    1
  47.  @dominikvonlavante6113  absolutely, any hard STEM background is good enough as a basis for self taughts. The real problem are self-taughts with no formal education.
    1
  48.  @encapsulatio  Install J, or K, or even APL itself, if you've got a fancy keyboard. Or Cat. Or a couple of dozens of other APL descendants.
    1
  49. No, looks like some abstract register-based VM.
    1
  50. Or, even more likely, MISRA-C.
    1