@Seggan is the runtime itself an object I can delete at runtime
better yet, is the editor for the code you're writing an object that i can delete (and therefore no longer be able to write code, even to restore the editor, essentially softlocking myself)
return is a function in Haskell in exactly the sense that it isn't a keyword and so you can define a function with that name, and they have historically misnamed the pure function as return
Which isn't its fault, we literally didn't know how to make languages that weren't bad yet, and the closed world sucks in a universe where it didn't win, but it's just really neat
You can scrub back in the livestreams at least at the moment, although they may shut off at some point
There will be cropped videos in a couple of weeks. The streams generally stay accessible for a while or indefinitely
If anyone here just happens to be particularly interested in Swift, the Data Race Safety for the Masses talk from later in IWACO is also good, I'm told, but I didn't see that one happen
I'm wondering how could pitfall #4 in this link be avoided without runtime type (or class ID etc.) checks: https://www.artima.com/articles/how-to-write-an-equality-method-in-java.
From a language designer's point of view, the problem is the following:
We want to add an equals (or operator ==) met...
...and mapM is just a specialized traverse (though apparently sometimes more efficient)
Not sure how I forgot that--I guess the map in the name made me think something about functors even though it obviously would need a Foldable to actually order the actions
I am investigating ways to add some form of abstract data types to a toy language.
I was reading Graydon Hoares The Rust I Wanted Had No Future, in where he talks about Existensial types. I have not used a language with Existensials, but he seem to write about them as an alternative to Traits, as...
