The Nineteenth Byte

Rydwolf Programs

19:06

Anything that isn't prefix

I hate prefixed operators like that so much

typeof, await, new, etc.

Seggan

@RydwolfPrograms you prefer function calls?

also why do you hate them

new and typeof i understand

but not await or perform

well actually await can be a function call

what about throw?

Rydwolf Programs

19:31

No, await should be .await, Rust-style

Much more readable, less unnecessary parenthetization, and since it's not a keyword you don't get the completely stupid error message issue

throw's the only one I'll concede since it's a statement

new just creates annoying ambiguity with things like new thing().otherthing()

typeof just shouldn't exist at all, but if it does it should be a function call

print is also fine as a keyword as long as it's a statement

perform is a dumb name

What's it doing, getting on stage and dancing?

It's just a more verbose way to write run or do which is a horribly indescriptive way to describe what that does

omg cursed language idea: do { ... } if (...);

like do-while but it only runs once or twice

do { ... } for (x in y); runs the block once with x being an undeclared variable before the for loop starts

do { ... } function do_thing(x, y, z); defines a function which also runs immediately :p

user

19:47

@Seggan Okay, I do agree that checked exceptions should have types more specific to the thing causing them

@RydwolfPrograms You have very strong views

About thing that most people don't seem to care too much about

What's wrong with perform? (other than being 7 characters)

Rydwolf Programs

If I'mma be typing something over and over again for the next decade it might as well be good

user

You get used to it

Rydwolf Programs

@user It doesn't mean anything

Running a function is "perform"ing something

user

You're performing an effect

Rydwolf Programs

Oh no is this FP speak again

user

19:50

No it's just English

Rydwolf Programs

"perform an effect" sounds super weird to me and I've spoken English for 15 years

user

I've spoken English about the same time and it sounds perfectly fine to me

Granted, I regularly make minor grammatical mistakes

Rydwolf Programs

Only place "perform" sounds natural to me is subroutines

You "perform a routine". You don't "perform an effect", that doesn't sound any more natural and intuitive than "perform a function"

user

Okay, you could maybe consider it FP speak in the sense that functions are supposed to be pure instead of performing things, and only with these effects would they perform stuff like printing

Rydwolf Programs

But the fact that it could be applied to any of those at all shows how it doesn't really hint at the actual meaning

user

19:52

/shrug I've seen do too

Rydwolf Programs

do wouldn't be bad, just 'cause of the conciseness

Really tho the throw metaphor doesn't stop working here does it?

That's a good option still IMO

user

Yeah I guess you could think of them as resumable exceptions, except they're also for non-exceptional cases

Rydwolf Programs

put would make sense I think

user

And the part about them algebraic isn't totally necessary, I think - they could be normal OOP objects too

I strongly associate put with maps

Rydwolf Programs

Like...dicts?

Or something else

user

19:55

Yeah

Rydwolf Programs

I've never seen it in that context

get and set is what JS and Rust use

user

tbh it doesn't matter too much which keyword you choose - perform, put, do, run - your users will eventually get used to it

Rydwolf Programs

Yeah but it can at least not be ugly and stupid

user

docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/util/…

Ugly and stupid?

Rydwolf Programs

perform

user

19:56

lol

purform

Rydwolf Programs

I'm honestly fine with e in certain contexts, what bothers me is when it corrupts other nice looking words

form is a beuatiful like, indigo-fading-to-black thing

per is like...yellow and brown and black

It'd be like doing construction work in a dark black suit with a blue tie, in a desert with iron-rich sand

user

I wonder if you could fit cooling into a suit that would be good enough to cool you in like 80 degree weather would making your suit bulge too much

Maybe you could store the coolant in front of your stomach and cover it with one of those things you put on to look fat

Actually, I have no idea if that's how space suit cooling even works, and it's time to move to OTTNB

Seggan

20:15

@RydwolfPrograms no

its a weird mishmash of special syntax; too confusable with property access

either promote it to a full function or make a different syntax

user

It's much more convenient when chaining

Rust also does operator overloading through traits instead of special syntax or whatever and I really like that

Wait a second, .await is special syntax? I do not like that

imo it should be foo.await()

Seggan

^

@user well ure not accessing a field, are you?

user

But perhaps treating it like a normal function will mess up borrow checking or whatever?

Seggan

@RydwolfPrograms yeah throw is nice

user

@Seggan I thought it was .await()

Seggan

20:18

i was trying to answer your q

user

I'm used to throw but I feel Python's raise makes more sense (but since everyone's used to throw, it doesn't really matter)

@Seggan If you're using an IDE, it should be highlighted

foo().await.bar() would be nicer than (await foo()).bar() even if it feels weird to do .await

Seggan

@user you language shouldnt be dependent on ides

user

Fair enough

Seggan

20:44

@lyxal ah, you learned something from me :P

Rydwolf Programs

20:58

@user I do agree with this, but it's worth noting it still couldn't be a normal function

@Seggan ...says the Java(/Kotlin) user :p

I thought .await without the () was weird at first too, but it's kinda nice to actually use/read

user

Hey, leave Kotlin out of this! :P

Rydwolf Programs

Since it's clearly distinct from the method calls surrounding it, so tends to stand out even without an IDE, and saves typing (and since syntactically it's "incorrect" anyway, might as well go with the one that's easier to type)

user

Also, I'd say Java is much less reliant on IDEs than other languages because it's so simple. It's only because it's verbose as hell that you need an IDE, but that's a different reason from the one we were discussing

Rydwolf Programs

Java users are the ones I've seen using IDEs the most out of anyone, tho that's probably since a lot of the ones I'm thinking of are Minecraft modders and I guess that's kinda different

user

@RydwolfPrograms I don't know much Rust, would the signature of some magic await function be unrepresentable in Rust?

@RydwolfPrograms Because the IDEs are great and it's super verbose, not because you need an IDE to understand where a certain method comes from or whatever

I find it much harder to trace where a certain function comes from in languages with typeclasses

Rydwolf Programs

21:03

@user No, futures have a type signature, but IIRC they aren't actually part of Rust

I think Rust just provides syntactical support and you need a library that actually makes the language do greenthreading or whatever

E.g., Tokio

user

Interesting

So an await() function would be possible?

Rydwolf Programs

I don't think so

Seggan

@RydwolfPrograms i programmed java in notepad for a while

its really verbose but otherwise manageable

user

Notepad? Not even npp?

Seggan

yeah notepad

Rydwolf Programs

21:05

Well I mean, as a function. As a special syntactical thing it's totally possible since it's literally just detecting .await as a function instead of a property

user

Respect

Rydwolf Programs

Since .await has to like, switch what the thread's doing and stuff, I don't think you could do it as a method being called

user

I more meant having await() be treated as a normal function instead of a special syntax, with the internals being magic

Rydwolf Programs

Yeah I mean I don't see why not, if it's special cased

user

Time to make Rust but with that one change

Rydwolf Programs

21:07

But as I said having it not be a function is much more usable :p

user

Yeah, but it seems irregular if other Rust functions can't be called without parentheses

Rydwolf Programs

It's not anything like a function tho

user

I'd like it if you could do foo.bar to call a method bar()

But I guess that's kinda misleading

Rydwolf Programs

Even if it might fit a mental model of one slightly better, it would just create misunderstandings elsewhere

user

Yeah

Rydwolf Programs

21:08

Having it be explicitly its own thing kinda makes sense

My ideal async/await system is one I've described here before

1. No async keyword, the compiler/interpreter figures it out

2. All async functions await by default

user

I don't really like how these modern programming languages (Rust, Kotlin, etc.) like being so explicit. It's really not appropriate for languages that are used in professional business and taught to innocent children

Rydwolf Programs

3. You can add a .prom/.fut/?/some other indicator to a function or method to make it return a promise/future

user

IDEs should strike through explicit-making boilerplate like .toInt to protect people's eyes

Rydwolf Programs

E.g., tcp_conn(8080) would implicitly await and return the TCP stream or whatever, and tcp_conn?(8080) would return a promise

So you could create two tcp_conns at the same instant, instead of having to block, then use something like a switch/any macro to wait for both to finish

Seggan

21:26

@user wdym? kotlin is all about implicits

(well, except number type casting. thats annoying)

i.e. with, lambda receivers, inferred types

user

21:48

With with and lambda receivers, you know what the receiver, which makes it a little easier to find where a method's coming from (but yeah, still not as direct as Java)

Inferred types are an expected feature for statically typed languages nowadays, and they're not so hidden that you couldn't find out yourself

@Seggan That's what I was talking about

Kotlin is not weakly typed at all

Pretty sure I read somewhere that the team working on it had being explicit in mind as a main design goal

From here:

> Kotlin hates implicit, so this is not going to happen.

> The Kotlin guys are very against implicits. Everything in Kotlin is explicit.

But yes, they're talking mainly about implicit conversions

In data classes, you have to manually write val/var even though the fact that it's a data class already means that all the parameters are proper fields and not just constructor parameters

It sucks that so many cool features can also complicate things in so many cases

DLosc

22:30

For anyone who's interested, I updated the SE profanity filter userscript that I use (originally made by @RydwolfPrograms) with a better regex that avoids several common false positives. No more censoring Charles Dickens or shiitake mushrooms. :)

Adám

22:52

What about people who are called Dick?

DLosc

Yeah, there's not really any good way around that one.

user

Let’s be honest, practically no one calls themselves that these days

Adám

Maybe not in English-talking countries, but I had a gym teacher in Sweden called Dick Hoppe, and everyone thought it was so funny because "Hoppe" means "Jump".

DLosc

There are also several famous people who tend to be mentioned on StackExchange, including Dick van Dyke, Dick Cheney, and Philip K. Dick.

user

@DLosc do you have the original regex somewhere? (I understand the script itself shouldn’t have that but do you happen to have a regex101 link or something? I’d do btoa but on phone rn and I’d like to expand my vocabulary)

Ah, true

DLosc

22:57

I added an exception for Philip K. Dick, but it wasn't general enough, so philip-k-dick is still censored :P

user

Maybe allow capital Dick?

DLosc

@user One moment

Adám

Will it censor Cockfosters?

user

It’s unlikely someone will start a sentience with the insult or capitalize it in the middle of a sentence

DLosc

@Adám No, "cock" isn't in the list of words to censor at all (possibly because of the "rooster" meaning, possibly because Rydwolf didn't think of it)

@user It's a thought. Right now the whole thing is case-insensitive.

user

22:59

Does it censor Scunthorpe? If not, you’ve solved the scunthorpe problem!

DLosc

@user It does, lol. Didn't think of adding that exception.

Adám

How are profanity filters supposed to deal with pale lager from Fugging, Austria?

Fucking Hell

Fucking Hell is a German pale lager, a Pilsner, with an alcohol content of 4.9%. It is named after Fucking, the previous name of the village of Fugging in Austria; hell is the German word for 'pale' and a typical description of this kind of beer. The beer's name was initially controversial. Both the local authorities in Fucking and the European Union's Trade Marks and Designs Registration Office initially objected to the name. It was eventually accepted and the lager is sold internationally. == Production == Fucking Hell is not brewed in Fugging, but was originally brewed in the Brauerei Waldhaus...

user

Lol, they intentionally named it fucking

DLosc

@user regex101.com/r/kNvPgm/1 should do it (I'm not 100% sure since the actual code makes a list of regexes, which I've glommed into one big regex on Regex101 using |)

user

Thanks!

DLosc

23:06

@Adám Given that this is something I use at work so my coworkers don't do a double-take if they see me scrolling past a BF answer, I don't mind it censoring that one :P

user

That’s a lot simpler than i expected, i wonder how complex the ones in games and stuff are

Adám

@user The town was actually called that at the time.

user

Yeah but the article says they named it because it was funny

DLosc

@user Not complex enough, apparently :P

user

Well at least this one covers the second:p

DLosc

23:10

though to be fair, this one doesn't even bother with racial slurs since they aren't very common on StackExchange, whereas apparently they can be much more common in certain multiplayer games

lyxal

23:28

Gaming amiright

DLosc

This is probably more on-topic for the gaming room, but I've gotta say, the Age of Empires II player base has a reputation for being particularly "wholesome," and my experience bears that out. The worst thing anyone's ever said to me was when I won a game and my opponent said my strategy was "kinda lame tbh"

Transcript for