This is a federal search warrant pertaining to an ongoing investigation, not a facility that Trump organized to hunt nonbelievers, as much as you want that to be true so that your narrative can play itself out.
Now that dart has sound types, why not continue this work? I'd love to write dart and try it out, but I don't really care about phone apps or web apps. I know the dart vm exists but it seems like Google has so much control over that, and it makes me uncomfortable and unwilling to invest time in it. If an LLVM branch existed, I could be more certain that corporate won't obsolete my project out of the blue some day, as Google has become known to do, many times.
People with good content that you don't agree with don't deserve the same opportunity to be paid for their content? I've never used medium but it's starting to sound like I better not bother.
I really like that HN is so low bandwidth. I often check the fp on shitty mobile connection and while I can't read most stories until my rss reader catches up, at least I know what people are talking about.
I don't experience any lag with current word except for very large files. It's slightly less responsive than typing in vim, but most operations feel instant.
Yes, but that's a fundamental difference, don't you think? Java interop works on almost every device, same with js. I'm the context of just portability, tapping into Java code is more useful than tapping into c++ code.
I get where you're coming from, but there's a long list of reasons why it hasn't ever been done very well, not the least of which being that it just wouldn't be as useful as people think. There's a million languages that can talk to c/c++. Guile can do it, ruby can do it, Julia can do it, there's already some lisp cousins/friends that have that ability.
I'm not super familiar with clasp, but I'd bet anything that its missing some major features compared to sbcl.
Hygiene is a nicety that indeed can be emulated by unhygienic macros.
First class continuations however are less easy, and just as big a part of scheme. Callcc is a cult, nearly, and for good reason. With it, almost all local control patterns can be easily implemented so you can have things like fibers, coroutines, etc basically for free. It gets harder when you want asynchrony and parallelism, Andy Wingo has a great blog about guile internals and delimited continuation implementation, CML stuff, etc. If you're interested in higher-level scheme implementation, that's a good starting point.
Clojure has advanced control flow mechanisms and more sophisticated parallelism features than most scheme implementations, but this relies a lot on the underlying host platform. Callcc is made possible at the fundamental level of how scheme works. Pmaps in clojure work because the jvm is incredible and js engines are getting there too. LLVM is not the magic bullet for excellent language design, sometimes.
I would love clojure as a native platform but I have very little hope that it will happen.
Clojure a greatest strength was being able to use all the mature Java libraries. The jvm is an incredibly sophisticated platform, regardless of how shitty Java is. Clojure script benefits from the same concept by being able to run on node, use npm libraries, run on lighter devices in a quicker start-up than regular clojure, etc.
Common lisp and clojure have quite a few differences, though common lisp is certainly on clojures tail with regards to adoptability in enterprise. Scheme is a simpler, truer to principle language than CL.
Scheme was my first love, before we even knew what r6rs would look like.
I feel like r7rs-small rights the wrongs that r6 dumped on us. Scheme has always been a very fragmented community especially in the technical sense, there's a lot of scheme features that don't carry over to another implementation. However, I think most scheme subcommunities appreciate the spiritual benefits of immutable data structures, hygiene in macros, lambda calc, continuations once you grok them, streams, etc.
Clojure has filled the hole for a while but I suspect a scheme implementation with as sophisticated a packaging and build system as clojure/lein could be in the works somewhere ;)
Racket is a scheme in one sense but not spiritually. It's a unified learning environment. The editor works hand in hand with the language engine, which you can mold however you like, there's a sophisticated package system, etc. It's practically an insult to describe racket as "a scheme implementation". It's not wrong, but it's a massive understatement.
I guess my contention is that we all should realize a giant program like word is going to exhibit areas of latency that simpler programs can be more efficient in.
Idk, I don't expect word to pain as quickly as vim because why would it? It's huge.
Word is what I use for editing rich text, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that doing the same in vim or emacs is much more of a chore and less intuitive.
Idk, seems like comparing a wrench to a hammer from my perspective, that's all.
I'd think that would have more to do with painting the screen then actually processing the keystroke. A few ms difference wouldn't be noticeably slower unless you were watching for it specifically.
This is a federal search warrant pertaining to an ongoing investigation, not a facility that Trump organized to hunt nonbelievers, as much as you want that to be true so that your narrative can play itself out.