Hacker Newsnew | comments | ask | jobs | submit | sltkr's commentslogin

To learn something new, you need to get out of your comfort zone, and try to get used to things that might seem "strange" or "unpleasant" at first.

Just because the syntax looks odd at first glance, it doesn't mean you can't get used to it in time. If you are so quick to dismissing the language, how are you ever going to learn anything new?

Principles aside, I'd expect people on HN to be more familiar with single quote being used as a prefix. After all, that's how you denote symbols and quote things in LISP, Scheme and their variants.

reply

coldtea 2 days ago | link

Well, at least in LISP you can use "quote" instead of the single literal quote.

And while familiar with quote in Lisps, I mostly code in algol-like languages, so my OCD for balanced quotes come fro that.

Imagine a Lisper seeing an unbalanced parenthesis used in the syntax of a new Lisp, to get my pain :-)

reply

sltkr 3 days ago | link | parent | on: Go Performance Tales

Sparse is fine if they are more-or-less randomly distributed.

reply

awda 3 days ago | link

I was mostly aiming for unique -> no hash collisions.

reply


Programmer's habits are possibly less reliable than requirements enforced by the compiler.

reply


And "Transport Layer" should ring a bell to anyone familiar with the OSI model (for example, a student that has taken an introductory course on network protocols).

reply


This is a cute story, but it lacks all sources, and it contradicts Wikipedia [1] [2]:

> Commonly repeated lore has it that August has 31 days because Augustus wanted his month to match the length of Julius Caesar's July, but this is an invention of the 13th century scholar Johannes de Sacrobosco. Sextilis in fact had 31 days before it was renamed, and it was not chosen for its length (see Julian calendar). According to a senatus consultum quoted by Macrobius, Sextilis was renamed to honor Augustus because several of the most significant events in his rise to power, culminating in the fall of Alexandria, fell in that month.

The fact that February has the fewest days makes sense considering it was the last month of the Julian year (March was the first, hence July and August were called quintilis and sextilis, for fifth and sixth, respectively). It doesn't quite explain why the 31-day months are distributed unevenly over the year, but if you are going to take days off, it makes sense to take them off the last month of the year.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus#Month_of_August

reply

darkarmani 5 days ago | link

> March was the first, hence July and August were called quintilis and sextilis, for fifth and sixth, respectively

An even better example is the actual numbered months:

- Septum (7)

- Octo (8)

- Novem (9)

- Decem (10)

reply

dllthomas 5 days ago | link

"if you are going to take days off, it makes sense to take them off the last month of the year."

It's sort of understandable to take them off the last month of the year, but I think it makes the most sense to take them off the longer months first.

reply

sixothree 5 days ago | link

Backwards compatibility.

reply

dllthomas 5 days ago | link

I don't follow. If you're already resizing months, what backwards compatibility is preserved by moving days from the last month rather than elsewhere?

reply

VikingCoder 5 days ago | link

Nature abhors a vacuum.

Internet abhors a claim contradicting Wikipedia.

reply

hobbes300 5 days ago | link

Contradicting Wikipedia does not equal a lack of truth.

reply

sltkr 5 days ago | link

No, but information on Wikipedia tends to be accurate and based on reliable sources -- when a person contradicts Wikipedia and fails to provide any sources of their own, they are usually wrong. Not necessarily, of course, but often enough to say the burden of proof lies with the person making the unsubstantiated claim.

reply

saraid216 5 days ago | link

Uh. There was a source provided: 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.

I wouldn't call that more reliable, but it's still as valid a source as Wikipedia.

reply

mgraczyk 5 days ago | link

The 1911 Britannica is not the source provided. The source is a hypothetical entry in an encyclopedia that most people don't have. That is not as valuable a source as Wikipedia because I cannot easily verify that the 1911 Britannica corroborates the facts in this email.

reply

acqq 5 days ago | link

The text of the whole 1911 Britannica is just one Google away:

https://archive.org/details/EncyclopaediaBritannica1911HQDJV...

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclopædia_Britannica

reply

maxerickson 5 days ago | link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_articles_inc...

reply

saraid216 5 days ago | link

Just because you are lazy and unwilling to verify the source doesn't mean it's not a source.

reply

sltkr 5 days ago | link

You're right -- my mistake. I missed that somehow.

reply

sltkr 5 days ago | link | parent | on: Introduction to A*

It's more like: breadth-first search is a specialization of Dijkstra's algorithm, which is a specialization of A*.

reply

sgeisenh 5 days ago | link

While breadth-first search and Dijkstra's have a lot in common, Dijkstra's is a priority first search which is inherently sequential, whereas there is some parallelism to be had in BFS since you can check the neighbors of your frontier concurrently given a data structure with which it is efficient to do so.

reply

jmt7les 5 days ago | link

A* uses BFS but was a specialization of Dijkstra's, not the other way around.

reply

Sharlin 5 days ago | link

No, Dijkstra is simply A* whose heuristic function is h(x)=0. A* is the more general one.

reply

amitp 5 days ago | link

Another way of looking at it: A* is Dijkstra where the edge weights have been modified. http://11011110.livejournal.com/135302.html

reply


Original original article: http://www.politie.nl/nieuws/2014/april/2/08-ilegale-bitcoin...

-----

sltkr 25 days ago | link | parent | on: 2048 Solver

Seems like a great application for Monte Carlo tree search.

-----


> [..] douches [..] paying huge sums of money for crappy apartments, not even because they want to live there, but because they enjoy bullying the poors.

I find this very hard to believe.

-----


Costly in what sense? Compilation time? Binary size?

-----

xroche 41 days ago | link

Binary size! (in my base separated .dbg files were HUGE, compared to the .so files). I don't think it has any impact on performances however (especially as the debug information is put in a separate ELF section, either in a separate file, or mapped but "cold" [ie. not live in memory as the runtime does not touch it])

-----

More

Lists | RSS | Bookmarklet | Guidelines | FAQ | DMCA | News News | Feature Requests | Bugs | Y Combinator | Apply | Library

Search: