Yes, like giving the correct result for every possible input.
Not really sure that a type system is going to guarantee that your program generates the correct result for every possible input.
Readit Newsrerdavies commented on Typechecking is undecidable when 'type' is a type (1989) [pdf] dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/... · Posted by u/zem
rerdavies commented on Typechecking is undecidable when 'type' is a type (1989) [pdf] dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/... · Posted by u/zem
Hum... I'm getting 403, forbiden. Is it down?
Working for me, but very very slow to load (which I assume is most of the way to 403).
rerdavies commented on Typechecking is undecidable when 'type' is a type (1989) [pdf] dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/... · Posted by u/zem
And still this type system could be the base for a very interesting and powerfull programming language imo.
Presumably with the rather unpleasant side-effect of compiles that may never finish. :-P
rerdavies commented on Typechecking is undecidable when 'type' is a type (1989) [pdf] dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/... · Posted by u/zem
rerdavies commented on Typechecking is undecidable when 'type' is a type (1989) [pdf] dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/... · Posted by u/zem
Not getting it. Why would you want to do this? And why is no distinction made between `typeof(type)` and `type`? And doesn't the entire problem go away if you distinguish between `typeof(type)`, which is a value whose type is `type`?
rerdavies commented on How problematic is resampling audio from 44.1 to 48 kHz? kevinboone.me/sample48.ht... · Posted by u/brewmarche
Someone else wrote that it was chosen to best match PAL and NTSC. IIRC there is also a Technology Connections video about those early PCM adaptor devices that would record to VHS tape.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=44,100_Hz&oldid=1...>
Take it with a grain of salt, I’m not really knowledgeable about this.
E: also note the section about prime number squares below
4800kHz and 44100kHz devices appeared at roughly the same time. Sony's first 44100kHz device was shipped in 1979. Phillips wanted to use 44.0kHz.
If you can do 44.1khz on an NSTC recording device, you can do 44.0khz too. Neither NTSC digital format uses the fully available space in the horizontal blanking intervals on an NTSC VHS device, so using less really isn't a problem.
Why is 44Khz better? There's a very easy way to do excellent sample rate conversions from 44.0Khz to 48Khz, you upsample the audio by 12 (by inserting 11 zeros between each sample), apply a 22Khz low-pass filter, and then decimate by 11 (by keeping only every 11th sample. To go in the other direction, upsample by 11, filter, and decimate by 12. Plausibly implementable on 1979 tech. And trivially implementable on modern tech.
To perform the same conversion from 44.1kHz to 48kHz, you would have to upsample by 160, filter at at a sample rate of 160x44.1kHz, and then decimate by 147. Or upsample by 147, filter, and decimate by 160. Impossible with ancient tech, and challenging even on modern tech. (I would imagine modern solutions would use polyphase filters instead, with tables sizes that would be impractical on 1979 VLSI). Polyphase filter tables for 44.0kHz/48.0kHz conversion are massively smaller too.
As for the prime factors... factors of 7 (twice) of 44100 really aren't useful for anything. More useful would be factors of two (five times), which would in increase the greatest common divisor from 300 to 4,000!
rerdavies commented on IPv6 is not insecure because it lacks a NAT johnmaguire.me/blog/ipv6-... · Posted by u/johnmaguire
I would never debate NAT was marketed as security (as marketing is often detached from the reality of what's being sold) but I'd be interested why it's a material factor in securing networks independent of the stateful firewall mentioned, which most seem to actually rely on. The "snooty" people probably mean less what may have been marketed to consumers and more what the standards which introduced it say. E.g. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1631 notes address depletion and scaling as drivers in the opening but the only mentions of security are later on in how NAT actually makes security more difficult.
I.e. it would seem whatever argument could be made about security from NAT, poor or not, intended to be security or not, would be immaterial in context of stateful session tracking with outbound originate allowed alone w/o doing the NAT on top anyways.
The principle difference, IMHO, is that it makes the security visible. My home cable router has NO firewall configuration at all. Supplied by my ISP and woefully deficient in absolutely all respects. I can't (for example) configure It does have a configuration for forwarding IPv4 ports to inside machines; but none for forwarding IPv6 ports. Does it have stateful filtering of IPv6 ports? I'd like to think that it does, but if so there is no visible evidence that it does.
rerdavies commented on Ask HN: COBOL devs, how are AI coding affecting your work? · Posted by u/zkid18
If it's bad at python the most popular language what language it's good at?
If you see the other comments they're basically mentioning most programming languages
Pretty darned good at C++ and typescript too.
rerdavies commented on Let's be honest, Generative AI isn't going all that well garymarcus.substack.com/p... · Posted by u/7777777phil
Slice THEIR hands. They might say yours are rigged.
I'm a non dev and the things I'm building blow me away. I think many of these people criticizing are perhaps more on the execution side and have a legitimate craft they are protecting.
If you're more on the managerial side, and I'd say a trusting manager not a show me your work kind, then you're more likely to be open and results oriented.
I am a (very) senior dev with decades of experience. And I, too, am blown away by the massive productivity gains I get from the use of coding AIs.
Part of the craft of being a good developer is keeping up with current technology. I can't help thinking that those who oppose AI are not protecting legitimate craft, but are covering up their own laziness when it comes to keeping up. It seems utterly inconceivable to me that anyone who has kept up would oppose this technology.
There is a huge difference between vibe coding and responsible professional use of AI coding assistants (the principle one, of course, being that AI-generated code DOES get reviewed by a human).
But that, being said, I am enormously supportive of vibe coding by amateur developers. Vibe coding is empowering technology that puts programming power into the hands of amateur developers, allowing them to solve the problems that they face in their day-to-day work. Something that we've been working toward for decades! Will it be professional-quality code? No. Of course not. Will it do what it needs to do? Invariably, yes.