a-nikolaev

It can answer: "I'm a language model and don't have the capacity to help with that" if the question is not detailed enough. But supplied with more context, it can be very helpful.

I'm using gnuplot for plotting too (the actual gnuplot application not a library that uses gnuplot as its backend).

And I usually keep computation and plotting separate. Computation produces data files, and a gnuplot script generates plots. This separation of computation and plotting allows updating charts later if needed, collected data can be reused in other plots, and additional data analysis can be performed and charts can be augmented.

So I personally don't see many advantages from integrating chart generation into computational pipeline itself (except for computation monitoring or maybe when user response is needed to direct computation). Because of that, libraries that encourage charts generation from a computed array instead of dumping that data into persisted files feels like an anti-pattern to me.

A collection (e.g. an array or a hash map) that stores things. Maybe more than one collection like that, different for each type of entity: monsters, items, etc. (Separate code paths to handle these different types of things.)

Keeping indexes/keys for references, and loops over these collections can do a lot without any upfront complexity of an entity system.

I think, Wiki fundraising message should be more informational, not an emotional cry for help and money. I myself don't want to be manipulated, give me the numbers and what you want to do with my money.

I think, Wikimedia's fundraising message should include the amount of money they have, the expenses they expect for the coming years (with a basic breakdown of how it is going to be spent), as well as a link to a detailed report of how much money they got and how they were spent for the previous years. Basically be transparent, b/c someone might want to spend their money on a different web project they like.

No parentheses can be nice for cleaner pattern matching, e.g. something like this:

  match a, b with
  | 1, 2 -> x
  | _ -> y

pretty much

Yeah. Maybe enclosing a particular type of hole could give more points or something like that. Also, one could put wooden pegs with numbers or other tokens in the holes to specify points that can be gained, or those tokens that can be collected. Such modifications can make the game more replayable. (One could also use this game as a sort of fortune-telling device, since solving a game requires randomization, and a player may end up in one or the other configuration at the end of the game.)

Dreaming is fine, but Musk has a track record of not delivering on his over-optimistic promises. And a dream is not enough to overpower gravity and the laws of thermodynamics. There are very hard physical limits on how efficient a rocket can be, even in the most optimistic scenarios.