bgongfu
Joined 8 years ago
Joined 8 years ago
There's no proof either way, but it seems the least likely alternative to me. As to Buddha, Gandhi, Tesla, Einstein and many more otherwise respectable thinkers.
Examine what you're not supposed to think, what is collectively ridiculed; that's where truth is hiding in plain sight.
Reference counting is only used for heap allocated values and types that themselves reference values, like pairs and tables.
https://github.com/basic-gongfu/cixl/blob/master/src/cixl/bo...
Did you ever try thinking about how they might turn out for the best instead to compare results? Energy follows thought, the more you focus on it the more likely it is to happen from my experience. And the only place and time you're ever going to stop failure from happening is here and now using up to date local knowledge.
Take it or leave it...
I lived through Microsoft's dark ages, when the victory of open source was still hanging by a thread. The reason we're seeing a softer Microsoft is that they lost, they were forced to change. And the open question is what they learned in the process.
On the other hand, they're producing pretty decent software these days; dotNet Core, TypeScript & VSCode just to name a few solid projects. Open source, no less; imagine that back when monkey boy was running the show, literally.
But then I keep hearing about shady Linux licensing deals and endless privacy intrusions over in Windows land.
Tricky indeed, I think I'm going to leave my code in there for now and give them a chance to redeem themselves.
Cixl [0] doesn't derive nil from every other type, instead Nil and most other types derive Opt; which means that user code may specify Opt to accept nil or any other type to have them automatically trapped by function dispatch. I find this to be a nice compromise between wrapped optionals and shooting from the hip.
Sweet memories from a more playful online experience, and probably part of the reason I turned vegan.
[0] http://www.stinkymeat.net/stinkymeat/day1/