hexane360

Well, except in the case of variable shadowing.

Signs we may be reaching the Plateau of Productivity

Fig. 8, where the model becomes poorly calibrated in terms of text prediction (Answers are "flattened" so that many answers appear equally probable, but below the best answer)

In many subfields, the submitter isn't even attempted to be hidden from the reviewers. Usually, even the reviewers can be guessed with high accuracy by the submitters

It's MathJax, do you have javascript enabled?

Note that Mathematica units impose a very large runtime penalty, making them unsuitable for a lot of applications

It's also quite similar to Thread and MapThread in Mathematica

Also worth noting that test pilots of experimental aircraft generally wear parachutes, at least for higher risk tests. This includes tests of commercial aircraft.

... no? Unless you're referring to null as a bottom type, then that doesn't hold. Are you describing some property of a specific language?

Only if you're designing both functions ahead of time. In other words, it's not composable.

This often comes up when writing a function which returns a wrapper over a generic type (like Option<T>). If your Option type is T | null, then there's no way to distinguish between a null returned by the function or a null that is part of T.

As a concrete example, consider a map with a method get(key: K) -> Option<V>. How do you tell the difference between a missing key and a key which contains `null` as a value?