jmgrosen
Joined 14 years ago
Karma
912
Submissions
245
Member since
Jan 13
Recent submissions
Comment · 1 month ago
hope to get a greg collab on here sometime
Comment · 2 years ago
Even at 23mph, a pedestrian's chance of death in a collision, in the US over the years 1994-1998, was only 10%: https://aaafoundation.org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-seve...
I don't mean to imply that that is a low risk, only that speed is quite a crucial factor.
Comment · 2 years ago
Especially the Field model!
Comment · 2 years ago
given the crackpot proofs received by coq-club, i imagine it would indeed
Comment · 3 years ago
are there any documented cases of this actually happening in the wild?
Comment · 3 years ago
Thank you for the self-promotion, Scheme for Max looks like something I’ve been wishing for for a long time!
Comment · 3 years ago
Use an existential type, usually called Some in Haskell: https://hackage.haskell.org/package/some-1.0.5/docs/Data-Som... The implementation of this type one has in their head (a GADT) adds a boxing overhead, but the actual implementation in this library uses a newtype.
That way if you have a type Expr a, you can have a list type [Some Expr].
Comment · 3 years ago
yes: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/130136/The%20...
(sorry for lack of details in my post, on mobile)
Comment · 3 years ago
No, it’s not—-they’re passing in a “node”, not a list, which always contains both a head element and a (nullable) tail pointer. That’s why it can’t separate the head in the case of size one: the node must maintain a non-null head.
Comment · 3 years ago
Some of you may enjoy this fantastic recent paper on how to win both the comprehension benefits of splitting lexer and parser AND the performance benefits of fusing them: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jdy22/papers/flap-a-deterministic-...
Comment · 3 years ago
This is absolutely ridiculous. I love it.
Comment · 4 years ago
I think more like 5.5 minutes: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=300+nautical+miles+%2F+...