(He’s off to chill in the woods and freelance.) What you really want in an editor is someone who’s still on the dock, who can say, Hi, I’m looking at your ship, and it’s missing a bow, the front mast is crooked, and it looks to me as if your propellers are going to have to be fixed.
I want a culture where employees can tell us their dreams, including after Carta, and we support them doing it. Lastly, all departures, whether employee initiated or company initiated, will receive payment commensurate with tenure.
Collectively, the engineers at Lickability have worked with dozens of iOS development teams, shipping countless features, new products, redesigns, and Swift rewrites. Ten years in, our processes have evolved into a well-oiled machine with collaboration at the core of our day-to-day engineering. Whether we’re augmenting a client’s existing iOS team or acting as the sole developers, and whether we’re building a social network, news reader, or game, our approach to collaborating on code remains largely the same. We find it important to follow a few key guidelines on every product we help ship, and would like to share them with you.
“I think that we need a way of doing math where things don’t need to proven completely before moving on. Like if a hypothesis about prime numbers is so far true for the first 10,000 of them we could say it's ‘finitely true’ or something. [...]”
I think that we need a way of doing math where things don’t need to proven completely before moving on. Like if a hypothesis about prime numbers is so far true for the first 10,000 of them we could say it's “finitely true” or something. Then anything we prove using that fact would also be only true in a limited sense. I’m guessing that for many practical purposes this only partially true result would be enough. Are there logics which think about this idea of partial truth? @JadeMasterMath But Hardy and Littlewood did something really cool: they proved something assuming the Riemann Hypothesis is true, and proved it a completely different way assuming the Riemann Hypothesis is false! Both ways really *use* the assumption they made. https://twitter.com/johncarlosbaez/status/1199427147284115457
Why making Never a bottom type is hard (see Pinboard profile for notes)
In theory, `Never` can be a substitute for every type, since you have no instance to call any methods on, but that breaks down with static methods since those don’t need an instance. Right, the issue is with static and initializer requirements. The `Never` type itself can be a subtype of all types in the language but that does not mean that `Never` can conform to all protocols. So, it gets hairy when you introduce generalized existentials into the language. i.e. `Never` needs to be a subtype of those existentials without necessarily conforming to the protocol. Related, SE-0217: https://forums.swift.org/t/se-0217-the-unwrap-or-die-operator/14107/222
Elm is about making delightful projects. [...] Projects you are excited to share. Projects that get you excited about programming! That means I am always asking myself how Elm can be simpler. How can it be easier to learn? More fun? Quicker for prototyping? More reliable? I think my obsession with these questions are the heart of Elm's design philosophy and Elm's success.
healing doesn’t happen in a linear manner, but in an ever-outward spiral; you will find yourself in the same place, but in a slightly different one, again and again
Have you heard the buzz? Applied category theory is gaining ground! But, you ask, what is applied category theory? Upon first seeing those words, I suspect many folks might think either one of two thoughts: 1. Applied category theory? Isn't that an oxymoron? or 2. Applied category theory? What's the hoopla? Hasn't category theory always been applied? (Visit the blog to read more!)
In type theory, an uninhabited type is often called a bottom type, and written as ⊥. A bottom type is a subtype of every other type. So `Never` would be an `Int` and a `String` and a `UIViewController` and every other type. The opposite is the top type (⊤), the supertype of every other type. In Swift, that’s `Any`.
This is "GORUCO 2014 - Samantha John, Jason Brennan - Designing a better Programmer Community" by Gotham Ruby Conference on Vimeo, the home for high quality…
Protocol-oriented programming is strongly recommended in the Swift community, and Apple has given a lot of guidance on how to use it in your everyday code. However, there has not been a lot of attention on when it is not appropriate, and what to do in that case. We will explore this idea, and show that there is a completely straightforward and mechanical way to translate any protocol into a concrete datatype. Once you do this you can still write your code much like you would with protocols, but all of the complexity inherit in protocols go away. Even more amazing, a new type of composition appears that is difficult to see when dealing with only protocols. We will also demo a real life, open source library that was originally written in the protocol-oriented way, but after running into many problems with the protocols, it was rewritten entirely in this witness-oriented way. The outcome was really surprising, and really powerful.
https://twitter.com/mbrandonw
https://appbuilders.ch
The closest professions to teaching are stage acting and stand-up comedy. Learn how they do it. [D]on’t focus on subtleties that interest you; focus on your audience.
More and more, I try to live in harmony with the seasons, not the clock. It turns out that in northern Norway, “people view winter as something to be enjoyed, not something to be endured,” says Leibowitz, and that makes all the difference. “there’s no such thing as bad weather, only bad clothing”
The system, then, does not particularly care for the individual user as much as it thrives on the decomposition and recomposition of the data that users provide Being shown what you are “supposed” to see is central to what social media offer (the promise of self-expression is mainly an alibi for that larger surrender to algorithmic recommendation); they allow us to consume that passivity toward what we want as pleasurable in itself.
🎬 The source for www.pointfree.co, a video series on functional programming and the Swift programming language. - Better exercise solutions (h/t @sharplet) · pointfreeco/pointfreeco@78fc3d1
