Amikke @Amikke@qoto.org

@hj haha yeah that is a simpler explanation I could have used

@Moon you can set up barriers like “until now this has been any, from this point onwards I am declaring that I know it to be X” and vice versa at pretty much any point of the code, but modules are an especially good start, as with TS you often also declare and import types, which fit naturally into the other imports of the module.

@Moon ts is the way, but very often the default config is too strict to switch into from an existing js project. Change the settings to, for example, allow for implicit any, and re-enable them when you refactor the code.

@hj AFAIK union in programming usually means “type A or type B(…or type C, or type D…)”, persisting even in times of early C, where a union is a space in memory that can contain data of any of the union types, so you can for example make a float64, uint8[] union, write floats and read them as separate bytes etc.

This is not the same as “contents of type A and contents of type B”.

@kumicota what’s that on the right? I don’t recognise.

@PausalZ oh yeah, I don’t discount the existing ecosystem nor claim that you should switch to Julia immediately. Yes, inertia-related reasons like the existing community, knowledge base, libraries and plain familiarity are very important and keep languages like Python alive even when worthy successors are present. This is not a “switch to Julia” post, it’s a “interpreted languages have become an artifact of the simpler past” post.

Nevertheless, I’m happy to inform you that Julia’s type and method overloading system provides all of the necessities for OOP too, and it’s not slower than C, C++ of Rust; with only the latter having the advantage of nearly runtime-free memory safety, at the cost of many restrictions. A properly done Julia program is as efficient as a properly done C program that also uses adequate high-speed calculation libraries for the platform, at a fraction of the required effort.

The advancements in compilation and JIT-compilation have made interpreted languages pointless.

Except for inertia-related reasons such as existing ecosystem, why would you use Python over Julia? It has all of its advantages and more and compiles to efficient binaries instead of redoing runtime maintenance work every time.

@tk imagine being younger than 9/11

Every solar power plant is a fusion power plant with extra steps.

Nearly every power plant is a solar power plant with extra steps.

@smigol nadal o wiele lepiej niż typowi przedstawiciele alternatyw, i piszę to jako ktoś kto życzy PO szybkiej i dokumentnej śmierci.

@xue @tk oh yeah, they only decrease the risk by an order of magnitude or two, no biggie. Not even mentioning HIV, which was the main problem in aforementioned Africa, for which a condom is the go-to safeguard.

As for the CC allowing condoms, I’m pretty sure the official statement from the official Pope Francis must count for something, he got a whole lot of flak from conservatives for that a little while ago.

@varl42 a Dyson sphere requires tearing the entire solar system down for materials, and is much less visible (as the sphere covers the sun). Simply moving the planets is much, much easier.

@zef@mastodon.technology there are two obstacles: the JSON purists who legit think pasting it in the middle of JS code is a sensible way of importing it and at the same time don’t like comments because muh pure data serialisation, and the state of the Node ecosystem which still has trouble with adapting ES2015 modules and gets panic attacks thinking of backwards compatibility with pre-JSON5 Node.