In the Elixir ecosystem (where documentation is considered a "first-class citizen" in the language), you can run code examples as part of your test suite in a similar fashion ("doctest"): https://elixir-recipes.github.io/testing/doctests/
That’s all in the article. The author goes into the confusion that it had the Apple logo on it.
Win was conceived as a modifier reserved for the OS (not to be used by applications), while command never was. Command is for commands. If you come to the Mac from Win or Linux it often helps to think of command as what ctrl does on those systems. Ctrl on the Mac started as Terminal-Emulator specific modifier— Which to this day is great, because your universal copy shortcut (cmd-c) and interrupt (ctrl-c) are different things.
Indeed one would map win to command, but only because you need another key for a modifier that‘s not ctrl or opt/alt, conceptually they are different
In this benchmark, models can correctly solve Rust problems 61% on first pass — A far cry from other languages such as C# (88%) or Elixir (a “buggy dynamic language”) where they perform best (97%).
I wonder why that is, it’s quite surprising. Obviously details of their benchmark design matter, but this study doesn’t support your claims.
- features a bit more actual data than “intuitions” compared to OP
- interesting to think about in an agent context specifically is runtime introspection afforded by the BEAM (which, out of how it developed, has always been very important in that world) - the blog post has a few notes on that as well
As the great Joe Armstrong used to say, “a lot of systems actually break the laws of physics”[1] — don’t program against the laws of physics.
> In distributed systems there is no real shared state (imagine one machine in the USA another in Sweden) where is the shared state? In the middle of the Atlantic? - shared state breaks laws of physics. State changes are propagated at the speed of light - we always know how things were at a remote site not how they are now. What we know is what they last told us. If you make a software abstraction that ignores this fact you’ll be in trouble.[2]
It’s astonishing to me that even so many long-term Apple observers don’t see this, even though they are sorta obvious about it. “Now that the hardware is so close, the systems converge, etc., there is really no reason iPad will not eventually run macOS” – No, macOS will continue to be dumbed and locked down (“security!!11”) until the point where the Macs can be safely switched over from the terribly open legacy OS.
> I always feel like I'm having to decode it. But I can easily and happily work with some programming languages that most devs would cross the street to avoid.
Those languages happen to be "imperative"? – the few backend devs I know who at least sort of vibe with CSS are all used to declarative programming. I think that might be at least one of the reasons?
> You would create and manage content directly from the file explorer application, in the most natural way possible.
This version of the web wouldn’t require users to learn advanced computer skills in order to participate.
My students at university (Gen Z) have no concept of the “file system”.
Sold to Gilette in 1967, expansion into many different areas after. Then, I guess their story is not really unique, they shared the fate of all European household appliance manufacturers — increasing competition from Asian companies, so by the 1990s, Braun was dead.
After Procter & Gamble bought them in 2005, it now mostly exists as a brand to be licensed (everything other than shaving and electric toothbrushes).