I used OCaml as my daily driver in grad school and my postdoc, and recommend my students use it. I think the main benefits of OCaml are:
Functional
Has mutable references
Not lazy
Haskell's type system is just better. But for large, complex systems that require performant code, it can be quite difficult to track the laziness, and sometimes life is just easier if I can use a mutable references.
The author is completely correct that there's a big failure in the lack of a type-class-like system. This is why people ask so much for modular implicits. Core is also a decent standard library (though I don't know why they require sexp_of_t and t_of_sexp on like all their data structures).
So I'd gladly use a different functional language with mutable references and strict evaluation. But there isn't any besides F#, and I have a Mac and don't personally want to figure out .NET on Mac.
Yeah, considering it was an open question for 12 years, I'd be pretty surprised if you solved it immediately after hearing the solution. If you were provided hints by the interviewer and got to it with some directions, I most would believe it more.
What's more likely, somebody figured the solution out to a problem that previously took over a decade in under an hour and then felt the need to brag about it to strangers on the internet; or somebody lied online to feel better about themselves. People are certainly more likely to assume the latter.
This is a little tangential, but does anybody find it weird that, even on desktop, the article seems hyperoptimized for mobile? The huge margins made it feel like I was reading on a phone emulator instead of on a desktop.
I recently helped make a VS Code extension during a Microsoft internship, and I found the language server interface really easy to use. It really makes it easy to write an extension.
Yeah, the article talked about "only" becoming Stanford professors... maybe the author doesn't realize how incredibly hard and rare it is to be a professor at a tier 1 research institution, not to mention being as prolific as Cronbach. The kids didn't become Nobel laureates but... so? That's an insane expectation for high achievement.
My research area has actually started doing that. Sure it's a CS discipline, but yeah we have a second component of our conferences where we automate our benchmarks, and other people run those benchmarks and validate the results.
Top conferences accept papers with a large expected impact, not necessarily papers the authors were really curious about. It's deeper than merely what time is spent on, it's also where accolades are given. The facebook thing shows real problems to the researchers and provides good data, good starts to high impact papers.
Yeah 2-3 publications in a year, unless you've been working on them for 2 years before that, is not going to happen. If you can get one good publication, you'll get into nearly any program in that field.
I don't know a single reputable program that makes you pay for a PhD. Typically the salaries are subsidized through the school, that gets it's money from taking a cut of stem grants, donations, masters tuition, and undergraduate tuition. Saying that most humanities professors get their salaries by doing some sort of ponzi scheme of charging their advisees is just spreading misinformation.
You might like to think that, but its not an honest representation of the majority of suicides. Most people who kill themselves do it, not for circumstantial reasons, but physiological ones like clinical depression.
Functional Has mutable references Not lazy
Haskell's type system is just better. But for large, complex systems that require performant code, it can be quite difficult to track the laziness, and sometimes life is just easier if I can use a mutable references.
The author is completely correct that there's a big failure in the lack of a type-class-like system. This is why people ask so much for modular implicits. Core is also a decent standard library (though I don't know why they require sexp_of_t and t_of_sexp on like all their data structures).
So I'd gladly use a different functional language with mutable references and strict evaluation. But there isn't any besides F#, and I have a Mac and don't personally want to figure out .NET on Mac.