Fork me on GitHub
Noah Bogart00:01:10

Anyone remember the website of software stories/koans, written in the “ancient Chinese parable” style where at the end there’s some silly contradiction and the student is enlightened?

Noah Bogart03:01:06

Closures and objects is the one i was hoping to find but thank you for the rest of the links, these are great


> The square root of a cube is the same as the cube root of a square. In other words, it is the number that, when cubed, gives the original number. For example, the square root of 8 is 2, because 2 x 2 x 2 = 8. The cube root of 64 is 4, because 4 x 4 x 4 = 64. Does this clarify the concept for you, or is there anything else I can help with? Sometimes I'm very impressed with ChatGPT, othertimes, less so.


Anyone using github co-pilot with clojure and finding it helpful ?


My manager has started doing this. We were doing some refactoring together and he said that copilot is helpful when the code is clear because it can give us good suggestions, but when our code is unclear, it has almost no suggestions- it’s very much a good nose for code smells like that.


An initial problem I found is closing the matching tags. I guess as I get better with paredit, it will be an non issue, hopefully.


What ide do you use @US7MXHV7D? I use Vscode with #CBE668G4R and never having issues with missing closing tags.


brushing up on css led me to this article: which links to this article: which has this talk as a reference: which is fantastic! Really refreshing take on the static/dynamic discussion and will be appreciated by clojurians from the description: > This talk—given by an experienced polyglot programmer who once implemented Hindley Milner static type inference for “fun”, but who now builds large and successful systems in Python—explores the disconnect between the dire outcomes predicted by advocates of static typing versus the near absence of type errors in real world systems built with dynamic languages

👍 10

> who once implemented Hindley Milner static type inference for “fun”, hey that's what I'm working on!


Did I mention today how I hate this "weak" and "strong" typing mislabeling?


It amazes me that the original author even links the same Wikipedia article that I did, to explain why the term nowadays don't mean much...