Obviously I know "jad" but I don't see any issue with calling venom "trucizna". Natural languages aren't C++ and you don't get compiler errors when you speak - to me, there is no issue calling both venoms and poison trucizna. Polish dictionary doesn't seem to contradict it either:
Nobody would say „trujący wąż” (poisonous snake) or „jadowity grzyb” (venomous mushroom). The distinction is similar to English. There are exceptions and contexts where it can be used interchangeably but arguably the same is true for English.
Italy, the core remnant of the Roman Empire, has unmatched language diversity, often varies even from town to town. It's a colorful mosaic of micro cultures and customs where people from one region using different words for venom/poison is completely normal, in their local dialect. Everyone speaks standard Italian though.
You've never visited Italy ? They're not that far away and I'm sure you'll love it.
> The point is, both are correct(afaik) while in English venom and poison are definitely two different things.
No, the situation in English matches your description exactly: all of these things are called poison. The word venom is almost never used in natural speech.
Furthermore, if you ask English speakers what the difference between poison and venom is, by far the two most common responses will be "there isn't one" and "I don't know". icyfox is just looking to be annoying.
(Another popular option will probably be "it's called venom when you're talking about snakes", which explains roughly 100% of use of venom in natural speech.)
And in Russian we use "jad" ("яд" in cyrillic) for both. Although there is the word "отрава", which can be used for poisons and "яд" is closer to "venom" the difference is almost non-existant and both are often used interchangeably.
The primary use case that I can see is following: you use your second phone — the communicator — to chat, while watching endless stream of tiktoks/reels/shorts on the first one.
That depends on your architecture and access pattern. In case of sequential access, packed bools may perform better due to arithmetic being usually way cheaper than memory operations.
Is ML a systems language? Sorry, maybe my definition is wrong, but I consider a systems language something that’s used by a decent amount of OS’es, programming languages and OS utilities.
I assume you’re talking about OCaml et al? I’m intruiged by it, but I’m coming from a Haskell/C++ background.
Rust is somewhat unique in terms of system language this because it’s the first one that’s not “simple” like C but still used for systems tools, more than Go is as far as I’m aware.
Which probably has to do with its performance characteristics being close to the machine, which Go cannot do (ie based on LLVM, no GC, etc)
One of the design goals of rust is explicitness. I think if Rust had type elision, like many other functional languages, it would go a long way to cleaning up the syntax.
In this case there is both time a distance limit to the gesture. If the gesture is too fast the switcher won’t appear even if the distance was long enough.
That said, personally I’ve always found the gesture navigation very intuitive.
Probably the compilation time is better than it would be with LLVM. On the other hand I doubt that codegen and therefore performance is on par with LLVM.
This is an advertisement, and I usually don't put “no LLVM” in the title or use it as a promotional feature.
I posted this project on HackNews a few times, but it quickly sank to the bottom. Maybe “no LLVM” might pique some people's interest in the project, so I added it. Actually, I posted this link a few days ago and had already given up on it, but unexpectedly, it suddenly appeared on the HackNews homepage.
I now need some attention, which will give the Nature project more capital.
This is mostly an issue with MSVC which refuses to become compliant with c99 standard. Their support for c11 and c17 also has some gaps around features that were introduced in c99.
Most popular languages would prevent this. In this case it’s as simple as having more sensible reader API than sscanf in standard library and forcing variables to be initialized.
Once you strip out all the helper code for tuples and args, it's really not the worst. Made sense to me on the first read. Sensible naming and not that much metaprogramming indirection going on, thank god.
Or maybe I am too brainwashed by C++ at this point.
reply