Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @icedquinn@blob.cat
Q.U.I.N.N.@icedquinn@blob.cat (2026-08-05 09:24:54)
@sun i think to some extent i'd like to just go back to ocaml if there was a way to manually guide the compiler to make decent C code at the end of the day.

have been reading too many PL papers the past two weeks. there's a lot of stuff around about how we really shouldn't be hand optimizing code anymore. optimizers are very well known and very good at their jobs. we just lack building the tooling around letting us tell them what we want them to do.

you have shit like mlton and stalin showing you absolutely could draw a box around the audio kernel and say "optimize the everloving fuck out of just this hot part" but we don't
---Reply---
Q.U.I.N.N.@icedquinn@blob.cat (2026-08-05 09:29:38)
@sun ocaml has functors (functions from modules to modules), ada had generic modules, julia has multiple dispatch, each one of those basically shows just being able to express the fucking concept goes a long way. koka's effects are a nice addition (ocaml has stolen them as much as they can.)

effects basically cleanly consume what exception throwing (and some adjacent CPS chicanery) do, kind of also consume what aspect oriented programming was meant to do, and the combination of functors, monads and effects covers a massive amount of "i don't want to care about that shit its above my paygrade" in ways that are very machine reasonable.

koka benches around 10% of C++ on some problems which is fucking goddamn impressive for an immutable language.

---Replies---

Blurry Moon@sun@shitposter.world (2026-08-05 09:30:10)
@icedquinn I think I would really like ada if it had all the stuff that probably breaks the ada contract model, liike lambdas