They aren't just type aliases, they actually have unique slots in the symbol table when used so...you define more brands :) brand posit...
They aren't just type aliases, they actually have unique slots in the symbol table when used so...you define more brands :) brand position <- Point brand start-position <- position brand end-position <- position def DrawLine(start-position, end-position): ... = start-position + ... ... = end-position - ... But that is kind of annoying, brand composition as adjectives would probably work better: brand position <- Point brand start brand end def DrawLine(start&position, end&position): ... = start&position + ... ... = end&position - ... Very natural language, and start/end can be used to qualify all variables that are starty or endy. The biggest problem with the approach is that you have to think ahead of time about what your variables mean, and they might become fairly verbose (so "start position" rather than "startp"). Also, when you get into the implementation, it is kind of tiring to think about what every local variable should mean, so maybe this only really works for procedural parameters and maybe to help define fields. I've been thinking about this for awhile, but haven't put it into a prototype yet.
Posted by seanmcdirmid on Feb 13, 2015, 2:17 AM
Tags
Related issues
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
- > steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
- Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.8,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
> our Git monorepo was developing an annoying problem Sentences like this are so common from people using monorepos that I am convinced ...
Why is there no contact form?
They aren't just type aliases, they actually have unique slots in the symbol table when used so...you define more brands :) brand posit...
They aren't just type aliases, they actually have unique slots in the symbol table when used so...you define more brands :) brand position <- Point brand start-position <- position brand end-position <- position def DrawLine(start-position, end-position): ... = start-position + ... ... = end-position - ... But that is kind of annoying, brand composition as adjectives would probably work better: brand position <- Point brand start brand end def DrawLine(start&position, end&position): ... = start&position + ... ... = end&position - ... Very natural language, and start/end can be used to qualify all variables that are starty or endy. The biggest problem with the approach is that you have to think ahead of time about what your variables mean, and they might become fairly verbose (so "start position" rather than "startp"). Also, when you get into the implementation, it is kind of tiring to think about what every local variable should mean, so maybe this only really works for procedural parameters and maybe to help define fields. I've been thinking about this for awhile, but haven't put it into a prototype yet.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.