in communist programming all operations are stateful. in many respects, it is not at all functional
Posts
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism. -
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.in communist programming the flow of control is not top down. we share control. no singular “if” statements, a committee must decide
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.in communist programming, we do not escape special characters. we escape to the one place that has not been corrupted by capitalism: space!
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.in communist programming, no class heirarchy. there is only loyalty to the party
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.in Communist programming language we have shared everything concurrency
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.In Communist programming language, there is no greater or lesser.
all values are equal
-
if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.if your programming language has “private property” -and “class heirarchy” then it’s built by capitalists in aid of capitalism.
-
Indigemoji (I found out about this from a conference call for a linguistics project last week, of all places) -
Reminded by @augustocc of the Captain Planet and the Planeteers TV show, which apparently first aired 34 years ago.@stefan @augustocc you didn’t see the reboot starring Don Cheadle?
-
The fediverse has been open for a few years now.The fediverse has been open for a few years now. If you haven’t saved your work yet, now would be a good time. Make sure you have enough floppy disks on hand.
-
proposal: instead of the fediverse we could call it tootyland.proposal: instead of the fediverse we could call it tootyland.
and when you’re an admin of an instance you’re rooty tooty
-
periodic reminder that when a fire gets hot enough, it forms a plasma that blocks the entire mobile phone radio spectrumperiodic reminder that when a fire gets hot enough, it forms a plasma that blocks the entire mobile phone radio spectrum
-
“be welcoming to cohost people”[looks around at the crumbling infrastructure, failed moderation tools, and the continuous refusal of new comers to understand this is not a single site, but many very different sites that are connected]already hearing some discussion about the urgency of figuring out a better engineering solution for image hosting, because N servers indefinitely holding a copy every video posted on the entire network is not suuper sustainable
-
“be welcoming to cohost people”[looks around at the crumbling infrastructure, failed moderation tools, and the continuous refusal of new comers to understand this is not a single site, but many very different sites that are connected]i want to say sure the more the merrier.
But i kinda decided a long while ago that the design of protocol cannot scale much beyond the number of people the network has now, without significant balkanisation;
both from a moderation point of view, but also just doing the math. O^2 growth for bandwidth per person is not good for scaling- server admins will hit a limit where they close registration or go broke
-
“be welcoming to cohost people”[looks around at the crumbling infrastructure, failed moderation tools, and the continuous refusal of new comers to understand this is not a single site, but many very different sites that are connected]“be welcoming to cohost people”
[looks around at the crumbling infrastructure, failed moderation tools, and the continuous refusal of new comers to understand this is not a single site, but many very different sites that are connected]hmmm ok i’ll get my crash suit
-
One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.I think it is worth calling attention, and shaming what specific design choices get made in classical OOP systems to break this modularity.
To document the cultish ideas that destroy this highly useful and yet delicate ecosystems of reuseable actors that respond to their environment.
-
One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.How did copy and paste just work? how did hypercard and its most popular clone escape the banana gorilla jungle curse?
1. Scripts could be attached directly to buttons/sprites
2. there was *enough* built into the base platform that you did not need to pull in dependencies
3. message passing and events were designed in a way that actually worked to the purpose of self contained modular "actor" objects, that reacted to and responded to their environment like an actual physical object. -
One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.THIS IS NOT MODULAR. these "components", these "objects", these "modules", these "classes", these arent the actors of the original small talk system. These are fragile beansprouts that die in your fingers the second you try to pluck them and replant them.
And yet somehow HYPERCARD of all things managed to enable this modularity in a way no other OOP system has
except for, flash, before it got infected with class heirarchy ActionScript3 brainworms
Copy And Paste Just Worked.
-
One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.Even on something as flexible and dynamic as the web platform, if a client sees a button on a site somewhere, I can not "simply" copy and paste it. I must track down all the css, html and javascript, in however many minified and compressed bundles they may exist in
or suppose, even if I were to use the state of the art systems: JSX components, css modules, I still have the problem of resupplying whatever BUILD CHAINS, libraries, hooks, dependencies, and context variables it needs
-
One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.One of the things I think a lot about is the fact that OOP *promised* more modularity and reusability.
The idea was that if an object in a program acted more like an object in real life, then it could be more modular and reusable.
And yet, to use objects in a Classical OOP system usually requires work that feels a lot like microsurgery- You can take in a library's *entire* class heirarchy to use one object.
or carefully resupply an class with its dependencies in its new context.