As an FP-fan interested in Clojure, how does one track if functions are pure in Clojure? I had assumed this was not possible, due to it not being statically typed (although I gather there is 3rd-party support for gradual typing).
bbarker
Great idea! I like the idea of being able to return "items" (files or directories).
Since this is an alternative front end for Lemmy, could someone simply host an instance of LemmyBB and point it to an existing instance of Lemmy?
Also, see this post from a few days back on dairy alternatives and their environmental friendliness.
ActivityPub is an open, decentralized social networking protocol that is standardized by W3C; it is used by Lemmy, Mastodon, and others.
I've been loving low-calorie almond milk for years; great to see it does well for total emissions and land use, which I'd think are the most important factors in most contexts.
Oat milk might not be great for some folks with blood sugar issues, though it sounds like it probably isn't too bad as long as you aren't guzzling it, and enjoying it with other food helps: https://www.insider.com/oat-milk-health-benefits-sugar-dietitian-advice-2021-4
I generally take your point, though I believe FP can be applied to most domains with some benefit - it is just that existing, prevalent FP languages may not always be well suited for the job. In HPC for instance, there are a few interesting options:
For both games and HPC, Futhark may be of interest: "Futhark is a small programming language designed to be compiled to efficient parallel code. It is a statically typed, data-parallel, and purely functional array language in the ML family, and comes with a heavily optimising ahead-of-time compiler that presently generates either GPU code via CUDA and OpenCL, or multi-threaded CPU code."
Sadly I can't find it right now, but there was research language designed with the idea of separating the implementation from the specification, in such a way that the implementation could still be verified to conform to the specification; the specification was much more than a typical function signature as I recall. Basically you would write the function specification in a functional style, and then be able to have multiple implementations (e.g. for different hardware) conforming to that specification. I want to say this was from Standford but may be wrong about that.