(On last boost) A thing I like about how stuff works here at the moment is that it's okay to have an actual conversation and not worry about the magic numbers and Internet points associated with it.

I'm hoping this will last... Though I will say (while making up numbers) that replies and conversation are worth 1000 likes.

A thing that made me grumpy about the Other Place was that replies were usually from people I didn't know telling me I was talking rubbish. To be fair, I often am talking rubbish, but so far here it's been constructive efforts at telling me I'm talking rubbish.

I have been on the Internet long enough to know it won't last but I'm going to enjoy it while it does :).

@edwinb Edwin! You're talking rubbish! Kidding.

I think though that it may just as well last for those who self-host or use niche instances like We don't get masses of content relayed to our instances, so even with the uptick in the registrations on mainstream services, I don't feel like the feeds or interactions got too fast.

Also, the Other Place is very much alive and well. And if what happened isn't enough for people to switch en masse, nothing is. Remember -- most people value convenience the most and there can be so many excuses to stay, that people *will* stay.

@jonn you're totally right of course. In that I am talking rubbish and that the other place isn't going away. Neither of these are problems though if this place becomes fun :).


Me quote reply this:

> replies and conversation are worth 1000 likes.

I hope to be boosted nonetheless !

@amirouche I like that quote replies aren't really a thing here :). I do like conversation rather than pressing buttons though.


I really, and completly agree about having conversations being better than using mere clickports 🛸

It is akward for me to hit someone by DM, or email, or reply on a subject that is unrelated to the OP, fear of rejection... still:

I read some time ago that OCaml, and it applies to Haskell too are aware of the advantages of symbolic expressions ala Common Lisp.

Still, I wonder what is the advantage of Idriss syntax compared to a parenthese-based syntax?



I am asking because I want to know, but also because I looking at Kernel by John N. Shutt, and I wonder whether s-expr are still the best thing or not, outside the fact that the parser is easy to write.

By the way, if you have some feedback, clues about Kernel, I will gladly take them as they are :)

@amirouche ooh, that's an interesting one. I picked the Idris syntax just because I targeting Haskell programmers but I think I'd have different priorities now. There's a lot to be said for s-expressions.

Syntax is somehow simultaneously the least and most important choice. Most important because that's how you find your audience.

So, yes, unashamedly, it was totally about finding the initial audience.


That is what I was thinking, I need to do more research to understand what is the point.

My take is that the parentheses are heavy visually, especially when the variable names are short, which makes reading that kind of code more difficult.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A Mastodon instance for programming language theorists and mathematicians. Or just anyone who wants to hang out.