hazel 💤 @hazel@types.pl

general topologists will literally make up a space and be like "HEY ISN'T THIS FUCKED UP"

if the first result that shows up when you google something is an nlab page, it's not basic

@wilbowma so for the first result, we know that our synthesis algorithm is sound. it cannot implement anything that doesn't satisfy the tests. it can be *maliciously compliant*, but it will always have the right signature.

it is not complete. it will simply not halt if it can't find an answer. however, we can put a max size on the program, and if it can't find a solution with, say, 5 nested conditionals or something wild like that, we can safely say there's an issue.
it isn't perfect at detecting inconsistent sets of unit tests, but it's Good Enough to be useful.

@wilbowma thanks i wish i could have given it.

🦀 🦀 🦀 🦀 🦀

@pounce I thought it was just a morphism

also could hypothetically give me the funniest reason ever for changing my name

honestly maybe i should just pick a different name. i have other reasons but this is one of them

every time i see someone talk about hazel (the structure editor) i do like. a triple take. a quadruple take

Rust protip: if you have cyclic data, have you considered not having cyclic data?

oh wait you need it? uhh... uhhhhhh

This kills the crab.

@wilbowma 3

Why say "fighting the borrow checker" when you could say "being owned by ownership"

@bitmapper @justinfrank https://github.com/ralsei/six-eyes/blob/main/src/syntax.rs
https://github.com/ralsei/six-eyes/blob/main/src/termbuilder.rs

Enjoy the worst code I've written in a long time

@justinfrank I feel like the Rust experience with anything self-referential is someone saying "that's a bad design choice", and then refusing to say how else to do it

Since, yeah, it's a bad design choice. The ownership type system inherently does not work with this kind of thing. But sometimes you just gotta