News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by pklausler on Thursday July 14, 2016 @07:53PM (#12098109)
I write fast code instead.
Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by pekk on Thursday July 14, 2016 @08:36PM (#12098258)
What do you think the difference is between "performant" and "fast"?
Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by pklausler on Thursday July 14, 2016 @10:18PM (#12098586)
"fast" is in my dictionary.
Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by auggierose on Friday July 15, 2016 @08:05AM (#12100374)
Thanks for pointing out that "performant" is not in any english dictionary! (http://weblogs.asp.net/jongalloway/performant-isn-t-a-word) Didn't know that.

Besides that, your "fast" code will not be as fast as it can be if you are only relying on purely functional code, at least on current architectures.

Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by bsummer4 on Friday July 15, 2016 @12:15PM (#12102027)
Do be fair, he said "impure language" and not "impure code".

"Looks like we need to let the scholars know - there are 18,300 uses of the non-word "performant" in scholarly papers" <- If that's not sarcasm, something is wrong. Performant is a word!

Re:The Future of Standard ML (2013) [pdf] by auggierose on Friday July 15, 2016 @12:40PM (#12102205)
It is a word, just not an English one it seems! It certainly is a German word. That might explain a lot ;-) It might also explain the many occurrences, as there are many Germans writing papers in English.