The Zen of Go - Hackdot

Re:The Zen of Go by cannabis_sam on Tuesday February 25, 2020 @11:53PM (#22420380)

> You (and most PLT advocates I've encountered) seem to be evaluating languages on their inputs/features (presumably because you believe axiomatically that certain features--e.g., type systems--have a huge effect on the success or failure of a given software project) while the "useful for real world problems" view is about evaluating languages on their outputs.

I don’t, so please keep you assumptions to yourself and don’t put words to in my mouth.

> in correct proportion (no axiomatic beliefs).

What is this based on?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Zen of Go by throwaway894345 on Wednesday February 26, 2020 @10:07AM (#22423547)

> I don’t, so please keep you assumptions to yourself and don’t put words to in my mouth.

I'm hardly putting words in your mouth. You were expressing more-or-less exactly this sentiment in your previous post.

> What is this based on?

It follows by definition of output-based or blackbox evaluation. Evaluating the output of a system implies that you are evaluating inputs in proportion to their contribution to the output.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Zen of Go by cannabis_sam on Wednesday March 04, 2020 @07:47AM (#22483263)

> I'm hardly putting words in your mouth. You were expressing more-or-less exactly this sentiment in your previous post.

Trust me, I wasn’t.

> It follows by definition of output-based or blackbox evaluation. Evaluating the output of a system implies that you are evaluating inputs in proportion to their contribution to the output.

I like this! It’s like pure functions/total programming, only not rigorously defined in the slightest.

It’s not an answer to my question though, HOW do you know that the results of your output/blackbox testing is correct?

[ Parent | on HN ]