Also in the minority. I use pretty atypical language and grammar for effect frequently, which is a nightmare to edit on iOS. I'm probably a little slower typing now for run of the mill message, but like you said dictation is actually great for that.
I'm overall happy with the decision and would recommend others try it.
Yes! I miss it very much. When I was on Android, I used to have it set to 100ms. I used to very quickly send well-punctuated text. On iPhones, it seems like the digitizer has 100ms of hysteresis built in.
now i just Lettuce my iPhone sden whatever it wants with no punctuation its not real good
Unfortunately, MacOS doesn't have settings (which I am told it had) for animation scales, like Androids have. The interface is sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow.
I wonder how Nim 3/Nimony handles or will handle bindings in patterns regarding copy, move or reference. Rust can change it per binding, and Ada's experimental pattern matching might have some plans or properties regarding that.[1]
> By default, identifier patterns bind a variable to a copy of or move from the matched value depending on whether the matched value implements Copy.
> This can be changed to bind to a reference by using the ref keyword, or to a mutable reference using ref mut. For example:
match a {
None => (),
Some(value) => (),
}
match a {
None => (),
Some(ref value) => (),
}
.
The Github issue had a strange discussion. I really disliked goteguru's equals-sign-based syntax, though I had difficulty judging the main design syntax.
I wonder what Araq thinks of Scala's Expression AST type. Tree, TermTree, and all the subtype case classes [2]. Tree has fields. Though I am not certain how the common variables are initialized.
In Avatar they are literally mining a room-temperature superconductor. If you had to think of a way to make interstellar mining plausible that certainly would be a candidate.
Thank you! (And thanks for following along for all the years!)
I'll speak a bit to the language audience, and others might weigh in as they see fit. The target is pretty broad: Unison is a general-purpose functional language for devs or teams who want to build applications with a minimal amount of ceremony around writing and shipping applications.
Part of the challenge of talking about that (the above might sound specious and bland) is that the difference isn't necessarily a one-shot answer: everything from diffing branches to deploying code is built atop a different foundation. For example, in the small: I upgraded our standard lib in some of my projects and because it is a relatively stable library; it was a single command. In the large: right now we're working on a workflow orchestration engine; it uses our own Cloud (typed, provisioned in Unison code, tested locally, etc) and works by serializing, storing, and later resuming the continuation of a program. That kind of framework would be more onerous to build, deploy, and maintain in many other languages.
I think you would need a complicated set of metrics to claim something like "improved" that wasn't caveated to death. An immediate conflict being total number of articles vs impressions of articles labeled with POV biases. If both go up has the site improved?
I find I trust Wikipedia less these days, though still more than LLM output.
I'm overall happy with the decision and would recommend others try it.
reply