Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
    weepy
    @weepy
    the code sampler are good
    perfect way to show it off
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    Most people laugh at my code samples and that's ok
    weepy
    @weepy
    why do they laugh
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    They feel it's too basic
    I am not using ES6 yet
    weepy
    @weepy
    yeah I would switch that if I were you
    it's better apart from anything else
    but im talking about the mathy stuff.
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    sure, just takes a bit of time for an old guy like me
    weepy
    @weepy
    im not saying to get rid off it
    maybe it can be another page
    that you link to "if you're interested in the CS stuff click here"
    how old are you ?!
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    mentally or physically?
    my first computer was a TRS-80
    weepy
    @weepy
    mine too
    im 39
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    just a bit older...
    weepy
    @weepy
    heh ok
    anyways ---- ofc take or leave my advice
    just saying what i think :D
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray
    makes sense, just so many hours in day
    Interesting, the TODO vanilla JS is just running on the browser.
    weepy
    @weepy
    yeah i think that's the standard
    isomorphic is interesting but i feel it's an advanced thing
    weepy
    @weepy
    looking at your Item List
    I think it's a bit bad practice to mix your model data with the model functions/state ? e.g model.state, model.present etc ...
    what do you think about that
    Jean-Jacques Dubray
    @jdubray

    isomorphic is interesting but i feel it's an advanced thing

    this was advanced until SAM, because that was nearly impossible to achieve
    SAM makes it totally trivial

    I think it's a bit bad practice to mix your model data with the model functions/state

    this is wiring, you can wire the pattern in any way you'd like
    The constraints of the pattern are only:

    • on role and responsibilities of Actions, Model and State
    • Sequence of invocations in the reactive loop as defined by the expression V = S( vm(M...
    • weaving of API calls in the pattern (3rd party APIs and CRUD)
    After that you can distribute and connect the elements of the pattern any way you'd like, that's the whole point of making Isomorphic JavaScript easy to achieve. Here are all the combinations you deploy the pattern as: http://sam.js.org/#iso
    There is no prescription on wiring at all
    brucou
    @brucou
    what do you mean by "only one factoring to computing, it's called TLA+"
    This factoring is "unique", you just can't make it up (IMHO)
    You can define formalisms on top of it, but you cannot decide arbitrarily what the foundation is, it is foundational.
    Computer science is not based on opinion.
    As I mentioned before, there is not only one factoring to computing, and that is just as known as the fact that the earth is round.
    maybe you have to do a little bit more research.
    you can't throw up any formalism in the air and say that one works too,
    That's exactly what you are doing with SAM
    My point is that TLA+ is a formalism which can be used to describe any state machine as we know it, therefore I claim it is foundational.
    brucou
    @brucou
    Bruno, there is only one factoring to computing, it's called TLA+, everything else that was built prior to that is an approximation
    Except that there is a very, very fundamental difference here
    SAM state machines are not of the kind (S1,A,S2)
    If that was the case, you would be correct
    As I mentioned the structure of (S1,A,S2) is an approximation
    An approximation to what? of what? What does that even mean?
    brucou
    @brucou
    Every program written with a turing-complete language can be written in another turing-complete language including the turing original machine itself . That is all turing-complete languages allow to write the same programs.
    So writing a program as a sequence of commands is not an approximation (whatever you meant by that), it is just as valid as any other way.
    It is about semantics, 1/1 and 16-15, 2232^2 - 3 are different expressions, but they denote the same number. You can't say one expression is an approximation and the other one is the real thing.
    brucou
    @brucou
    Back to state machines, the notation you use to describe them does not change their semantics, so (S1, A, S2) and the other one you wrote (I think it was (S1, A1, ..., NAP or something) are syntactic constructions. The behaviour of the state machines or its semantics is entirely decided based on the tuple which defines it (set of input symbols, set of output symbols, set of states, etc.)
    You have the tendency to present things which are just your unsubstantiated vision of things as being science backed by important theoretical construction, but I had a close look and I did not get to that conclusion.
    brucou
    @brucou
    Last thing, even if all of the previously quoted statements were all true, TLA+ is irrelevant to SAM. There is no need to go read any mathematical papers on anything. To determine a judgement on some properties of a theory/architecture, you need clear semantics which I haven't seen here. On the contrary, I see mathematics formulas where the functions are not really functions.