Just buy a new SSD to install Linux on. If you decide to switch back just plug the old one in.
Just buy a new SSD to install Linux on. If you decide to switch back just plug the old one in.
I quite enjoy Nix flakes for this. Only certain languages have good support though (C, Rust, Haskell, OCaml, …).
I don’t have 2 mil, how do I get out of this? File for bankruptcy?
Linux is already better than Windows, the latest versions are a mess, and is likely going to get worse.
A package is reproducible if you use the same inputs, run the build, and get the same outputs.
The issue is that the build can produce different outputs given the same inputs. So you need to modify the build or patch the outputs. This is something that is being worked on by most distributions: https://reproducible-builds.org/who/projects/
NixOS is not special in that regard nor are all NixOS packages reproducible.
Nope, nix doesn’t ensure or require that the builds are deterministic. It’s not any better in that regard than other package managers.
It’s not really fully reproducible either.
The way you can think of it is that in OCaml everything is implicitly wrapped in an IO monad. In Haskell the IO monad is explicit, so if a function returns something in IO you know it can perform input and output, in OCaml there is no way to tell just from the types. That means that in Haskell the code naturally stratifies into a part that does input and output and a pure core. In OCaml you can do the same thing, however it needs to be a conscious design decision.
deleted by creator
The implementations mostly don’t matter. The only thing that you need to get right are the interfaces.
XKB config files work under sway without XWayland.
Well, most people installing Arch for the first time have no idea what a typical Linux install does under the hood. That makes it a worthwhile learning experience. The same commands you use during the setup you can later use to fix or change things. It basically forces you to become a somewhat proficient Linux user.
Nope. Monads enable you to redefine how statements work.
Let’s say you have a program and use an Error[T] data type which can either be Ok {Value: T} or Error:
var a = new Ok {Value = 1};
var b = foo();
return new Ok {Value = (a + b)};
Each statement has the following form:
var a = expr;
rest
You first evaluate the “expr” part and bind/store the result in variable a, and evaluate the “rest” of the program.
You could represent the same thing using an anonymous function you evaluate right away:
(a => rest)(expr);
In a normal statement you just pass the result of “expr” to the function directly. The monad allows you to redefine that part.
You instead write:
bind((a => rest), expr);
Here “bind” redefines how the result of expr is passed to the anonymous function.
If you implement bind as:
B bind(Func[A, B] f, A result_expr) {
return f(result_expr);
}
Then you get normal statements.
If you implement bind as:
Error[B] bind(Func[A, Error[B]] f, Error[A] result_expr) {
switch (result_expr) {
case Ok { Value: var a}:
return f(a);
case Error:
return Error;
}
}
You get statements with error handling.
So in an above example if the result of foo() is Error, the result of the statement is Error and the rest of the program is not evaluated. Otherwise, if the result of foo() is Ok {Value = 3}, you pass 3 to the rest of the program and you get a final result Ok {Value = 4}.
So the whole idea is that you hide the if Error part by redefining how the statements are interpreted.
Some people consider working on programming languages fun, so they create new ones.
You write it in vim and then copy paste it once you are done.
BTW, why do you need a markdown editor?