meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Ottawa, Canada | |
| age | 38 | |
| visits | member for | 2 years, 6 months |
| seen | Mar 13 at 21:27 | |
| stats | profile views | 16 |
|
Feb 28 |
awarded | Constituent |
|
Feb 21 |
awarded | Good Answer |
|
Feb 19 |
awarded | Caucus |
|
Feb 10 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Jan 29 |
comment |
Using “off-paradigm” coding practices in an existing codebase True ... I'd argue that functional programs (well, purely functional) are less maintenance in the short and long term anyways as they have no bugs due to side-effects, and if you eliminate nulls, no bugs due to null reference exceptions. |
|
Jun 8 |
awarded | Constituent |
|
Jun 8 |
awarded | Caucus |
|
Nov 16 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Nov 4 |
comment |
Will .NET 4.5 Make the Reactive Extensions Obsolete? @RobertHarvey Although that video is still valuable and informative, channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/… goes over the integration with .NET 4.5 and is more up to date with the latest version. |
|
Nov 4 |
answered | Will .NET 4.5 Make the Reactive Extensions Obsolete? |
|
Jun 16 |
comment |
How do I create my own programming language and a compiler for it Awesome ... checking it out. |
|
Jun 16 |
comment |
How do I create my own programming language and a compiler for it I was going to suggest this myself ... for the lazy, check out the 10-minute intro: From NAND to Tetris in 12 Steps @ youtube.com/watch?v=JtXvUoPx4Qs |
|
Jun 7 |
awarded | Suffrage |
|
Jun 7 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Jun 7 |
revised |
Another term for common code smell edited body |
|
May 20 |
comment |
Why the current enthusiasm for Functional Programming? @Job, See blogs.msdn.com/b/wesdyer/archive/2008/01/11/… as referenced in the comment above. |
|
Nov 23 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Nov 22 |
comment |
Why the current enthusiasm for Functional Programming? @Stefan: It sounds somewhat accurate to say the lambda sees it's environment, but I'm not 100% clear on that, so I hesitate to answer until I learn more myself. However, I can say with 100% certainty, that LINQ is monads, because the creators have said so on many occasions. SelectMany is exactly equivalent to Bind in Haskell. If you haven't read "The Marvels of Monads" (blogs.msdn.com/b/wesdyer/archive/2008/01/11/…) I highly recommend it ... it'll reveal how LINQ is really monads. Cheers. |
|
Nov 19 |
awarded | Nice Answer |
|
Nov 19 |
awarded | Teacher |
