And to reconnect this stream of energy to the original point of my posting:
What do you think about changing the symbol storage in Julia to use ordered, indexed storage instead of hashed? Does that make sense at all to you? I've been playing around with this idea of array based, ordered, indexed sets for a while in different languages; getting decent results. Symbols are used more than created which means that the minor speed hit in interning should pay back as soon as you sort anything by a symbolic name. Seems to do fine up to around 100k symbols, but I have no idea what you're using in there right now or the other requirements. Just an idea... /fncodr Den söndag 21 augusti 2016 kl. 23:44:35 UTC+2 skrev [email protected]: > > Also, nice to see you again, despite somewhat irrelevant circumstances. > Watched you speak in Gothenburg a couple of years ago. Although you were > only given an hour, you gave a competent enough impression for me to learn > yet another language. Just wanted you to know that something came out of > that, for whatever it's worth. Thanks. > > /fncodr > > Den söndag 21 augusti 2016 kl. 23:38:31 UTC+2 skrev [email protected]: >> >> No, you're both wrong. >> Licenses don't add anything but restrictions to giving something away >> without conditions, how could they? How could a page full of legal bullshit >> ever make anyone more free? >> I know that's the story you were told, I've been up there on the >> barricades, but enough is enough. Outside of corporations, and I don't give >> a damn about corporations, licenses add nothing but headaches, division and >> wasted effort. I'm sorry about the community standards, you should know >> better than to play their game for them. >> >> /fncodr >> >> Den söndag 21 augusti 2016 kl. 22:19:25 UTC+2 skrev Stefan Karpinski: >>> >>> Also, please don't use phrases like "got your panties in a knot" – this >>> is a violation of the Julia community standards >>> <http://julialang.org/community/standards/>. >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Steven is correct here: licenses are what allow people to use your >>>> code, not a mechanism for constraining what people can do – by default >>>> they >>>> have no rights to your code. If you want to let people do whatever they >>>> want with your code, use the MIT license >>>> <https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT> or the even more permissive ISC >>>> license <https://opensource.org/licenses/ISC>. You can also state that >>>> you release the code into the public domain, but that's actually less >>>> effective than granting a license like ISC since not all countries have >>>> processes for reliably donating works to the public domain (e.g. >>>> continental Europe), so people in those countries would not legally be >>>> allowed to use your code. >>>> >>>> TL;DR: just put the ISC license on it. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Steven G. Johnson <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 12:11:26 PM UTC-4, [email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I gave a statement, on why I don't offer licenses. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Not offering a license means that no one can copy, modify, or >>>>> redistribute your code. >>>>> >>>>> Saying "Go bananas; use it, break it; embrace and extend it", while it >>>>> gives some permissions, is actually not sufficient to qualify as open >>>>> source <https://opensource.org/osd-annotated>. For example, you >>>>> don't explicitly give permission for people to sell it as part of >>>>> commercial products, so as a result that usage is prohibited (by default). >>>>> >>>>> It took many years for people in scientific computing to realize that >>>>> licenses were important for example (and as a result the Netlib >>>>> repository >>>>> ended up having huge headaches), and there are other prominent examples >>>>> of >>>>> problems stemming from software without a license because the authors >>>>> didn't think they needed one (e.g. qmail). Learn from the bitter >>>>> experiences of others! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
