That makes sense for the arguments to the outermost function but not to the function it self. Why call it A instead of apply and the then have a big cheat sheet where you put that A means apply and T means applyTo ?
I think those single-letter names like "S combinator" are a holdover from Math notation, where it was a practical consideration, but in practice in functional programming, those names aren't used (I certainly haven't memorized them); If you look at the Haskell column on the page, you can see that they're actually named for readability (though it might not initially seem like it if you don't do a lot of coding in Haskell):
- K is "const" and C is "flip"; they're generally used to for arguments to a higher order function: "map (const 5) myList", "foldl (flip f) 0 myList"
- Psi is "on", since it's regularly used to construct a new function "h = f `on` g"
- S is a specific type of application, called infix as "f `ap` x", but also has an operator to intentionally make it look more like just line noise: "f < * > x". (Had to add spaces to this operator so HN wouldn't interpret it as italics)
The operators might seem opaque, but the idea is to make it more visually apparent that it's a pattern, not some application-specific business logic. There are lots of concepts of "apply" - there's pure application ($), Applicative application (< * >), Monadic application (=<<), etc. - writing them out would distracting to read. Using operators makes it easier to skim and get the general idea of how the code works without worrying about the underlying structural details, while still being precise about them.
The problem is that the general population is very removed from the prison system and inmates in general so they don't see the long-term effects. So when someone is 'locked up' for a long time they view that as redemption for their or someone else's suffering. So being 'soft on crime' would be viewed as taking away those victims vindication. (I'm not saying I agree with this, but I have just noticed through general conversation that people want criminals locked up for a long time. It is very short sighted and vengeful if you ask me.)
The problem isn't so much that the general population is so far removed, it's that the victims are so closely connected.
Why's an outsider gonna stand up for a rapist or a murderer when they've got their own problems and the victims will never forget nor will they stand down. You can't get upset at the victims for that, it's very natural.
I have empathy for some prisoners and a family member was according to him unfairly convicted (he ended up dying in prison), but I've also had family members murdered and sexually assaulted. As far as I'm concerned the people who did those things took innocence and ruined lives it's hard to feel too sorry for those actors when their lives are ruined, too.
That might be a little vindictive, but you can never give victims back their peace nor their normal lives and normal people don't commit heinous crimes.
A moment of too much passion, a stupid firstandlast time drug trip, money troubles and "normal people"-addictions- yes, perfectly normal people commit perfectly normal crimes. All the time. Some of them even have company.
Normal crime is just not reported, because nobody wants to hear about how the neighbourhood they moved too- is not so nice after all.
As with x86-based servers, it depends on the chipset (or SoC for ARM). For the two APM X-gene1 based servers that I have, the answer is yes. The Cavium ThunderX also takes ECC RAM.
It depends on the linker and the command line options to the compiler and the linker. I was surprised to find out that, e.g., GCC, has this off by default and you have to pass options to enable it.
