Without persistent data structures (structural sharing) - every change requires copying the entire data structure, memory usage explodes, time complexity suffers, GC pressure increases dramatically.
With persistent data structures - only the changed parts are new; unchanged parts are shared between versions; adding to a list might only create a few new nodes while reusing most of the structure; it's memory efficient, time efficient, multiple versions can coexist cheaply. And you get countless benefits - fearless concurrency, easier reasoning, elimination of whole class of bugs.
I would also block/reject a person like this. I had my fair share of these phishing attemts so I'm not asking questions if someone is trying to touch my infra.
You can still start with Duolingo. Just know that if you are serious about your language learning, there may be better things in terms of learning per unit time or learning per unit cognitive effort.
Java has exceptions and can mock at runtime using reflection. Go is much worse. If you have glue code that calls 5 methods in sequence, you need to set up build rules to generate 5 mocks for the corresponding interfaces. And then if you’re like me, re-sync the editor so it picks up the generated symbols. Then you need to write 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 mock expectations for the 5 test cases to reach each error return branch. Oh and the mock expectation arguments are immune to automated refactoring because they’re all interface{}. So if you want to change the arguments of a method that’s implicated in a lot of test cases, lol good luck.
People get over this and even grow to appreciate it from the perspective of the production code, but from the unit testing side it’s been an unrelenting nightmare from the time I started using the language professionally ~10 years ago until we got Copilot.
It’s total slop. Perfect for the slop generating machine.
> And yet HN commenters are easily manipulated into thinking that suddenky oral health is a big driver of pancreatic cancer.
This isn't happening, this is you starting from a solipsist axiom that you're smarter than everyone else, who comparatively must be automatons about receiving information.
reply