Alavi

LLM by nature, cannot be, and are not deterministic.

I honestly trust him. He knows what he’s doing. He isn’t a kid who just got their hands on a new tool

Ah yes, because c++ is famously very enjoyable to work with

LLMs ar intrinsically undeterministic. You cannot posibly control what they do, and you (realistically) don’t control the data tgat they have been trained on and how they are tuned to behave. Respectfully. I think your statement shows a lack of fundamental understanding on how they work.

When Mr. Rich “the clojurefather” Hickey speaks. We listen.

we’re living the goofiest timeline right now

What a goddamn joke

The polish notation is the simplest thing to wrap you head around. Instead of operations being special syntax exceptions, they’re just functions! Functions that take parameters.

the only syntax of lisps are (myfun p1 p2 p3)

Mathematical operations are no exception (unlike otger languages). To make it simpler, think of it like this: + is just an alias (macro) for a function named plus which does addition. (plus 1 2 4 5) is the same as (+ 1 2 4 5). We don’t use infix notation because then that would be a syntactic exepction (like other languages) while this is the only syntax we have in lisp, for everything it’s really simple.

and also, how is (1 + 2 + 4 + 5) (15 chars) better than (+ 1 2 4 5) (11 chars)? It’s a conceptual shift and once you make it, it makes so much more sense.