frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Metaphor+Metonymy: "To love that well which thou must leave ere long"(Sonnet73)

https://www.huckgutman.com/blog-1/shakespeare-sonnet-73
1•gsf_emergency_6•1m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Django N+1 Queries Checker

https://github.com/richardhapb/django-check
1•richardhapb•16m ago•1 comments

Emacs-tramp-RPC: High-performance TRAMP back end using JSON-RPC instead of shell

https://github.com/ArthurHeymans/emacs-tramp-rpc
1•todsacerdoti•20m ago•0 comments

Protocol Validation with Affine MPST in Rust

https://hibanaworks.dev
1•o8vm•25m ago•1 comments

Female Asian Elephant Calf Born at the Smithsonian National Zoo

https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/female-asian-elephant-calf-born-smithsonians-national-zoo-an...
2•gmays•26m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Zest – A hands-on simulator for Staff+ system design scenarios

https://staff-engineering-simulator-880284904082.us-west1.run.app/
1•chanip0114•27m ago•1 comments

Show HN: DeSync – Decentralized Economic Realm with Blockchain-Based Governance

https://github.com/MelzLabs/DeSync
1•0xUnavailable•32m ago•0 comments

Automatic Programming Returns

https://cyber-omelette.com/posts/the-abstraction-rises.html
1•benrules2•35m ago•1 comments

Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation [pdf]

https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/Why%20Are%20there%20Still%20So%20Many%...
2•oidar•38m ago•0 comments

The Search Engine Map

https://www.searchenginemap.com
1•cratermoon•45m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Souls.directory – SOUL.md templates for AI agent personalities

https://souls.directory
1•thedaviddias•46m ago•0 comments

Real-Time ETL for Enterprise-Grade Data Integration

https://tabsdata.com
1•teleforce•49m ago•0 comments

Economics Puzzle Leads to a New Understanding of a Fundamental Law of Physics

https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/economics-puzzle-leads-to-a-new-understanding-of-a-fundamental...
2•geox•50m ago•0 comments

Switzerland's Extraordinary Medieval Library

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20260202-inside-switzerlands-extraordinary-medieval-library
2•bookmtn•51m ago•0 comments

A new comet was just discovered. Will it be visible in broad daylight?

https://phys.org/news/2026-02-comet-visible-broad-daylight.html
3•bookmtn•56m ago•0 comments

ESR: Comes the news that Anthropic has vibecoded a C compiler

https://twitter.com/esrtweet/status/2019562859978539342
2•tjr•57m ago•0 comments

Frisco residents divided over H-1B visas, 'Indian takeover' at council meeting

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2026/02/04/frisco-residents-divided-over-h-1b-visas-indi...
3•alephnerd•58m ago•2 comments

If CNN Covered Star Wars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vArJg_SU4Lc
1•keepamovin•1h ago•1 comments

Show HN: I built the first tool to configure VPSs without commands

https://the-ultimate-tool-for-configuring-vps.wiar8.com/
2•Wiar8•1h ago•3 comments

AI agents from 4 labs predicting the Super Bowl via prediction market

https://agoramarket.ai/
1•kevinswint•1h ago•1 comments

EU bans infinite scroll and autoplay in TikTok case

https://twitter.com/HennaVirkkunen/status/2019730270279356658
6•miohtama•1h ago•5 comments

Benchmarking how well LLMs can play FizzBuzz

https://huggingface.co/spaces/venkatasg/fizzbuzz-bench
1•_venkatasg•1h ago•1 comments

Why I Joined OpenAI

https://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2026-02-07/why-i-joined-openai.html
19•SerCe•1h ago•14 comments

Octave GTM MCP Server

https://docs.octavehq.com/mcp/overview
1•connor11528•1h ago•0 comments

Show HN: Portview what's on your ports (diagnostic-first, single binary, Linux)

https://github.com/Mapika/portview
3•Mapika•1h ago•0 comments

Voyager CEO says space data center cooling problem still needs to be solved

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/05/amazon-amzn-q4-earnings-report-2025.html
1•belter•1h ago•0 comments

Boilerplate Tax – Ranking popular programming languages by density

https://boyter.org/posts/boilerplate-tax-ranking-popular-languages-by-density/
1•nnx•1h ago•0 comments

Zen: A Browser You Can Love

https://joeblu.com/blog/2026_02_zen-a-browser-you-can-love/
1•joeblubaugh•1h ago•0 comments

My GPT-5.3-Codex Review: Full Autonomy Has Arrived

https://shumer.dev/gpt53-codex-review
2•gfortaine•1h ago•0 comments

Show HN: FastLog: 1.4 GB/s text file analyzer with AVX2 SIMD

https://github.com/AGDNoob/FastLog
3•AGDNoob•1h ago•1 comments
Open in hackernews

Overview of the Ada Computer Language Competition (1979)

https://iment.com/maida/computer/redref/
105•transpute•8mo ago

Comments

synack•8mo ago
There’s more detail about the language proposals and their merits here: (very large PDF) https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/trecms/pdf/ADB950587.pdf
pixelesque•8mo ago
Heh.

"We did not have enough time to do a thorough analysis. The languages arrived at WHMI on February 21 and were on my desk on February 22. To insure the analysis is on your desk by March 13, we have to mail our report on March 8. That gives us fourteen days (counting weekends) to read the languages and work on the analysis. Figure two days to read and understand a language. We have used eight days. Another three days are used to write a report and solicit comments, and one day is lost typing. That leaves two days to analyze the four languages. Even if we had a thousand computer scientists doing the analysis, we could have only scratched the surface of these designs. Two hundred and seventy women can not have a baby in a day."

jakeisnotadog1•8mo ago
https://archive.is/hZcMO
tgv•8mo ago
Useful, as the site seems overloaded, but that link only says "Welcome to nginx".
kevlar700•8mo ago
Interestingly Co-Pilot gets it wrong and states Ada was designed by committees instead of being multiple competitive processes. How misunderstood Ada is.

https://copilot.microsoft.com/shares/Jp9AmNHMEJzNmcbiu1VNx

https://copilot.microsoft.com/shares/vUjdaDh4mXvj1fm4cyt15

7thaccount•8mo ago
I believe it was both:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Order_Language_Working_...

The High Order Language Working Group came up with the requirements.

kevlar700•8mo ago
True but it was far more open than a committee. The STRAWMAN requirements were circulated widely for comment to industry, military, federal and academic communities and to select experts such as Dijkstra and Hoare. Then WOODENMAN circulated for comment after incorporating changes based on STRAWMANS responses.
adrian_b•8mo ago
I wish I knew who were the anonymous authors of DoD "IRONMAN" (January 1977), especially who has written the paragraph "7.2.F. (7F.) FORMAL PARAMETER CLASSES".

"IRONMAN" has introduced a very important innovation in programming languages, which has been inherited by Ada and by its derivatives, e.g. VHDL (the innovation is that formal parameters may have 3 kinds of behaviors, "in", "out" and "in out", and that the parameter behavior must be specified, but not its implementation mechanism, like in older programming languages).

Unfortunately this innovation has remained largely unknown for the authors of most more recent programming languages, which are defective because of that.

If Bjarne Stroustrup had bothered to read carefully the Ada specification before conceiving "C with Classes", he might have understood the implication of the "IRONMAN" parameter classes for languages with constructors and destructors, like C++, which could have avoided many decades of pain for the C++ users. In a language with the "IRONMAN" parameter classes, constructors can be ordinary functions and there is no need for many features that complicate C++, like distinct copy constructors and assignment operators, or "move" semantics. Moreover, the performance problems that have plagued C++ before 2011, due to the creation of unnecessary temporaries, would have been avoided since the beginning.

It is likely that the authors of "IRONMAN" did not fully understand the consequences of their innovation, but they had proposed it only in order to make the new DoD language more similar to Jovial, which was a programming language used in several DoD projects at that time. Jovial had such formal parameter classes, but their meaning was slightly different than in "IRONMAN" and in the later Ada, enough to make them much less useful.

Before "IRONMAN", the earlier DoD requirements were to be able to specify whether the parameters are passed by value or by reference, which is an extremely wrong requirement. It is the same mistake made by C and by its derivatives, including recent derivatives, like Rust.

How the parameters are passed must be decided by the compiler, not by the programmer. For the programmer it does not matter whether a parameter is passed by value or by reference, when the passing of the parameters is implemented correctly (e.g. an in-out parameter that is passed by value is copied from the caller to the function and then back when the function returns, if that is necessary; frequently this is not necessary, e.g. if the parameter is located in a register; if the in-out parameter is so big that copying would be slow, the compiler decides to pass it by reference; in C and its derivatives, both out and in-out parameters must be passed by reference, even when that is the wrong choice; moreover, the compiler cannot flag as an error the reading of an out parameter prior to its first writing).

touisteur•8mo ago
Yes this is one of my favorite Ada features (combined with named paramètres at call-site) it always felt clearer reading or writing Ada. The intent ('what') is more important (to me, reading heaps and heaps of code) than the 'how' that I can infer quickly and is less useful in data-flow reading mode.
renox•8mo ago
> the innovation is that formal parameters may have 3 kinds of behaviors, "in", "out" and "in out", and that the parameter behavior must be specified, but not its implementation mechanism, like in older programming languages

Great on paper, not so good in real life: so what is the specification when a parameter is aliased? That is to say passed two times to a procedure: once as an "in" parameter, the other as an "in out" parameter. I've been able to use compiler explorer to show the behaviour may change depending on the size of the parameter with GNAT, ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43001394 ).

adrian_b•8mo ago
Parameter aliasing creates problems for "out" parameters and for "in out" parameters in any language, regardless whether they are passed by value or by reference, and regardless whether there exists a distinction between "out" and "in out".

In C/C++, where such parameters are passed only by reference, the chances of wrong behavior in the presence of aliasing are greater than in a language like Ada, where they may be passed by value and in lucky cases that may happen to produce the right result.

In general, the documentation of any function should specify whether the aliasing of such parameters is allowed. By default any good compiler, for any language, should give at least a warning whenever parameters that can be modified by a function are aliased, because without analyzing how they are used inside the invoked function it is unknown whether the function will produce the expected results.

The distinction between "out" and "in out" parameters that exists in Ada can only make easier the detection of suspect function invocations. It can never be worse than in C, C++ and similar languages.

On the other hand, the distinction between "out" and "in out" would have greatly simplified C++, because for an "out" parameter the compiler can use raw memory, instead of memory for which a constructor must have been invoked, like for an "in out" parameter. There would have been no constructors as a special category that must be handled differently, any function with an "out" parameter of a certain type could have been used to initialize a value of that type.

The distinction between "out" and "in out" and not specifying whether the parameters are passed by value or by reference are great in real life, because they enable the compiler to make optimizations that are otherwise impossible, as proven by the fact that nobody has succeeded to make such a compiler for the pre-2011 C++. C++ from 2011 and later has solved some of the performance issues, but only by introducing tedious and error-prone annotations for ensuring the desired behavior, i.e. the "move" semantics.

Moreover, not having to specify how the parameters are passed eliminates a huge amount of "&" and of "*" or of their equivalents from a program, also eliminating the risk of errors caused by their misuse. In my opinion, this is a great advantage in real life.

microtherion•8mo ago
> for an "out" parameter the compiler can use raw memory, instead of memory for which a constructor must have been invoked

So let's say the parameter has a nontrivial destructor. Caller A passes an uninitialized variable. Caller B passes an initialized variable. What is the callee supposed to do?

mafribe•8mo ago
> How the parameters are passed must be decided by the compiler, not by the programmer.

Consider the program

   def f(x):
      return 17
If omega is a non-terminating expression then the call

  f(omega)
might or might not terminate, depending whether the compiler uses a lazy or eager evaluation strategy. This freedom is not something I would recommend to a programming language designer.
adrian_b•8mo ago
I have not encountered yet a programming language where it is unspecified whether the evaluation of expressions is lazy or eager.

This choice has too many consequences and it is pretty much impossible to understand how a program will behave, unless you know whether the evaluation is lazy, like in Haskell and the like, or eager, like in ML, LISP and in most other programming languages.

In a programming language with lazy evaluation, the programmer also does not specify how parameters are passed. Whoever implements a translator for the language will choose a parameter passing method, which for most parameters will be neither by value nor by reference, but it would be something similar to the ALGOL 60 parameter passing by name.

askvictor•8mo ago
How funny, I was just talking about and researching Ada at work this afternoon, while discussing what the best language for safety critical embedded systems would be
gridtied•8mo ago
If i may, what was the outcome? ADA?
askvictor•8mo ago
It rated highly. But lack of community & ability to hire devs would be it's biggest problems. Rust isn't really mature enough in the embedded space just yet. So we'll be sticking with C/C++ for now D-:
transpute•8mo ago
On embedded systems with enough power budget to run statically-partitioned virtualized guest VMs, one could use different languages in different VMs, e.g. separated by maturity and talent availability for specific use cases. Or code that runs on a special-purpose processor.

> lack of community & ability to hire devs would be it's biggest problems

In some contexts, this might be a competitive advantage, e.g. Nvidia uses Ada to secure RoT firmware that protects their industry-leading margins. But they have the luxury of deep pockets and a full hiring pipeline, "Nvidia Security Team: “What if we just stopped using C?”, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42998383

  SPARK is a formally defined computer programming language based on the Ada programming language, intended for the development of high integrity software used in systems where predictable and highly reliable operation is essential. It facilitates the development of applications that demand safety, security, or business integrity.
cpeterso•8mo ago
Some biting critiques from Edsger Dijkstra:

Red: “the proposal is both advanced and backward in such an incongruous manner that I am baffled”

Green: “technical incompetence, probably enhanced by dishonesty”

Blue: “the blue language is unacceptably complex” … “these documents are an inextricable mixture of technical documentation and salestalk”

Yellow: “an unsalvageable mess”

https://craftofcoding.wordpress.com/2014/04/16/dijkstra-on-a...

transpute•8mo ago
Discussion, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44057731
vaxman•8mo ago
errbody from that era hates Ada --it was an edict that died once the promises of OOP began to be realized.

"dead things should stay dead" - Pet Cemetery, Steven King

If you want to have some fun from 1979, I highly recommend FORTH. It's really good and would have taken over the universe (lowercase u) had K&R C not dropped as part of the slow motion train wreck known as Unix (not to be confused with Linux). https://hackaday.io/project/170826/logs?sort=oldest

vaxman•8mo ago
PS: Charles "Chuck" Moore (who developed FORTH) last made a release called etherForth at https://etherforth.org/ It runs on a chip he designed called the GA144 (which is also programmed in arrayForth3) available at https://www.greenarraychips.com/home/products/index.php Again, this is for devs that want to have some fun. Between ZeptoForth and etherForth, you're covered.
microtherion•8mo ago
FORTH is amazing for bootstrapping on a small system. But actually writing code with it is an acquired taste at best.