HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ggliv's commentslogin

This is a neat perspective. I’ve heard conversation on how working with different programming languages affects how you code (“learn Haskell, it’ll make you think more functionally!”) but for some reason I never connected it to the linguistic side of things.

I remember learning about the effects of language on cognition in a psychology course I took a while ago, it’s interesting to think about how that could apply more broadly.


While probably a bit overkill for writing a Lisp, Robert Nystrom’s Crafting Interpreters [0] is a really fantastic book on the topic.

[0] https://craftinginterpreters.com/contents.html


Could you elaborate on the reasoning behind using byte length instead of bit length?

Most of the time when I use fixed-width int types I’m trying to create guarantees for bitwise operators. From my perspective I feel like it therefore makes the most sense to name types on a per-bit level.


We almost always talk in bytes. When trying to reason about alignment it's bytes, when reading a serial IO from a file it's bytes. I hardly ever think in bits and when I do, I think in hex not decimal.

I also like that it makes all the type names the same width (notably U1/U2 vs u8/u16).


Your Game Boy series has been a very nice reference for me as I've slowly cobbled together my own emulator, so thanks for that!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: