In "The Brothers Karamazov" by Fyodor Dostoevsky describes sort-of the opposite process. A body of monk who had been considered a living saint started to smell on the second day after his dearth. That made everybody to realize that he was the opposite of the saint. And then another monk mentioned that eating sweets and cakes could not lead to sainthood.
The code generator is inspired by "Destination-driven Code Generation"
by Dybvig, Hieb and Butler. There are some differences however. The code
generator in the paper generates "flat" code (assembler) whereas I
generate nested Web Assembly instructions.
This approach generates reasonable code without having to implement
a register allocator. Also, I believe I saw a Wasm to Wasm compiler
that improved register allocation (maybe it was a switch for wasm-tools?).
If (when?) WebRacket becomes a success, we can always switch out individual passes.
Seems a bit off, but I don't say that in a judgmental way.
If a person presented themselves for the Catholic/Orthodox catechumenate with the caveat "I'm not a believer but...", a director with a good humor would reply with something like: "Of course you're not, not yet, supernatural faith is a gift received in Holy Baptism."
Now, if at the end of the catechumenate (several months) the person admits they can't really offer intellectual assent to what they've been taught, that it boils down to their wanting to hedge their bets and that's all, then the director is going to speak to the priest of the parish, and more than likely the priest is going to meet with the person and tell them they're not prepared for baptism.
There are time crunched situations and emergency baptisms, for sure, but even then for an adult asking to be baptized, there generally needs to be a profession of intellectual assent ("I believe...") and an express openness to the gift of faith.
Someone I know recently joined the Catholic Church, in the setting of a community that uses the "pre Vatican 2" forms. Here are the questions-answers that are asked in the public setting (liturgy/rite) of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism in the older form:
What are you asking of God’s church?
Faith.
What does faith hold out to you?
Everlasting life.
If, then, you wish to inherit everlasting life, keep the commandments, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” On these two commandments depend the whole law and the prophets. Now faith demands that you worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in unity, neither confusing the Persons one with the other, nor making a distinction in their nature. For the Father is a distinct Person, so also the Son, so also the Holy Spirit; yet all Three possess the one nature, the one Godhead.
Do you renounce Satan?
I do renounce him.
And all his works?
I do renounce them.
And all his attractions?
I do renounce them.
Do you believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth?
I do believe.
Do you believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was born into this world and suffered for us?
I do believe.
Do you also believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting?
I do believe.
Receive the sign of the cross on your brow and on your heart. Put your whole trust in the heavenly teachings. And lead a life that will truly fit you to be a dwelling place for God. On entering God’s Church acknowledge with joy that you have escaped the clutches of death. Worship God the Father almighty, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son, our Lord, who is coming to judge both the living and the dead and the world by fire.
Let us pray. I entreat you, blessed Lord and Father, almighty and everlasting God, to point out the way of truth and godly knowledge to these servants of yours who grope in uncertainty and doubt in the darkness of this world. Open their inner sight, the better to see you as the one God, the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father, in union with the Holy Spirit. May it be their good fortune to enjoy the fruit of this avowal both now and forevermore; through Christ our Lord.
I sign you on the brow that you may take up the cross of our Lord. I sign you on the ears that you may listen to the heavenly teachings. I sign you on the eyes that you may see the grandeur of God. I sign you on the nostrils that you may sense the sweet fragrance of Christ. I sign you on the mouth that you may proclaim the word of life. I sign you on the breast that you may believe in God. I sign you on the shoulders that you may take on you the yoke of His service. I sign you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, that you may come to your eternal destiny and have life without end.
[ Many more prayers and blessings ]
Do you wish to be baptized?
I do.
I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. The almighty God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, has caused you to be born over again of water and the Holy Spirit and pardoned you all your sins. May he now anoint you with the chrism that sanctifies in Christ Jesus our Lord, and bring you to everlasting life. Take this white robe and keep it spotless until you arrive at the judgment seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you may be rewarded with everlasting life. Take this burning candle as a reminder to keep your baptismal innocence. Obey God’s commandments, so that when our Lord comes for the joyous wedding feast you may go forth to meet Him with all the saints in the halls of heaven, and be happy with Him forevermore. Go in peace, and may the Lord be with you.
The text of the rite is given fully in Latin, and then fully in English, so keep scrolling. Seems like their TLS cert is expired, but the website is okay.
We should pray for the repose of Scott's soul, full of confidence in God's mercy.
You realize that the world changes and we update out language as we go?
Saying "we already have a definition" when it's not clear whether it's been considered whether that definition would interact with something which is new, is... I don't even know what word to use. Square? Stupid?
> Saying "we already have a definition" when it's not clear whether it's been considered whether that definition would interact with something which is new, is... I don't even know what word to use. Square? Stupid?
The word you're looking for is "correct". The definition doesn't change just because circumstances do. If you want a term to refer to "open source unless it's for AI use", then coin one, don't misuse an existing term to mean something it doesn't.
> If you want a term to refer to "open source unless it's for AI use", then coin one
We even have such term already. It's source-available. Nothing necessarily wrong or bad about it. It only requires people to be honest with themselves and don't call code open if it's not.
Part of the background for this entire dispute is that prior to the OSI's founding, "open source" was a generic phrase which was broadly understood to just mean "the source code is available". See many documented cases in https://dieter.plaetinck.be/posts/open-source-undefined-part...
So it's a bit ironic to argue that terms cannot be redefined, when that's already what happened with "open source" and what got us here in the first place. If OSI had chosen a novel term (e.g. "Sourceware" was one option they considered), they would have been able to trademark it and avoid this entire multi-decade-long argument.
Rather, the definition as it is now, and has been for some time, addresses the same old difficulties and distractions that rear their heads again and again wearing slightly different masks.
Well, as the author says in the FAQ, he's been using the name Final Cut since 1991, whereas the famous video editing software appeared in 1999. Now, given how well-known the latter became, a name change would certainly be reasonable if he wanted to avoid confusion, improve find-ability in web search, etc. But, I get the impression that's not among his priorities, and it's his project, so...
The concept of database cursor, or more generally continuation token, has been around a long time. Jumping to pub/sub is missing the mark.
You can have RPC prompt(input) return an opaque cursor, and promptNext(cursor) which returns partial output and the next cursor. As appropriate, the client could specify the desired size of output chunks along with input. The server could advertise or have documented the grace period for exhausting the cursors, but that’s not strictly necessary as it could be indicated in a promptNext(cursor) call that failed because of timeout. Transport session reuse can be handled automatically by HTTP.
When client receives output from a promptNext call it can work on updating the UI while promptNext is dispatched again in the background.
Developers should properly learn the difference between push and pull reactivity, and leverage both appropriately.
Many, though not all, problems where an async mutex might be applied can instead be simplified with use of an async queue and the accompanying serialization of reactions (pull reactivity).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorruptibility
Recent case, died 2019, found not decomposed in 2023, had not been embalmed, unsealed wood coffin:
https://www.ncregister.com/cna/incorrupt-body-of-sister-wilh...
reply