Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | onestay42's commentslogin

AFAIK listen used to be used therefor[sic] but it has fallen out of use nowadays. From wiktionary:

> Listen the watchman’s cry upon the wall.

Edit: formatting


'Hear the watchman’s cry upon the wall' works the same way, no ?

I have clarified what I am looking for in a cousin comment.


I've seen some overheat themselves even in open air!


BSD would like a word.


They can't be heard over the faint booing from the Solaris crowd.


For that matter, if we're including the proprietary OSs, HP-UX is still kinda a thing and AIX is going strong. Of course, IIRC those are actual certified UNIX™ instead of unix-like... though I'd call that a subset, so still in scope IMO.


TIL AIX is still in development and they had a release this month

https://community.ibm.com/community/user/blogs/sanket-rathi1...


We don't talk about BSD here.


Do you mean therefore or therefor? I only ask because I have never seen an AI say therefor. (therefore ~ due to that; therefor ~ for that)


Therefore. I'm so used to writing it without the extra E.


This is also preventing kids in my school from logging into their chromebooks.


dd an company require if= and of=, if that counts


dd doesn't require either if= or of=. It'll read from stdin (or pipe) if you omit if= and it'll write to stdout happily if you omit of=.

From the man page:

    if=FILE - read from FILE instead of stdin.
    of=FILE -  write to FILE instead of stdout.
So you can do:

   cat x.iso | dd oflag=direct bs=4096kB | /dev/sdc


"Cattle labeling meat labeling supervision task transfer act" is just as bad as Rinderkennzeichnungsfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz, English just gets to use spaces where German doesn't. The underlying construction is the same. (I definitively got that translation wrong)


Usually English will try to come up with a single, Latin-or-Greek-derived word for compound ideas like this, which is another bad habit.

So surgery is full of -ectomies instead of -cut-outs.


Medicine terms in German also use Latin or Greek, since this is the subject language, so this is a bad example.


English gets to use a sentence. It can be reworded any number of ways. I did a bit of quick googling and the clearest English I came up with for `Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000` is "Requirements for the Labelling of Minced Beef" which is a lot easier to process than Rinderkennzeichnungsfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz. The reason we split code over lines is the same reason we split sentences into words. Easier for the brain to parse.

I wonder do German brains work on a much longer context window because of the language?


> I wonder do German brains work on a much longer context window because of the language?

Maybe, but more due to the spelling of numbers and long sentences. Compound words are not an example of this, since Germans can parse these words just fine as different things. It just means that the lowest "tokenization" in everyday use is not the word, but subcomponents of them.

Do English native speakers "tokenize" expressions in words? Do you see it as '(labelling) (of) (minced)' or '(label)l(ing) (of) (minc)(ed)' ?

I can't speak for most Germans, but the algorithm I think I use is just greedy from left to right. This is also consistent with how mistokenization in common puns works, so I think this is common.

In primary school we trained to recognize syllable boundaries. Is that just a German thing, or is this common in other countries? You need to know these for spelling and once you know these, separating word components becomes trivial.


a) the title of the regulation is not equivalent to the law (unsurprisingly), onestay42's translation is clunky but a lot closer

b) the official title of the law was "Gesetz zur Übertragung der Aufgaben für die Überwachung der Rinderkennzeichnung und Rindfleischetikettierung", so how again is it that English "gets to use a sentence" and German doesn't? German has the choice depending on context, sometimes having one word is convenient.


I'm not a German speaker. Why would someone use such a long word as a convenience?


I am. It is a semantic difference. Single entities get referred to by a single word. If you use a word group to describe it, it means you don't consider it a single "thing", but a "system" described by the relations of single "things".

The composed word also has a specific meaning that the same words with space between doesn't. For example "das rote Kraut" – "red herb" and "das Rotkraut" – "red cabbage". Also suppose "red cabbage" was grown in abnormal conditions, so it doesn't have the color pigments, it is still "red cabbage", but not "red" "cabbage". This is awkward to state in English, but no problem in German.


Maybe in speech they are similar, but not in writing. The underlying construction is as different as it can be. English puts " " between words, and German does not.


I suggest you look into the origin of eukaryotes.


I know this is quite tangential, but I never realized that Discworld's thud was so close to an existing game(Hnefatavl)


It's amazing to me that a python program can be written to make sure another python program is pythoning properly.


Just curious. Isn't that how development tools generally work? Would you be surprised if it was in and for a compiled language? (This isn't a dismissal. I'm curious about the aspect of this specific case that amuses you.)


Foundational tooling not being written in a compiled language (fast is good, it could be jitted, but ideally it's a single binary) is actually a huge tax that I'm quite glad we're getting over as an industry.

Python is probably the apex of the "slow + doesn't work without a magic environment" problem


I suppose it is how this kind of tool generally works. I think it's just some subset of the feeling I get when someone writes(implements?) $LANGUAGE in $LANGUAGE(e.g. brainf*ck in brainf*ck)

EDIT: escaped censorship


You can see from how quickly the code becomes extremely busy and annoying to read that python being flexible is a blessing and a curse. Maybe curse is the wrong word, but none of this was really designed cohesively so it's usually very janky and a bit slow.


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

Search: