If you assume your taxation mechanism is actually perfect and actually gets you the theoretical maximum amount of money from the ultra rich, or even the fairly rich, it's still orders of magnitude less than it costs to make sure everyone is taken care of like the scenario we were talking about above.
I think that's a very different goal post. We were talking about the social contract, publicly funded services. You must realize it's just not a meaningful amount, right? That was my initial point. If you want a real safety net, you have to tax the middle class, and a lot.
That's not really how that works. Almost all of that money is tied up in operating businesses. Most very rich people mostly hold investments in stock - and generally at large companies. That's debt, not an asset I think the way you're thinking of. Overall, taking that money out of market holdings reduces the value of those holdings, for everyone else as well. You really end up lowering the retirement savings value of everyone who has a retirement plan by some amount.
I tried using it maybe a decade ago and back then it had a tendency to mess up window layouts and leave weird buffers around. I notice there's now a GitHub repository which has two spurts of work in its history that probably didn't exist when I last used it – have they improved its usability?
Turning didn't work for me. Impressive as hell indeed! The author is probably already busy 100xing other projects, no time to fix such a minor nuisance.
I believe you, but it would be nice if you called out the exact vendors that do that, for others to be cautious. It's not like their pricing is under NDA, right?
Clojure authors are quite conservative about adding such opinionated instruments into the language, especially when they come from outside. But fortunately, being a Lisp allows Clojure to add such language modifications with libraries without forcing those modifications upon every user of the language.
1) they did add threading macros, which are very popular, and these seem to serve a very similar purpose for transducers. You could argue their inclusion would make the language a little more uniform even.
2) There is precedence for doing the same operation with different mechanisms, like map vs mapv, so the change fits in nicely in that sense
3) as the article points out (edit: just realized you are the author, heh, hello!), transducers often have better performance than alternatives. I think it makes sense to highlight them and encourage their usage as much as possible. The more high performance code in the wild, the better. Even just introducing new ergonomics that facilitate their usage will influence that.
This is sort of true, but it doesn't scale well. You quickly end up having a very verbose `ns` declaration at the top of every file as you try to extend your Clojure
To cut down on the noise, you can coalesce all your extensions into one `ns` but it's not technically feasible with `core` and needs to be done with another library:
