The Idea is that the enum acts as a union, capable of holding any of the member types, It’s not that different from using identifiers and when transpiling to rust I will probably only support variants beginning with string literals (or maybe generate them).

The main reason is that I could use type inference to define the variants in a returned anonymous enum.

I like the pipe symbol because it is useful for distinguishing between enums and structs without keywords. And I just personally think it looks better. And allow for pretty anonymous enums like (|String |Int) for something that can accept both a string and an integer.

Not having a license is “All Rights Reserved”. That’s why I bothered with the license section in the readme at all.

Thanks!

I intend for the language to have a similar borrow checker and type system. Which is why I’m targeting rust. It means I have something to check against when writing the tooling. (Although I’m not sure I’ll get that far. My computer is littered with dead projects).

I don’t really want to clutter the repo with something so frivolous. If they were links or an SPDX ID would that be enough?

I’m intending to use this for a custom language “OA” that I want to compile to Rust and JS to start with.

I don’t know enough about LLVM to compile directly to machine code although I would like to.

You can use Unicode pictures: ␜ ␝ ␞ ␟

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_Pictures

Lets ditch base10 entirely and use 0(freezing)-216(boiling). that means 0-1000 in base6.

Ideology. every cent a capitalist doesn’t make because of me is a small victory.

Okay, I agree. LLMs might be useful for education. But they should not replace practical experience.

I just am skeptical to everyone that says we should replace something with AI, because most of the time these decisions seem to be motivated by profit and aren’t actually better.

The biggest problem about Saharan solar farm is how are you going to get the power to where it needs to be?

The examples you provide are negatively biased. You don’t know all of the normal and useful things they learn because they don’t stand out. Also two of those examples (Church and school busses) come from current cultural biases, something a solarpunk society would hopefully mitigate.

I think AI is not suited for discussion. It might be good at conversation but discussion isn’t just conversation. Discussion requires understanding of others to a degree I don’t think AI can achieve.

I concede my point about resources, but will add that the model will get outdated and will need retraining every once in a while.

Textbooks are bad. I agree. I just think they should be replaced with a human that knows what they are talking about and the topics that are learnt are things that the kid actually wants to know instead of what people think they should know.

Also I can’t help but notice you ignored one of my core arguments: that solarpunk societies are about strong human connections and replacing one of the main sources of these connections is a bad idea.

I also think that the process of finding information is as important as the actual information. If all of your questions are answered just by typing it into the computer then you never learn the importance of checking information accuracy, accounting for bias and other very useful skills.

AI allows you to shortcut to the information you seek which means you never learn how to actually think for yourself.

knowledge will obviously come from other sources too. When kids socialize with others they will learn things naturally, and discussion should absolutely be encouraged. However AI produces a lot of problems. AIs have bias based on the information they learn, they require resources to build and maintain and cannot discuss information accurately. I just don’t see what AI adds over just interacting with other people.

Solarpunk societies, like all post-capitalist societies, are build on strong human relations, replacing one of the avenues of creating them with an hallucinating rock (exaggeration I know) just seems weird.

I don’t think reading and maths needs to be obligatory. Kids will pick it up naturally through their own curiosity when trying to learn about something more advanced.

What you are describing is pretty close to a university. Which makes sense because universities are places of learning, unlike schools which are prisons of disciplining and the goal isn’t to learn but to memorize minutia for about a month before moving to the next topic.

I don’t think we need AI. Without the need to constantly work the tutor can just be one of the child’s parents. This would work better because children naturally respect and want to emulate their parents. The tutor doesn’t even need to know everything and just teach how to analyze situations and find knowledge.

But I agree that kids should be included in workspaces to teach them about necessary (or interesting) jobs.

Overall I think the best way is to allow kids to find their own best ways to learn.