Vladimir Keleshev

@keleshev.com

OCaml programmer, author of Compiling to Assembly from Scratch: https://keleshev.com/cas Copenhagen

In original docopt, square brackets mean each item is optional. For example, `prog [<x> <y>]` is the same as `prog [<x>] [<y>]`. Weird or not? To make both-or-nothing you need to group them like `prog [(<x> <y>)]`. You know why this was the design decision?

Power new Raspberry Pis is tricky nowadays, isn't it? Pi 4 needs 15W at 5V, but normally hubs/screens/power supplies advertise their max power delivery at a higher voltage, so there's no way to know without trying.

+600 of you are following me! It's amazing! 🌱 Let's do a little introduction. Hi! 👋 I'm Katiuska, I'm Venezuelan and I like to draw kids and sometimes write my own stories. I'm available for freelance work and also looking for representation. 🖍️ PortfolioWIP's and Tips

BildBildBildBild

Making parser combinators in OCaml that do not allocate (except when you explicitly do so, e.g. constructing an AST) is tricky. The usual advice I'm hearing is to use CPS in order to "return" multiple arguments. But in practice, even sequencing two parser creates closures that capture variables.