lambada

For the red Lambada line in Fig 13 when the model predicts ~0 the ground truth is 0.7.

Teaching them the benefits of lambada early on would be very useful.

I don't think everyone knew how to implement lambada properly, but the calculus was clear enough.

You should just write a Lambada and point it at your queue.

You could just do the usual lambada, etc., but what's the point?

For instance, VB has better IDE support for expressing sum types, doesn't require type annotations for lambada expressions, and has more Linq (query comprehension) operators.

There might have been a moment in time lambada was popular?.

I don't know if the lambada feature was there before, but it's pretty cool!

>For the red Lambada line in Fig 13 when the model predicts ~0 the ground truth is 0.7.

Yeah but Lambada is not the only line there.

Learning turing-completeness, lambada-calculus and logic is more important.

As far as I understand a functional programming language is one where functions are first-class citizens and hopefully the lambada calculus is the top-level abstraction.

"Rule 110" This is just lambada calculus and has no tape movement - requires checkin boxes, still, and thinking about whether or not to halt - which actually kinda is its own asterisk (not the usual 'infinite tape' kind).

...the only times I heard people bitching about syntax to the point of staying away from a language for it was either about Lisps ("undistinquishable paren soup") or about Python's significant indentation and lack of multiline lambada.

I flew in a Czech ultralight once, it was a Lambada, I forget the manufacturer.