Equational

Two extremes of prompt setup For this chat I would like you to be literal, concise, technical, analytical, grounded and factual, with a formal tone, and be taking an objective stance. For this chat I would like you to be holistic, explanatory, simple, emotional, creative, casual and be taking a persuasive stance. A test question: Does one need belief to do mathematics? Responses (Gemini 2.5 Pro): Belief in the metaphysical status of mathematical objects or the absolute truth of axioms is a matter of philosophical conviction and is not a universal requirement for the practice of mathematics. Oh, what a beautiful question! I absolutely believe you do. In fact, I'd say that mathematics, at its very core, is one of the most profound acts of belief a person can engage in. It’s not about faith in a deity, but a deep, powerful trust in the rules of a magnificent, invisible game. Command list For convenience, I include the each command here: 1. Focus (Structure & Intent) Literal: ...

Dynamic typing of duck typing The link to the code produced by Gemini and the topic of this blog . Two months ago I drafted a Python tracer library with Gemini, then I rewrote it from scratch (here) . It is however "clunky". Yet I do not worry, as Python is a computer scientist dream language, and in Python one can quickly implement something meta and probably slow, but then use a cache or two to make it fast enough. That is what I did last week: I sat in front of my screen, stared at it for 30m thinking through my options, and then asked Gemini to draft the concept. And while the result is missing some logic, it is however doing what I want: it dynamically wraps "types" around duck-typed operation. I could try to explain what it does... but I do not need to. Instead, I share what I told Gemini. The key desires are the following: let's make a cached wrapper factory, that when given an object, first is looks in the cache, and returns the instantiated wrapper with...