2 ms·
No, it's not what I want thanks. It's not eager and it's not simple and it's pretty fiercely pure. What I am thinking of is something more like a functional P
by andrewcooke 17y ago
No, it's not what I want thanks. It's not eager and it's not simple and it's pretty fiercely pure. What I am thinking of is something more like a functional Python, or a Scheme with a "nice" syntax.
- jrockway 17y agoUse Scheme for more than five minutes and I think you'll find you don't care about the syntax anymore. Plus you won't have to write your own language, which is always nice. Strict evaluation is a pain, though, IMHO.
- andrewcooke 17y agoThanks, but I have used Scheme for more than 5 minutes. [edit: more generally, what is the point of this conversation? You've stated that you don't understand how anyone could want dynamic types, and that strict evaluation is a pain. It's pretty obvious that you want completely different things to me. Given that, are you really trying to help me here, or just being a bit of an asshole? You're welcome to disagree, but simply repeating your opinions as if they are somehow more valid than mine isn't helping anyone.]
- jrockway 17y agoWell, at least my comments aren't one sentence saying how the other person is wrong with the overtone of "no, that's not good enough, I am a unique flower and eveyrone else is wrong". Er, this one is, but...
- anthonyb 17y agoHe's not being an asshole, he's just trying to help. Perhaps if you were a bit more forthcoming about what you do want (or why you don't want X), his comments might be a bit more on target.