anon_d

14 ms·

121.
by anon_d 16y ago
Racket is not a scheme.
122.
by anon_d 16y ago
Are you serious? 3 to 4 minutes is a lifetime.
123.
by anon_d 16y ago
C, Standard ML, and Unix shell. Lojban, Swedish, and Japanese.
124.
by anon_d 16y ago
(define (error . args) #f) (define (class x y z) (lambda (d) (case d ('x x) ('y y) ('z z) (else (error "Invalid slot ~a" d))))) (define obj (class 'this 'is-a 'test)) (display (obj (read))) (newline) Th
125.
by anon_d 16y ago
GUI (which you can't easily replace, since it too is exposed to the filesystem) What? The graphics system is quite nice, there's no reason to replace that. I'm pretty sure there is nothing tying the graphics protocol to their GUI para
126.
by anon_d 16y ago
I use Chicken Scheme. I prefer Scheme over Common Lisp for practical reasons. None of the Common Lisp implementations that I'm aware of can compile code to nice, small, executables that start fast and don't use a ton of memory. They all
127.
by anon_d 16y ago
A long and mostly incoherent rant. I'm ever so sick of seeing these.
128.
by anon_d 16y ago
Stop reading r/politics!
129.
by anon_d 16y ago
It's not a problem at all , there is zero readability cost to all of those parens. Nobody with any experience coding lisp has any trouble reading it. Personally, I find lisp code to be considerably easier to read than other languages t
130.
by anon_d 16y ago
http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-49/srfi-49.html I think it's a terrible idea, but there you go.
131.
by anon_d 16y ago
With only three times as much memory, it runs on average 17% slower than explicit memory management. However, with only twice as much memory, garbage collection degrades performance by nearly 70%. When physical memory is scarce, paging cau
132.
by anon_d 16y ago
[...] where the impure side of things was as easy to write as the pure computations, that would be great. From your post, I'm going to assume that you haven't used the languages I'm talking about; sorry if I misread that. SML/Ocaml/F# a
133.
by anon_d 16y ago
While AliceML is quite nice, the main advantage that SML has over the other major ML-family languages is, IMHO, that it's simple, well-defined, and has several fairly-compatible and high quality implementations.
134.
by anon_d 16y ago
SML/Ocaml: - Rapid development - Clean syntax - Static type system - Good performance - Practical, not about pushing boundaries SML especially, is a very stable, simple, and well thought out language.
135.
by anon_d 16y ago
Project thesis Unfortunately, I've already done my senior project. Though, I'd be happy to hack on Glendix stuff in my free time. /net I've not done any network or kernel programming, and I'm only slightly familiar with /net. If I wan
136.
by anon_d 16y ago
Sometimes, it is more important to have the right problem than the best solution. Perhaps unwittingly, this statement fits C++ perfectly. It's popular to criticize C++'s design, and this is why. It's the best solution to the wrong probl
137.
by anon_d 16y ago
I'm finishing my bachelors next spring, and I would kill to work on Glendix or Plan 9. Suggestions?
138.
by anon_d 16y ago
How did you have time to work on it when you were a grad student?
139.
by anon_d 16y ago
> Because tar does not support encryption/compression on the inside of archives. Yes it does? Just encrypt/compress all the files before tarring. > Not indexed The reason tar doesn't have an index is so that tarballs can be concate
140.
by anon_d 16y ago
> Somebody once said (anybody have the quote?) that C and java code looks blocky, while lisp code looks more fluid. This is from Paul Graham's book, On Lisp.
141.
by anon_d 16y ago
tl;dr: Introduction zsh is UNIX shell. So what’s zsh and why would I want it over my current shell? It's more bloated than just about every other shell! Bash isn't nearly bloated enough! Feature, features, features! Ok, Yo
142.
by anon_d 16y ago
> Writing this comment, I had to look up the order of the parameters to tar; I still can't remember. Stupid tar ; tar c *.cpp *.h >something.tar ; tar c dir | gzip >something-else.tgz Problem solved! Also: ;
143.
by anon_d 16y ago
What do you have against bourne shell scripting? I thinks it's probably the most under-rated language/programming paradigm I know. I really don't understand all the hate. Also, what didn't you like about Tcl? I find it much more in-line
144.
by anon_d 16y ago
Your code sample isn't quite right. [read stdin] returns a string (not a list of strings), which is parsed as a list when you try to loop over it. The parsing breaks the string into a list of words, so the second loop is redundant. The pa