brehaut

35 ms·

91.
by brehaut 17y ago
Will compojure let you specify an alternative route parsing/handling library via a binding, protocol or similar?
92.
by brehaut 17y ago
Thanks for the clarification. I had been confused through a lack of understanding about where compojure's handler functions stopped and clout's routing started.
93.
by brehaut 17y ago
While I'm happy that the library is being broken down into smaller pieces, I am left wondering what is left in Compojure itself. Http is handled by ring, html is its own lib, routing is its own lib. Can someone clarify what the library prov
94.
by brehaut 17y ago
Personally i don't care what someone who doesn't understand language X can make of a piece of code written in language X. What I care about from a languages syntax is that it makes programs clear to someone familiar with the language. Like
95.
by brehaut 17y ago
Not 'less intuitive', it is 'less familiar'. These sorts of comments are largely subjective. See also C family programmers looking at Lisp or ML family languages.
96.
by brehaut 17y ago
In overview: 1. Write javascript prototypes to mimic the primatives of BASIC where there is no JS equivalent - Arrays spring to mind, JS Arrays are dynamical growing sparse arrays. To support BASIC arrays you will need support redim and red
97.
by brehaut 17y ago
There is also another parser combinator library called fnparse at http://github.com/joshua-choi/fnparse
98.
by brehaut 17y ago
For gamers who are interested in the burning wheel aesthetic but are intimidated by the crunch of the system, I would suggest starting off with the Mouse Guard RPG ( http://archaia.com/blog/titles/mouse-guard-rpg ). It's not a 'lite' syst
99.
by brehaut 17y ago
Clojure (being a lisp) uses macros and some dynamic variables to manage this sort of polymorphism. The clojure library provides a defmonad macro to let you define the functions required (m-bind and m-result are a must, and m-plus and m-zero
100.
by brehaut 17y ago
"...without a type system..." Sorry to be a pedant, but dynamically typed is not the same as without a type system, it is merely without a type checker. They probably look the same to somebody well versed in Haskell but the distinction mat
101.
by brehaut 17y ago
Even more than that, design to your body font size. The vertical rhythm of your design is incredibly valuable. Far more so than any fancy grid CSS framework or other tricks. Every non-designer (and possibly some designers) should read http
102.
by brehaut 17y ago
The problem is with your argument is that that sort of observation is purely subjective. It's based on your experience. It's almost a trope for a discussion about lisps to have someone make the claim 'All those parenthesis are ugly!' and ha
103.
by brehaut 17y ago
The most egregious fault of the fourth point is that it is not actually currying in anything but the colloquial sense. It is correctly called partial application . In comparison if you were to curry the function function foo(a, b, c)
104.
by brehaut 17y ago
To make matters worse, us nerds have been confusing value and identity ever since we were shown objects. Bah-dom-bom.
105.
by brehaut 17y ago
Just to be clear, Clojure (and most lisps) are also dynamically typed and thus allow just the same experimental approach. Clojure and Common Lisp (I can't speak for other lisps, but I think some schemes too - PLT Scheme perhaps?) also have
106.
by brehaut 17y ago
I've been using python for about 8 years before feeling like i wanted to move. I think that puts me well outside the fad window.
107.
by brehaut 17y ago
Python is currently in a perfect storm for experienced users to want to move away. If it was just itertools it wouldn't be the case. Point the first: Python 2.x to Python 3.x if you already have to make a transition, there is more impetus
108.
by brehaut 17y ago
Right on the money ;) All the evidence i have is purely subjective and anecdotal, but I personally know of a number for whom this is true.
109.
by brehaut 17y ago
you are quite right. it looks totally different to when i first checked it, so yes, ignore me.
110.
by brehaut 17y ago
well of course. Its a last resort in python too. while it's much easier to do in python, its far from idiomatic. It's getting into 'too much magic' territory.
111.
by brehaut 17y ago
I believe the question is asking 'if you have an object of unknown type, how do you introspect it to find out if it supports a method with name meth_name'. the test for callability is to determine of the objects member is callable, not if t
112.
by brehaut 17y ago
The snippet is imprecise. it should be something like def hasmethod(obj, meth_name): """If it calls like a method it's a method.""" return callable(getattr(obj, meth_name)) if hasattr(obj, meth_name) else Fals
113.
by brehaut 17y ago
Would you like to expand on your claim? Be quite clear that i dislike both languages. VBS is the worst of the two though.
114.
by brehaut 17y ago
The problem is that in functional languages you have a lot of tools build on higher order functions, so you can easily leverage functions as expressions. On the other hand, its standard practice to use statement forms (if, while, for, try e
115.
by brehaut 17y ago
I think thats unfair. PHP sucks some hairy donkey's balls, but VBScript is significantly worse. Dim, Redim Preserve, ByRef, Arrays that are basicly C arrays (see also Redim), Ridiculous Object/Value dichotomy (for those that arent aware you
116.
by brehaut 17y ago
Speculation around the 'tubes believe that A4 is a System on Chip based around the core ARM architecture.
117.
by brehaut 17y ago
If you start using metaclasses its likely more experienced pythonista's will look down their nose at you and say "probably shouldn't have done it that way", largely because they often turn out to be magic for magics sake. I believe the rule
118.
by brehaut 17y ago
Ive dabbled in Haskell and F# myself; I found Haskell to be the amazing mind awakening experience people talk about, but it also frustrates the hell out of my sometimes. All the syntax around types confuses my simple brain. F# on the other
119.
by brehaut 17y ago
Oh, a couple other points: Clojure is very fast. It generally runs quickly, but then you can profile and add a couple of type hints and watch it run about as fast as java. It's still a dynamic language, but names can only be defined in spec
120.
by brehaut 17y ago
Have you looked at Clojure? [Huge ramble to follow] Clojure is a particularly interesting functional language for a python programmer IMO. It shares a number of asthetic and cultural properties with python that other lisps and other functio

More ›