fogus

25 ms·

301.
by fogus 14y ago
Since you mention Joy of Clojure, it's worth a response. First, I would love to include exercises, however two factors conspire(d) against us. First, some of our favorite C.S./programming books have amazing exercises, so we respect the art
302.
Clojurewm - a "window manager" for Microsoft Windows written in Clojure(github.com)
3 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
303.
by fogus 14y ago
> anyone can be _why Except when they try they're not very interesting; unlike `Subject`.
304.
by fogus 14y ago
I'm not sure that the presense of a stack is required for a concatenative language, but your point is well taken. Pesto5 is not enterprise ready.
305.
by fogus 14y ago
Syntax only thought right?
306.
by fogus 14y ago
Here's hoping he wants Potion back. http://www.github.com/fogus/potion
307.
by fogus 14y ago
I'm quite familiar with Docco having helped implement something similar for Clojure.[1] I wanted to use org-mode. Sorry it's not readable. [1]: http://github.com/fogus/marginalia
308.
by fogus 14y ago
The fun part that distinguishes an early Lisp from the pure lambda calculus is the mixing of strict evaluation and call-by-need. I had to hack that a bit by making a distinction between Procs created with proc vs those with lambda and by t
309.
by fogus 14y ago
Well, I can't control everything. :-)
310.
by fogus 14y ago
My s-expression reader is 34 lines. https://github.com/fogus/ulithp/blob/master/src/reader.rb A minimal Lisp (the bare minimal) does not require sexprs though.
311.
by fogus 14y ago
If I had a little more time I would have written the uLithp eval in uLithp. The stark simplicity of that never fails to take my breath away.
312.
by fogus 14y ago
But really the "why" is that it was fun. Also, it was my submission to the PLT Games. http://pltgames.com/competition/2012/12
313.
by fogus 14y ago
Why not?
314.
by fogus 14y ago
That's based on an older version of uLithp that had a couple bugs.
315.
by fogus 14y ago
An observation that I made recently during a multi-day brainstorming[1] session. The managerial attendees were, in every case, decked out with multiple high tech gadgets while the technical types all used pen and paper for note taking. Jus
316.
by fogus 14y ago
> I should note that an ordinary > contract system does not delete your code... Much to my dismay.
317.
by fogus 14y ago
Both for the iPad: * SmartGo Kifu * OOTP Baseball
318.
The Acceptable Cost of the Right to Bear Arms(vice.com)
1 points by fogus 14y ago|1 comments
319.
Raspberry Pi-ing, MacGyver Style(interlockroc.org)
3 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
320.
by fogus 14y ago
You could do it in ~15 lines with Clojure: http://www.fogus.me/fun/unfix/infix-src.html I suspect most Lisps would require about the same.
321.
Why Lisp? 3 answers(mattknox.com)
74 points by fogus 14y ago|76 comments
322.
The industrial bookcase(jwz.org)
3 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
323.
Photos That Violated Facebook's Policies(techdirt.com)
37 points by fogus 14y ago|19 comments
324.
by fogus 14y ago
"Hammock-driven Development" I think.
325.
Functional programs rarely rot(michaelochurch.wordpress.com)
10 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
326.
A Logic Programming Reading List(dosync.posterous.com)
3 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
327.
by fogus 14y ago
If I knew the answer (of at least thought I did) then I could probably finish that post. ;-)
328.
by fogus 14y ago
Thank you for the reply. I think some (most?) of the issues that you raise could fall into the purview of book #6 "Software Development Management" -- although what you mention would require a better word on my part than "Management".
329.
Emerging languages spotlight: Elm(radar.oreilly.com)
3 points by fogus 14y ago|0 comments
330.
by fogus 14y ago
I would be interested to know how you would change the list to facilitate a broader view.

More ›