progman

9 ms·

31.
by progman 9y ago
The only foreign languages which come close to Lisp with a Python like syntax are Stanza [1] and Nim [2]. Stanza feels like a Lisp with infix syntax. The closeness to Lisp explains why Stanza makes a semantic difference between "f(x)&q
32.
by progman 9y ago
> an X11 application can read all keystrokes I like that because I use key desktop macros heavily. > and do screen grabs of other windows. I like that since it enables me to make screen shots of any application. > X11 does not supp
33.
by progman 9y ago
I think bootstrap with OCaml is ok - if just bootstrap from source becomes possible at all. Binary-only dependency is awful when Rust is wanted on yet unsupported systems.
34.
by progman 9y ago
> Unless you are talking about an architecture which doesn't have llvm backend Nim doesn't depend on LLVM. It works also with GNU C.
35.
by progman 9y ago
> See for instance the comments ... Interesting! So, it should basically be possible to bootstrap from source using OCaml and the old source from the Git repository. It's interesting that OCaml was used to develop Rust since OCaml i
36.
by progman 9y ago
> I fail to see what advantage rewriting existing and proven tools with a new language would bring I think code safety is not an issue here because the Posix tools (and Unix/Linux as a whole) have already proven their extreme reliab
37.
by progman 9y ago
> go needs go, haskell needs haskell, rust needs rust That's painful. It's one big point which Nim [1] does better. It compiles to C and bootstraps from C. That makes porting to other platforms much easier. I don't underst
38.
by progman 9y ago
Oustanding progress usually comes from individuals, not from outstanding groups. Consider Newton, Archimedes, da Vinci, Jesus Christ, Luther, Gutenberg, Mozart, Einstein, Zuse, Edison, and others. They changed the world. Unfortunately, ther
39.
by progman 9y ago
> My recommendation to use one close to the metal like PreScheme with Rust-style safety that outputs C for LLVM attempts to address that. Wouldn't it be easier to develop a very basic OS core in Rust, and a simple Lisp 1.5 interpret
40.
by progman 9y ago
> Next cool possibility: use a Rust-like LISP Why do you want a Rust with Lisp syntax? I don't see the benefits of such a "Lisp" if you take the core benefits of metaprogramming at runtime away which depends on the equalit
41.
by progman 9y ago
> I actually preferred the documents were all generated, either by software, or at least using markup like HTML or LaTeX, that are diff'able. But I know this is impossible to impose on the layman. I agree with that. Regarding MS Off
42.
by progman 9y ago
You cannot compare Slackware 2.0 with the current version (14.2). Setup is way easier today.
43.
by progman 9y ago
Regarding catching up you are right. It is always difficult, if not impossible to catch up with proprietary systems. I always wondered why the OSS community followed that way for so long instead of focusing on things which the user really
44.
by progman 9y ago
To me it's exactly the opposite. I am glad that KDE remained to be a usable desktop, and did not follow the Win 8 GUI disaster. I also appreciate that LibreOffice sticks to the classical menu system and doesn't overload the desk
45.
by progman 9y ago
That's true for most languages. However, some languages are so well designed for maintainability that they barely need verbose comments. Ada is such a language. I have no problems to understand my own Ada code written 10 years ago. Ho
46.
by progman 9y ago
What's the difference of trusting the media, or the data which backs the media?
47.
by progman 9y ago
What if - theoretically - this is just "fake news"? I mean, how can you discern that the stuff the media reports is actually true, no matter in what direction? I think the most reliable source of information in this time of spread
48.
by progman 9y ago
Of course. You learn quickly ;-)
49.
by progman 9y ago
> "ugly, stupid and mean" is actually intended to the beginners or to those who want to try it. When I encountered Forth first (6502 figForth) I felt it quite convenient. At that time there were only two other options - Basic a
50.
by progman 9y ago
Doesn't your latter post contradict your previous post? If Forth is not powerful how did you manage to do such things with Forth, and why did you stay so long with Forth despite its "ugliness" and "meanness"?
51.
by progman 9y ago
> : right# negate 32 + . ; This is an example of "ugly" Forth code. It's ok here to make the code as short as possible. In reality I would write (educational) Forth code this way. The texts in parentheses are comments.
52.
by progman 9y ago
> 'm going to need a citation for that. "My VLSI tools take a chip from conception through testing. Perhaps 500 lines of source code. Cadence, Mentor Graphics do the same, more or less. With how much source/object code? –
53.
by progman 9y ago
> Forth is not powerful. It is ugly, stupid and mean. That's a statement of someone who doesn't understand Forth. Of course, one can write ugly code easily. Any language with raw power (Asm, C, Forth, Ada) needs a disciplined d
54.
by progman 9y ago
The critical point is specification vs. implementation. Any difference creates a loophole which can be abused.
55.
by progman 9y ago
> how did this attack slip through, despite the fact that the 802.11i handshake was formally proven secure? So, we cannot trust even formal verification? > it’s a factual statement. In formal analysis, definitions really, really mat
56.
by progman 9y ago
> There is ZERO riscv software at all Really? If you mean software for the RISC-V/x86 emulation you are possibly right. Regarding RISC-V in general however your statement is not true. Fabrice Bellard has published a working Linux on
57.
by progman 9y ago
I think one big advantage could be seemless integration of all applications. Genera on Lisp Machines [1] and McClim [2] illustrate how it works. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1878220 [2] https://common
58.
by progman 9y ago
Yes, time to market is important. However, you don't need to compromise convenience of development for the sake of performance. If you twist your Python code to get performance it takes time. If you need performance, and like the synta
59.
by progman 9y ago
Your perception confirms my previous post that mediocre developers have a hard time to think in different ways, even to code in non-infix notation. Linux suffers a similar problem. Many people are so used to Windows desktops that they have
60.
by progman 9y ago
Excellent languages like Lisp, Haskell, Ada, etc., maybe also Rust and Nim, will likely never be mainstream since they offer a lot of features which require a lot of discipline by the programmer. Companies want mediocre developers for medio

More ›