skrishnamurthi

8 ms·

61.
by skrishnamurthi 5y ago
I've used rationals by default in Racket/Scheme for literally 3+ decades now. It's fine. Dart is trying to be an industrial-strength language. We're trying to create an awesome initial programming experience. To the be
62.
by skrishnamurthi 5y ago
Well, actually, it's implemented in Pyret itself (-:. But it currently compiles down to JavaScript. Our goal is to create an awesome language for certain educational settings, and many of our users (e.g., schools) are on restricted mac
63.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
You know it's also the name of a sporting good, right? There's this game called tennis. Quite popular, can be fun to play and to watch. You should check it out.
64.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
I presume you refuse to play tennis, then, solo calcio.
65.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
That's a bit different. Guy Steele's first Scheme compiler was called RABBIT (it ran fast). The Yale T project created the Orbit compiler. This set off a *bit trend, including Gambit and also Will Clinger's Twobit.
66.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
Also Will Clinger's Larceny.
67.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
The name MrEd was also an in-joke because Matthias Felleisen was notoriously anti-TV, so his students thought it fun to sneak in a TV reference. Lots of the old subsystems had prefixed-names. MrEd and MzScheme begat DrScheme; others include
68.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
Though this is not at all the only essential part of Racket, building other languages atop it is something Racket really specializes at, which Clojure does not. See http://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/
69.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
Why forego at all? (-:
70.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
I don't think it's a coincidence that the mid-90s was a hot time for language design: the CGI-bin protocol of the Web suddenly made it possible to write code in any language you wanted and distribute the results, even with a loose
71.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
I would say the vast majority of How to Design Programs ( https://htdp.org/ ) is about exactly this. It's not presented this way, but that's what the Design Recipe makes you really good at.
72.
by skrishnamurthi 6y ago
Callback hell in JavaScript.
73.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
This is a lovely deconstruction.
74.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
We know that, thanks. (Co-author of both book and language here.) It doesn't obviate the point that @justinpombrio was trying to make, which is the relevant response to the parent post.
75.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
By the way, that page is based on discussions correspondents of the HtDP authors have had in dozens of departments. Without that experience, I'm not sure quite how you can even judge what is written there beyond your claim about the wr
76.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Well put.
77.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
It's amusing that you get so riled up about a page that is not only not about "language wars", it's in fact exactly about taking a multi-lingual perspective _instead_ of getting bogged down in a language war.
78.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Are you looking at the first edition or the second? The first is very dense early on. The second was rewritten to avoid that. Take a look at the second edition instead: I'm confident you'll find it qualitatively very different. h
79.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Sure. We should fix that. But the post ends with a link to the actual paper, which very much has labeled axes. Anyway, the label is "density" because it's a KDE, which it says just above the graph: "Visualized as kernel
80.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
The post ends with a link to the actual paper. The paper's graphs do have labeled axes. While I agree the blog post should have labeled them too (and we'll fix that), if you really want to understand what's going on, you shou
81.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Well, it depends on how the TA's job is defined. If it's to also help students, then code that doesn't pass is very much worth grading. Indeed, the failures may be useful in determining where the student needs help.
82.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Co-author here. 1. It's PART OF the assessment. There's also a ton of human review. But humans aren't tops at checking for correctness. Using automation helps us run against a large set of tests, both normal and corner cases,
83.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
What version of DrRacket are you in?
84.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
I have to assume you're trolling me at this point, but just in case not: https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/milner_1569367.cfm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Milner ML did not spring
85.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
No, syntax is not merely bikeshedding, but endless discussions about it can certainly turn into that. I don't know what qualifies as "mainstream", but anything that sprang from the head of Milner, you can be sure, put semanti
86.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Reductionist theories don't work out that way in practice, but sure: Build it, teach it, and then I'd be happy to talk about your experience and how the difference is only "splitting hairs".
87.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
If you know of other places that do it specifically for programming languages, using this kind of approach, let us know so we can study and attribute properly. Thanks. (In the 2012 PL MOOC that Joe Politz and I ran, we had CTF-style exercis
88.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Two separate things here. I would love to record and publish the videos. However, the moment I do, I have essentially published the solutions to the homeworks. It's very hard to reuse them again. But mystery languages are really diff
89.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Our SNAPL paper [ http://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Publications/Papers/Published/pkf-te... ] has data on how long students spend. It turns out relatively few hours for pretty high levels of attainment (i.e., of fin
90.
by skrishnamurthi 8y ago
Also at the University of Philippines.

More ›