Re: A Exhibition Of Tech Geekers Incompetence: Emacs whitespace-mode

On Aug 14, 8:25 pm, fortunatus wrote: > On Aug 14, 1:01 pm, vippstar wrote: > > > Why would you fill your website with junk? > > The OP made it clear: > > >Just wanted to express some frustration with whitespace-mode. You took my question out of context and answered i

Re: A Exhibition Of Tech Geekers Incompetence: Emacs whitespace-mode

On Aug 14, 4:36 am, Xah Lee wrote: > • A Exhibition Of Tech Geekers Incompetence: Emacs whitespace-mode >  http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/emacs_whitespace-mode_problem... Instead of writing a completely useless article you could had asked for help in an emacs newsgroup, or wait until som

Re: If Scheme is so good why MIT drops it?

On Jul 21, 1:22 am, Paul Rubin <http://phr...@nospam.invalid> wrote: > vippstar writes: > > > I don't see how to implement such a thing in my code, > > Write a function: > > >   (if (< x y) > >       ValueError > >       (/ x y)) > >

Re: If Scheme is so good why MIT drops it?

On Jul 20, 7:50 pm, Paul Rubin <http://phr...@nospam.invalid> wrote: > vippstar writes: > > > I wonder whether 2/3 => ValueError is preferable. > > > Not all software wants this. It shouldn't be part of the language but > > rather part of your code if y

Re: If Scheme is so good why MIT drops it?

On Jul 20, 9:13 am, Paul Rubin wrote: > Steven D'Aprano writes: > > Besides, one can legitimately disagree that 2/3 => 0 is the wrong thing > > to do. It's the right thing to do if you're doing integer maths. > > I wonder whether 2/3 => ValueError is preferable. Not

Re: If Scheme is so good why MIT drops it?

On Jul 19, 9:31 pm, Frank Buss wrote: > fft1976 wrote: > > How do you explain that something as inferior as Python beat Lisp in > > the market place despite starting 40 years later. > But maybe the most important point: The syntax looks simple compared to > Common Lisp (much less parentheses) hah