ccc31807 writes:
> Programming is neither an art nor a science, but a trade.
>
> It's not an art in the sense of painting, music, dance, poetry, etc.,
> because the objective isn't to make a beautiful something, but to give
> instructions to a machine to accomplish some useful task.
>
> It's not
ccc31807 writes:
> On Apr 2, 5:48Â pm, "Pascal J. Bourguignon"
>> This is a narrow-minded definition of programming.
>
> Well, that's the point.
>
> If we make a list and include things like:
> computer science
> software engineering
> computer
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz writes:
> In <87wr5nl54w@sapphire.mobileactivedefense.com>, on 04/10/2012
>at 09:10 PM, Rainer Weikusat said:
>
>>'car' and 'cdr' refer to cons cells in Lisp, not to strings. How the
>>first/rest terminology can be sensibly applied to 'C strings' (which
>>are sim
Tim Bradshaw writes:
> On 2012-05-02 14:44:36 +, jaialai.technol...@gmail.com said:
>
>> He may be nuts
>
> But he's right: programmers are pretty much fuckwits[*]: if you think
> that's not true you are not old enough.
>
> [*] including me, especially.
You need to watch:
http://blog.ted.co
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> The actual physical cost of typing is a small part of coding.
> Productivity-wise, optimizing the distance your hands move is worthwhile
> for typists who do nothing but type, e.g. if you spend their day
> mechanically copying text or doing data entry, then increasing
Neil Cerutti writes:
> What's the rationale for providing them? Are the definitions
> obvious for collections that a not sets?
The rational is to prove that Xah is dumb.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
chad writes:
> Let's say I have the following
>
> class BaseHandler:
> def foo(self):
> print "Hello"
>
> class HomeHandler(BaseHandler):
> pass
>
>
> Then I do the following...
>
> test = HomeHandler()
> test.foo()
>
> How can HomeHandler call foo() when I never created an in
Roland Hutchinson writes:
> Sorry to have to contradict you,
Don't be sorry.
> but it really is a textbook example of
> recursion. Try this psuedo-code on for size:
>
> FUNCTION DIR-DELETE (directory)
> FOR EACH entry IN directory
> IF entry IS-A-DIRECTORY THEN DIR-DELETE (entry).
t...@sevak.isi.edu (Thomas A. Russ) writes:
> Well, unless you have a tree with backpointers, you have to keep the
> entire parent chain of nodes visited. Otherwise, you won't be able to
> find the parent node when you need to backtrack. A standard tree
> representation has only directional link
t...@sevak.isi.edu (Thomas A. Russ) writes:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" writes:
>
>> t...@sevak.isi.edu (Thomas A. Russ) writes:
>> >
>> > This will only work if there is a backpointer to the parent.
>>
>> No, you don't need backpointer
torb...@diku.dk (Torben Ægidius Mogensen) writes:
> Xah Lee writes:
>
>
>> Functional Programing: stop using recursion, cons. Use map & vectors.
>>
>> 〈Guy Steele on Parallel Programing〉
>> http://xahlee.org/comp/Guy_Steele_parallel_computing.html
>
> This is more or less what Backus said in his
Kenneth Tilton writes:
> Xah Lee wrote:
>> Haskell has a new logo. A fantastic one. Beautiful. For creator,
>> context, detail, see bottom of:
>> • A Lambda Logo Tour
>> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/lambda_logo.html
Don't do that!
If you want to watch the logo, just google for haskell
Thad Smith writes:
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>> ... so I cheerfully installed it on the user's desktop machine
>> (Windows ME, would you believe), and then set about configuring the
>> reader, when... ouch! No PDF reader on the machine. Not even an
>> ancient Adobe version. Oh dear. Program s
bolega writes:
> Which is the best implementation of LISP family of languages for real
> world programming ?
What's the real world?
What's real world programming?
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
bolega writes:
> On Jun 10, 2:51 pm, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
> wrote:
>> bolega writes:
>> > Which is the best implementation of LISP family of languages for real
>> > world programming ?
>>
>> What's the real world?
>>
bolega writes:
>
> > [PAIP]
>
> Is there anything in this old norvig book that makes it worth
> pursuing as a text ?
Yes.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
George Neuner writes:
> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:57:08 +0300, "Antti \"Andy\" Ylikoski"
> wrote:
>
>>OT: (very Off Topic.)
>>I would not trust dolphins to take care of my investments.
>
> Why not? Remember the chimpanzee that picked stocks and beat many
> professional fund managers?
"Antti \"Andy\" Ylikoski" writes:
> 12.6.2010 22:54, Pascal J. Bourguignon kirjoitti:
>> bolega writes:
>>>
>>>> [PAIP]
>>>
>>> Is there anything in this old norvig book that makes it worth
>>> pursuing as a text ?
&g
Kryno Bosman writes:
> Would you, please, be so nice to share *your* truth somewhere else?
He has been long time ago kill-filed by everybody.
Your quoting of his message puts you at risk of being kill-filed too.
The only way to deal with this kind of post is the kill file and
foremost not qu
Nick Keighley writes:
> On 8 July, 08:08, Nick Keighley
> wrote:
>> On 7 July, 17:38, Rivka Miller wrote:
>
>
>> > Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ?
>>
>> Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s)
>
> oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to "
Kenneth Tilton writes:
> What we do not have is any interesting amount of "free as in speech"
> software, because no one uses the GPL.
I do. So far, I resist to calls to put my software in a less
freedom-promoting license.
Hey everybody! Switch from MIT or BSD to GPL! Now!
--
__Pascal Bo
Tim Bradshaw writes:
> On 2009-07-19 19:31:36 +0100, Frank Buss said:
>
>> (e.g. I
>> don't know of a free modern and stable Lisp implemenation with
>> mulithreading support for Windows, with a licence with which you can use it
>> in closed source commercial programs, like you can do with Python
Xah Lee writes:
> here's a interesting toy list processing problem.
>
> I have a list of lists, where each sublist is labelled by
> a number. I need to collect together the contents of all sublists
> sharing
> the same label. So if I have the list
>
> ((0 a b) (1 c d) (2 e f) (3 g h) (1 i j) (2
namekuseijin writes:
>> in C I can have a function maximum(int a, int b) that will always
>> work. Never blow up, and never give an invalid answer. If someone
>> tries to call it incorrectly it is a compile error.
>> In a dynamic typed language maximum(a, b) can be called with incorrect
>> dataty
"Scott L. Burson" writes:
> Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>>
>> On the other hand, with the dynamic typing mindset, you might even wrap
>> your values (of whatever numerical type) in a symbolic expression
>> mentionning the unit and perhaps other meta d
George Neuner writes:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 12:15:07 -0700, Keith Thompson
> wrote:
>
>>George Neuner writes:
>>> On 28 Sep 2010 12:42:40 GMT, Albert van der Horst
>>> wrote:
I would say the dimensional checking is underrated. It must be
complemented with a hard and fast rule about onl
Squeamizh writes:
> In short, static typing doesn't solve all conceivable problems.
>
> We are all aware that there is no perfect software development process
> or tool set. I'm interested in minimizing the number of problems I
> run into during development, and the number of bugs that are in th
Ian Collins writes:
> On 09/30/10 06:38 PM, Lie Ryan wrote:
>>
>> The /most/ correct version of maximum() function is probably one written
>> in Haskell as:
>>
>> maximum :: Integer -> Integer -> Integer
>> maximum a b = if a> b then a else b
>>
>> Integer in Haskell has infinite precision (li
RG writes:
> One might hypothesize that the best of both worlds would be a dynamic
> language with a static analyzer layered on top. Such a thing does not
> exist. It makes an instructive exercise to try to figure out why. (For
> the record, I don't know the answer, but I've learned a lot t
RG writes:
> In article ,
> Seebs wrote:
>
>> On 2010-09-30, RG wrote:
>> > You can't have it both ways. Either I am calling it incorrectly, in
>> > which case I should get a compiler error,
>>
>> You get a warning if you ask for it. If you choose to run without all
>> the type checking on
TheFlyingDutchman writes:
>>
>> > "in C I can have a function maximum(int a, int b) that will always
>> > work. Never blow up, and never give an invalid answer. "
>>
>> > Dynamic typed languages like Python fail in this case on "Never blows
>> > up".
>>
>> How do you define "Never blows up"?
>
>
RG writes:
>> The main example of a sensible program that can't be written in a
>> non-complete language is an interpreter for a Turing-complete language.
>> But presumably a high-assurance application should never contain such a
>> thing, since the interpreted programs themselves then wouldn't ha
Ian Collins writes:
> On 10/ 1/10 02:57 AM, Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
>> Nick Keighley writes:
>>
>>> On 27 Sep, 20:29, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
>>> wrote:
>>>> If you start with the mindset of static type checking, you will con
Keith Thompson writes:
> const double pi = 2.71828182845904523526;
>
> To a human reader, it's obviously either a mistake or deliberate
> obfuscation, but I'm not sure I'd *want* my compiler to warn me
> about it just because I named the object "pi" rather than "e".
> (And if I called it "x",
Gene writes:
> The FA or TM dichotomy is more painful to contemplate than you say.
> Making appropriate simplifications for input, any modern computer is a
> FA with 2^(a few trillion) states. Consequently, the gestalt of
> computer science seems to be to take it on faith that at some very
> lar
Seebs writes:
> On 2010-10-01, Don Geddis wrote:
>> in C I can have a function maximum(int a, int b) that will always
>> work. Never blow up, and never give an invalid answer. If someone
>> tries to call it incorrectly it is a compile error.
>
> I would agree that the thi
rustom writes:
> Some points that seem to be missed (or Ive missed them?)
>
> 1. A dichotomy is being made between 'static' languages like C and
> 'dynamic' languages like python/lisp. This dichotomy was valid 30
> years ago, not today. In Haskell for example
>
> - static checking is stronger th
Seebs writes:
> On 2010-09-30, Ian Collins wrote:
>> Which is why agile practices such as TDD have an edge. If it compiles
>> *and* passes all its tests, it must be right.
>
> So far as I know, that actually just means that the test suite is
> insufficient. :)
>
> Based on my experience thus
"BartC" writes:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote in message
> news:87sk0qkzhz@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com...
>> rustom writes:
>
>>> Much more mainstream, C# is almost as 'managed' as dynamic languages
>>> and has efficiency
"BartC" writes:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote in message
> news:87zkuyjawh@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com...
>> "BartC" writes:
>>
>>> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote in message
>
>>>> When Intel will realiz
Seebs writes:
> On 2010-10-01, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>> static dynamic
>>
>> compiler detects wrong type fail at compile fails at run-time
>>
Seebs writes:
> On 2010-10-01, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>> Seebs writes:
>>> On 2010-10-01, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>>>> compiler passes wrong type wrong resultfails at run-time
>>>>
"BartC" writes:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote in message
> news:87sk0qkzhz@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com...
>
>> Nothing extraordinary here. Common Lisp is more efficient than C.
>> http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier/research/verna.06.ecoop.pdf
"BartC" writes:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote in message
> news:877hi1iq2o@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com...
>> "BartC" writes:
>
>>> (defun fib (n)
>>> (if (< n 2)
>>> n
>>> (+ n (fib (- n
Keith H Duggar writes:
> On Sep 29, 9:01 pm, RG wrote:
>> That the problem is "elsewhere in the program" ought to be small
>> comfort. But very well, try this instead:
>>
>> [...@mighty:~]$ cat foo.c
>> #include
>>
>> int maximum(int a, int b) { return a > b ? a : b; }
>>
>> int main() {
>>
Tim Bradshaw writes:
> On 2010-10-12 20:46:26 +0100, BartC said:
>
>> You can't do all that if angles are just numbers.
>
> I think that the discussion of percentages is relevant here: angles
> //are// just numbers, but you're choosing a particular way of
> displaying them (or reading them). 100%
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> Hmmm, my ISP's news software really doesn't like it when I cross-post to
> more than three newsgroups. So, trying again without comp.lang.c.
>
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 02:00:46 +0100, BartC wrote:
>
>> "RG" wrote in message
>> news:rnospamon-20651e.17410012102...@news.alba
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:28:42 +0200, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:
>
>>>> But what exactly *is* this number? Is it 0.25, 1.57 or 90?
>>>
>>> That's the wrong question. It's like asking, what exactly "is" the
&g
namekuseijin writes:
> On 11 out, 08:49, Oleg Parashchenko wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'd like to try the idea that Scheme can be considered as a new
>> portable assembler. We could code something in Scheme and then compile
>> it to PHP or Python or Java or whatever.
>>
>> Any suggestions and point
namekuseijin writes:
> On 13 out, 19:41, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
> wrote:
>> namekuseijin writes:
>> > On 11 out, 08:49, Oleg Parashchenko wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>>
>> >> I'd like to try the idea that Scheme can b
Lawrence D'Oliveiro writes:
> Would it be right to say that the only Lisp still in common use is the Elisp
> built into Emacs?
The lisps in common use nowadays are emacs lisp, Common Lisp, and the
various schemes, from R4RS to R6RS.
Some other lisps are in use in niches too. Eg. guile (a kind
sthueb...@googlemail.com (Stefan Hübner) writes:
>> Would it be right to say that the only Lisp still in common use is the Elisp
>> built into Emacs?
>
> Clojure (http://clojure.org) is a Lisp on the JVM. It's gaining more and
> more traction.
There are actually 2 REAL Lisp on the JVM:
- abcl
Alain Ketterlin writes:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro writes:
>
Would it be right to say that the only Lisp still in common use is the
Elisp built into Emacs?
>>>
>>> There is a new version of Lisp called Clojure that runs on the Java
>>> Virtual Machine (JVM) that is on the upswing.
>>
>> No
kodifik writes:
> On Oct 28, 1:55 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
>> Would it be right to say that the only Lisp still in common use is the Elisp
>> built into Emacs?
>
> Surely surpassed by autolisp (a xlisp derivative inside the Autocad
> engineering software).
I would
54 matches
Mail list logo
