Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

How do I learned Lisp?

Name: Anonymous 2006-04-11 15:12

I have tried several times -- and FAILED UTTERLY. It felt like having a fetus shoved up your ass, and then having to shit it out while a big bad nigger is trying to shove it back up with his humongous cock. All while the fetus is growing at a steady pace.

Alright, what I need to know is:
1) How do I indented Lisp.
2) What dialect is "the best".
3) Minor programming project good for a stupid ignorant wapanese newbie.
4) PROTIPs.

Only serious inquiries, dear Sir or Madam.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-05 16:58

Lisp sucks sure there're pure functions in Lisp but it's not purely functional, it's multiparadigm, and it allows SIDE EFFECTS, whitch means that it is a PROCEDURAL language

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-05 18:34

I like haskell now. I tried ocaml and with floats you have to do x+.y = z. floats having different arithmetic functions? DIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-05 18:53

>>82
Agreed. It's like programming in Forth or something where floats and ints have different stacks. Where's my motherfucking abstraction?

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-05 19:56

Where's my motherfucking abstraction?
In a non-strongly and statically-typed language.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-05 20:18

I've really wanted to learn Lisp/Scheme once I heard about them. However, I kept getting lost with the endless libraries, and the foreign operators (#' anyone?). The community has already implemented so many shortcuts, it's impossible to distinguish the language from the hacks (kinda reminds me of the MFC). If I haddn't run across newLisp (http://www.newlisp.org/) I would have already given up on all of it. If you want a very gentle, well documented, out-of-the-box introduction to Lisp-like syntax and thinking, take a look at newLisp. From there, you may want to move on to CLisp or PLT Scheme.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-06 14:31

Lisp sucks sure there're pure functions in Lisp but it's not purely functional, it's multiparadigm, and it allows SIDE EFFECTS, whitch means that it is a PROCEDURAL language

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-06 20:57

Languages without side effects can't do anything ;p

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-07 4:11

>>87
So the program (+ 2 2) doesn't do anything? Admittedly, it's much harder to do certain things, but you can certainly get stuff done in lisp without using things with side effects.

>>86
No one cares. If I really cared about something being purely functional, I'd be programming in lambda calculus or some shit. As it stands, I'm more concerned about getting things done in an efficient (and hopefully elegant) manner than planing the "pure" OOP/functional/whateverthefuck wankfest.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-07 8:47

Pure anything sucks

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 3:14

>>88

Sure, (+ 2 2) does something, but you don't know the answer. :D

Output is a side-effect.





Monads suck.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 6:07

>>90
Sure, (+ 2 2) does something, but you don't know the answer. :D

It does nothing if you optimize the program.  Any program that has no side-effects can be optimized to ().  That's the main selling point of Lisp I think.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 15:27

Any program that has no side-effects can be optimized to ().  That's the main selling point of Lisp I think.
It's fast if it does nothing!

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 15:39 (sage)

>>91
That's the main selling point of Lisp I think.

GTFO OF MY /PROG/ NOW.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 16:09

http://www.joeganley.com/code/jslisp.html

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-08 18:35

>>92
Yeah!  I wonder who came up with this brilliant idea of programming without using side-effects and doing that optimization... why didn't he patent it... would it be patentable?

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 2:58

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs is a great series of video lectures based on the book of the same name. Its a prefect intro to functional programming and data abstraction.
http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 7:41

>>90

Speaking of monads, does anyone have a good explaination of wtf they are without me having to climb into bed with Haskell? All I know is they are some kind of syntax sugar to allow for side-effects in a purely functional language. How do they work? What would you have to do if you didn't have the handy syntax?

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 9:54

>>97
I believe the theory is that they are uncertain values.  Or something like that.

If you didn't have monads, you'd simply put side-effect statements in your code :)

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 16:08

Haskell has syntax sugar for monads specifically but monads itself is not syntax sugar. It's a way to abstract a certain type of computation.

Also, monads in Ruby: http://moonbase.rydia.net/mental/writings/programming/monads-in-ruby/00introduction.html

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 16:44

100GET!

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 16:49

>>100

Fail. It should've been "(get! 100)" or "(NGET 100)"

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 16:49

>>100
Thread over.

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-09 20:05

>>101
Of course not, literals are evil.

(2GET (recursive-lambda-function-that-returns-100))

Name: Anonymous 2006-08-14 10:55

>>96
Dude, SICP is a book first and foremost. Google for it if you'd like to read it -- it's available on the netz0rs without dipping into ebooks or anything. Plain HTML with a few images for the equations and so forth.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-28 22:26

>>96
Ah, the days when SICP wasn't fucking worshipped.

Name: Anonymous 2009-08-16 22:40

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:04

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:04

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:05

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:05

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:05

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:05

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:06

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:06

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:06

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2009-09-19 1:07

Lain.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 15:19

Name: 2012-01-25 6:50

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-23 19:21

ANCIENT THREAD RESURRECTED
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -