Lisp? no THANKS
1
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 15:29
ID:RaFZLwCc
I am make a new progrmming language based on the work of MCARTHY It is named
ГISP
Central idea is SYNTAX
(COND (a b) (c d) (e f))
is replaced by
(a → b, c → d, e → f)
GIve me OTHER ideas to replace all of lisp with SYNTAX thnk.
I await the reply..
2
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 15:34
ID:Heaven
Kill yourself.
3
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 17:17
ID:O+l7XGDj
GISRRRR?
4
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 17:20
ID:Heaven
Вы глупая промежность!
пизда!
5
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 17:21
ID:BzIQe1Xy
propose it for r7rs, I hear they're taking all kinds of crazy shit for 6.
6
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 18:17
ID:RaFZLwCc
OK I am look through UNICODE to deice what is good for programming ΓISP .
∀ = map
∅ = nil (?)
()[]{}〈〉‹›〔〕«»⦅⦆「」『』〈〉《》«»{}〔〕〘〙【】〖〗[] = as many paranthesis for as much expressivbility as possibles
☞ = GOTO
λ = lambda
Γ = L
7
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 20:14
ID:aY/T5pyW
what keyboard would be capable of such an undertaking
8
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 20:31
ID:O+l7XGDj
>>7
A Chinese keyboard, they have about 20,000 keys.
9
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 22:56
ID:ZoT9EsGH
I ΓOΓ'D
10
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 23:47
ID:HdQNK0fL
11
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 23:48
ID:Heaven
I ror'd
12
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-14 23:48
ID:Heaven
omg ror
13
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 0:42
ID:OnmQE8/I
Ⓘ ⓟⓡⓞⓟⓞⓢⓔ ⓣⓗⓐⓣ ⓣⓗⓘⓢ ⓛⓐⓝⓖⓤⓐⓖⓔ ⓢⓗⓞⓤⓛⓓ ⓤⓢⓔ ⓒⓘⓡⓒⓛⓔⓓ ⓛⓔⓣⓣⓔⓡⓢ ⓕⓞⓡ ⓐⓛⓛ ⓕⓤⓝⓒⓣⓘⓞⓝⓢ ⓣⓗⓐⓣ ⓓⓞⓝ'ⓣ ⓗⓐⓥⓔ ⓐⓝⓨ ⓢⓟⓔⓒⓘⓐⓛ ⓢⓨⓝⓣⓐⓧ.
14
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 1:14
ID:YlsZ8H25
ΓoΓΓerskates
15
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 1:47
ID:K5k0pl9T
ɹỊɐ-ləq pəllɐɔ uʍoʇ ɐ ɟo əɔuỊɹd əɥʇ əɯɐɔəq I ʍoɥ noʎ lləʇ ll‚I
əɹəɥʇ ʇɥნỊɹ ʇỊs ʇsn! əʇnuỊɯ ɐ əʞɐʇ oʇ əʞỊl p‚I puɐ
uʍop əpỊsdn pəuɹnʇ ´pəddỊlɟ ʇoნ əɟỊl
ʎɯ ʍoɥ ʇnoqɐ llɐ ʎɹoʇs ɐ sỊ sỊɥʇ ʍoN
16
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 1:55
ID:Heaven
>>13
(>ⓞ_ⓞ)>
just imagine how the code would look like
17
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 9:59
ID:Yrd32fIE
<=> as a primitive operator, of course
(define (<=> a b)
(cond
((< a b) true)
((= a b) true)
((> a b) true)
(else false)))
18
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 10:48
ID:EeTeUxIG
>>17
(<=>) is so fundamental that anything else could be defined through it.
We should formalize <=>-calculus.
19
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 13:24
ID:qMnArLA6
>>17
it iwll be closer to
(define <=> a b
((< a b) → t,
(= a b) → t,
(> a b) → t))
20
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 16:07
ID:Heaven
>>19
Forgetting
else makes <=> completely useless
21
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-15 17:09
ID:qMnArLA6
>>20
(else false)
is implicit in a cond duh..
22
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 3:26
ID:IrGN/Hws
>>19
fucking
[aa] tags look different everyday
23
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 7:59
ID:IrGN/Hws
ГISP - pronounced Risp, a new Lisp Dialect
24
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 8:04
ID:RDiNr/FK
>>23
Actually it'd be pronounced more like "Gheisp".
25
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 8:46
ID:IrGN/Hws
>>24
"Gheisp" - a new dialect of
ГISP
26
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 9:56
ID:IrGN/Hws
Every part of the language is defined in an OBJECT ORIENTED WAY at compile time then optimized FULLY for runtime.
27
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 10:02
ID:IrGN/Hws
>>26
is this a GOOd orr Bad idea??????
28
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 14:08
ID:ETpVhzGo
>>27
It's too vague to be too good or too bad, but "Every part ... OBJECT ORIENTED WAY" rang a warning bell and "optimized FULLY" another. Probably bad.
29
Name:
Anonymous
2007-07-16 14:48
ID:IrGN/Hws
>>28
...
I pour my soul into this effort and you tell me this????
30
Name:
Anonymous
2009-01-14 12:35
LISP
31
Name:
2010-09-10 4:08