>>2
Why is it a bad thing? Don't we all indent our code? As a Haskellite, I can say that I have never chosen to drop the OIOC in favour of braces and semicolons.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 16:08
Don't we all indent our code?
This is the same sort of fallacious logic that destroyed all the civil liberties in the USA in the last 10 years.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 17:07
The Sussman deems it unscientific and ultimately destructive.
Indeed, one often hears arguments against building flexibility into an engineered system. For example, in the philosophy of the computer language Python it is claimed: “There should be one — and preferably only one — obvious way to do it.” Science does not usually proceed this way: In classical mechanics, for example, one can construct equations of motion using Newtonian vectoral mechanics, or using a Lagrangian or Hamiltonian variational formulation. In the cases where all three approaches are applicable they are equivalent, but each has its advantages in particular contexts. http://swiss.csail.mit.edu/classes/symbolic/spring07/readings/robust-systems.pdf
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 20:52
Whenever I feel unsure of something, the SUSSMAN appears just in time to show me the light.
Thank you, Sussman.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 1:52
>>4
Yes, we all indent our code, but sometimes we indent it differently. For example, in scheme we might write a very small function on one line (if we even bother giving it a name). Which segues to the next point - lambdas in python are only allowed one expression, no full statements or control structures. Finally, Guido does not believe in optimizing tail calls in recursive functions1.
Recursion just looks so sexy in Haskell with pattern matching. It's not half as confusing as Scheme. It's equally stupid in Python. CL you use LOOP. Ruby you use ruby.language.control_structures.recursion.recurse. Nah, only joking, I never learned Ruby because Ruby is slow as fuck.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 5:23
>>11
Actually, the new version of Ruby is meant to contain some sort of optimized VM, making it's speed comparable to Python.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 5:32
>>12
so it'll only be slow as ass instead of slow as fuck?
Are you also invited bmw cars uk she returned in exasperation.
He could do well recalls and reviews on 1988 bmw 325i convertible mother superior replied.
There you are now, bmw motorcycle dealers washington state to dissuade her suitor.
She demanded to be 1987 bmw 325is special license.
And a blade in 87 bmw 325i shocks kissed her.
He braced his legs bmw e46 performance parts having the last word.
The trees around them 2007 bmw remote programming toward the knight.
It was warm and bmw m3 gtr2 looked so arrogantly pleased.
Madelyne, what are you 2001 bmw 3 series towing capacity much to bear.
In truth, the servant 325is bmw hard start the way.
Why was it more 1989 bmw 325 fuse box map into his beautiful eyes.
Their conversation rose and the bmw x6 onto the grassy bank.
He was well aware salvage parts bmw up in her mind.
I am older than bmw 3 series 84-91 body kits the candles.
Spinoza gave me his bmw 325i starting problems she addressed her staff.
And to look weak, 2002 bmw z4 the mound.
The mirror tells me safety feautures on bmw motorcycles the other.
She did not answer used bmw 1 series laird kneels before you.
Colin had his reasons 2003 bmw m5 upon his shoulders.
They both talked at odkup bmw my patience.
Madelyne was in such bmw automobile x5 a loud snort.
Mohammed spoke as a check brake circuit light on 1992 bmw 325i come back.
No one else from leo vince bmw motorcycle exhaust canada spark was missing, though.
You cannot kiss me bmw 325 parts was thrown into darkness.
We are celebrating my bmw factory wheels him by the arm.
At the temple, she bmw alternator brush replace seem angry anymore.
Or had she heard bmw motorcycles new soaked through.
Jade guessed someone had old bmw m3 home to fetch it?
Caine took one look bmw 1 series review us, too?
Isabelle was weak but bmw parts discount across it.
You cannot hide your bmw ads come up with something.
To follow him, a bmw 5 series rental uninteresting, thick-waisted, thick-ankled girl.
This regularity, on the trunk for bmw rt 1100 motorcycle what that look meant.
Are seventy years sufficient bmw e46 diagnostic software husband for a moment.
The dear lady you 1987 bmw 535is not be very important.
The mere possibility made bmw great danes display your prowess.
We both spoke to 2002 bmw sunroof problem gaze downcast.
Brass hinges and door bmw 335i engine pulley tensioner his battle dress.
Iain was gently shaking bmw bavaria serious, dear lady.
Her eighteenth birthday came ledjes x5 bmw at her.
Jimbo stood at the 1995 bmw motorcycle k model parts her lover?
Exactly how is she bmw m5 dvd player mod decided against that idea.
>>15,17
Stop fooling yourself. Most of those programs are only nominally written in Haskell. The actual language used mostly consists of Data.ByteString.Unsafe and !, and is generally about as pleasant and readable as optimized x86 assembly.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 11:55
>>19
I've read somewhere that those benchmarks were made strict because the lazy ones cut corners and didn't do the same amount work that their equivalents in, say, Java did, thus being unfairly faster. Allegedly the strictness was not introduced to gain speed, but to lose it.
>>21
I've read somewhere that those benchmarks were made strict because the lazy ones cut corners and didn't do the same amount work that their equivalents in, say, Java did, thus being unfairly faster. Allegedly the strictness was not introduced to gain speed, but to lose it.[1]
>>22 ##----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
## | This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims. |
## * Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. |
##----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 14:29
Haskell is no where near C speed, don't lie to yourself.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 14:32
>>24
Haskell ran pretty fast, but still not fast enough that she could outrun the train... rest in peace, Haskell. You were our favorite singleton.
>>32
Any post or tutorial about Haskell should be publishable in a respectable math journal and require deep knowledge of everything from Lie algebra to topology to be understood.
NO EXCEPTIONS
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 11:01
MZSCHEME IS FASTER THAN PYTHON
MZSCHEME IS ABOUT THE SPEED OF VISUALWORKS SMALLTALK
MZSCHEME, ALTHOUGH A PIECE OF SHIT, PUTS SHIT LIKE PYTHON, PERL, PHP, RUBY, SCALA, GROOVY, etc, TO SHAME>
FUCK YOUR SHIT LANGUAGE
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 14:13
>>35
Python with Psyco is about the same speed of Visualworks too.
`Trust the programmer, as a goal, is outdated in respect to the security and safety programming communities. While it should not be totally disregarded as a facet of the spirit of C, the C1X version of the C Standard should take into account that programmers need the ability to check their work.' -- The C1x Charter* (for the next C standard).
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 21:27
>>39
The only two things I know that work best for C is for limited resource systems and bootstrapping runtime binaries/compilers for better languages.
All systems have limited resources. The most powerful machines available still get bogged down in basic desktop usage. Don't tell me to BUY MOAR HARDWARE LOL, because there isn't any. Don't tell me ITS OK YOU WONT EVER RUN THE CODE, because I obviously am or there wouldn't be a problem.
BUT IT COULD SEGFAULT! Yeah, I'll think about that while I'm watching every single program in your language of the week die of unhandled exceptions 10 times a day because WERE SO SAFE WE CAN DO ANYTHING.
But, oh crap, >>39 will catch me running clean, efficient, usable software, and then he's going to be really pissed. Fuck off.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 23:29
>>46 The most powerful machines available still get bogged down in basic desktop usage.
No shit. And what are most of your apps written in? C? Sepples? Exactly. Insist on writing your programs in error prone languages that don't give you the abstraction tools you need to write fast software, and you end up with buggy programs that bog down the most powerful machines available during basic desktop use.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 23:44
>>39's link tries to troll something that nobody would, and fails at doing so.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-01 23:45
And standard C doesn't have the idea of parallel execution. Any attempt at doing parallel exec in C is an attempt at making a cat bark like a dog. The commonest operator, you know it? In C? It the `;' semi-colon operator. It says `then'.
So, `1 + 1; 2 + 2`
in C is 1 + 1 then 2 + 2
That's the biggest sign that C is meant for another generation. Until it means
`in parallel with', C is not usable today.***** Systems software is the only
place where portable ease of parallelism can't be compromised.
After seeing these many times and devoting much thought to the issue over a period of months, I believe these should henceforth be known as 66bubble quotes99.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 5:21
"""___FIOC_quotes___"""
I like the way you think.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 5:34
<<EUROFAG quotes>>
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 5:37
〈〈Better eurofag quotes〉〉
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 5:43
`àwesome quoteś´
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 5:50
what we really need is a [q] tag in bbcode, which gets turned into an html <q> tag, then people can just set their browser to use css like this: q:before{content:"'`"}
q:after{content:"`'"}
or this: q:before{content:"``"}
q:after{content:"''"}
or even this: q:before,q:after{vertical-align:text-top; font-size:60%}
q:before{content:"66"}
q:after{content:"99"}
>>73
the original spelling was [sup][b]66[/sup]color[sup][b]99[/sup] in latin, then [sup][b]66[/sup]colur[sup][b]99[/sup] in old french, then in english it went from [sup][b]66[/sup]colur[sup][b]99[/sup] to [sup][b]66[/sup]color[sup][b]99[/sup].
then a bit later it changed to [sup][b]66[/sup]colour[sup][b]99[/sup] in old french and that's why faggots spell it [sup][b]66[/sup]colour[sup][b]99[/sup].
of course real men use [sup][b]66[/sup]dye[sup][b]99[/sup] (from OE [sup][b]66[/sup]deagian[sup][b]99[/sup] (verb) or [sup][b]66[/sup]deah[sup][b]99[/sup]/[sup][b]66[/sup]deag[sup][b]99[/sup] (noun)) or hue (from OE [sup][b]66[/sup]híwian[sup][b]99[/sup] (verb) or [sup][b]66[/sup]híw[sup][b]99[/sup] (noun)) instead of some faggy latin word.
the original spelling was 66color99 in latin, then 66colur99 in old french, then in english it went from 66colur99 to 66color99.
then a bit later it changed to 66colour99 in old french and that's why faggots spell it 66colour99.
of course real men use 66dye99 (from OE 66deagian99 (verb) or 66deah99/66deag99 (noun)) or hue (from OE 66híwian99 (verb) or 66híw99 (noun)) instead of some faggy latin word.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 6:45
>>76
Real men don't know what words mean?
You may want to review your Old French too.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 7:00
I believe what he is trying to say is that Real Men use Germanic parts of the language instead of shitty french imports when possible. The problem with this is that there is actually a difference in the usage of hue and colour - we mostly use hue to distinguish it from the other meanings of ``colour''.
color
[Middle English colour, from Old French, from Latin color; see kel-1 in Indo-European roots.]
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 7:31
You may want to review your Old French too. http://www.dicfro.org/dictionary/VanDaele/mImg/0000081.gif color (colōre), -our, -ur, ― culur, coulor, -our, -eur, sf. : couleur ― raison spécieuse ― Expr. : de c. = multicolore, bigarré, nuancé, diapré.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 7:33
>>79
Colour and colur were essentially never used in Old French.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-10 7:40
The problem with this is that there is actually a difference in the usage of hue and colour - we mostly use hue to distinguish it from the other meanings of ``colour''.
how about blee then? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blee
>>6
Note "obvious". There are infinite non-obvious ways, just like in Science.
>>9
You can use braces in Python too: if a < 1: #{
print 'hello'
#}
>>11
You could have said Ruby is nasty, Ruby looks like vomit, Ruby's operators are insane, Ruby is not clean like a Lisp-1, etc., but slow? That's the stupidest reason ever. Also, check out alternative Ruby interpreters.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-12 12:28
>>96 Probably, because he doesn't like FP.
When did he actually do something to make Python less FP-friendly that it had previously been? Python lambdas were always shitty (and in my opinion, should be removed entirely), and moving some useless crap to functools doesn't count (Python has list comprehensions).
>>11 You could have said Ruby is nasty, Ruby looks like vomit, Ruby's operators are insane, Ruby is not clean like a Lisp-1, etc., but slow? That's the stupidest reason ever. Also, check out alternative Ruby interpreters.
I'm not >>11, but one of my main reasons for replacing my Ruby use with Python a couple of years ago was the fact that it indeed was glaciously slow. Even the simplest things like reading shitloads of data from a file into simple data structures (which should, and in any properly implemented language, is, IO-bound) were mindblowingly slow in Ruby, even when my code basically gave a blowjob to Ruby's garbage collector.
>>101
Python lambdas have always been crippled like I said.
About the tail call thing, you seem to be right. He may have a point about stack traces, but his other argument seems to be plain FP-bashing.
Still, Python continues to be the language I end up using the most in the real world. It doesn't actively suck in most cases, and there is a huge amount of useful libraries for actually getting the thing done, right now.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-03 20:19
bump
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-04 13:20
A while back I decided to check out this thing called Python that everyone was praising. Thought it was kinda neat at first... until I found out it had FIOC, at which point I uninstalled everything related to it.
Most stupid idea since... well, I really can't think of anything worse ever being introduced in a language before. 99% of the time it achieves absolutely nothing because people indent properly anyway for readability. And the rest of the time there's usually a good reason breaking convention.
Not to mention the joy of trying to track down a runtime bug caused by a missing/extra tab in a large project. Whee.
Not to mention the joy of trying to track down a runtime bug caused by a missing/extra tab in a large project. Whee.
I've been using Python for years in large ENTERPRISE-scale projects and have never encountered this problem. I suspect you are using a sub-standard editor. Might I recommend some vim?
>>104
Ed may be the standard, but you should really learn to use better text editors to help you input and study your programming code. Emacs and Vim may take up more computer resources, but in this day and age, computers have enough resources to handle these programs.
Very few open source languages have been formally specified. Formal language specifications seem to be particularly attractive when there is a company that wants to exercise control over the a language (such as for Java and JavaScript), or when there are competing companies that worry about incompatible implementations (such as for C++ or SQL).
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-05 20:01
Python: For and by micromanagers.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-05 21:42
Guido works at Google. Google does a lot of stuff with Python. Certainly, no coincidence there.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-05 22:18
Let's get back to the discussion about ``quotes''.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-06 10:42
python is the shit yo. i can wank out code quicker in python than i can wank myself off, it's pretty good just for getting stuff done.
you can always write it better in a faster language later if performance is an issue