I have a dream that one day PHP will be a respectable programming language.
I have a dream that one day we'll download popular web applications that are free software and will not be outraged at their source code.
I have a dream that one day "designers" who were writing PHP would just give up and we'll get less PHP-Nuke hacks, and more decent software.
I have a dream today.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 10:59
Keep dreaming.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 13:54
if you think having closures and namespacing makes a language respectable you're a nigger
a nigger, a nigger, a nigger I say
and the klu klutz klan is gonna make your day.
a nigger, a nigger, a nigger I say
and the klu klutz klan is gonna make your day.
a nigger, a nigger, a nigger I say
and the klu klutz klan is gonna make your day.
a nigger, a nigger, a nigger I say
and the klu klutz klan is gonna make your day.
a nigger, a nigger, a nigger I say
and the klu klutz klan is gonna make your day.
As of 2007, work has begun in anticipation of another revision of the C standard, informally called "C1x". The C standards committee has adopted guidelines to limit the adoption of new features that have not been tested by existing implementations.
If you want closures and lambdas in standard C, feel free to add them to gcc (|Intel CC|Microsoft CC if you happen to work on either team). That's the only way the ISO will even glance at a feature request.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 20:57
>>7
Yes, this is like a pain in my cock, since I otherwise love Python.
>>9
Ah, so ISO has finally realized they have no ability whatsoever to define the language, and should just stick to imitating GNU C so they can pretend to be relevant.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 21:29
Grim Fandango music
Also Frank Sinatra & Dean Martin because they are good regardless.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 23:22
>>9
i'm adding them to my own version of tcc right now.
pcc is next.
>>16
We don't need an organization of sodding ass-lickers such as ISO to tell us what works once it's implemented. Those fucking motherfuckers should just stick the OOXML specification up their humungous assholes and die from the AIDS it has.
int main(){
int (*mult_by_2)(int) = MAKE_FUNC(int, {_1 * 2;}, int _1);
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
printf("2 * %d = %d\n", i, mult_by_2(i));
for(int i = 0, j = 10; i < 10; ++i, --j)
printf("%d * %d = %d\n", i, j, MAKE_FUNC(int, {_1 * _2;}, int _1, int _2)(i, j)); // this also works!
return 0;
}
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 9:35
>>19
If there are any commas in MAKE_FUNC's block argument, your shit's gonna break. To make it work properly, you're gonna have to do something like:
#define COMMA ,
and replace every "," for "COMMA" in MAKE_FUNC's block argument.
>>21
Seriously guys, I think you're going too far. I know it's stupid to tell this to Anonymous, but I wouldn't turn the respect we have for the Sussman into something he might not like if he saw it. And we're easily reachable via Google if you Google for Lisp-related stuff.
I see the Sussman as a super-hero, along with the Abelson. They're like Superman and Batman; the former is all about purity; the later is darker but gets the job done and does just as good a service to the world.
>>27
As far as I'm aware, lol!8mQB/2odm6 is not a real tripfag in that he normally posts with neither name nor tripcode, except when posting in the course of his Official /prog/-Sussman Liaison Officer duties.
>>29
Holy shit. Spoiler has a secret.
Official -Sussman Liaison Officer then highlighting /prog/ is different than /prog/ and then Official -Sussman Liaison Officer
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 16:13
>>32 Official -Sussman Liaison Officer then highlighting /prog/ is different than /prog/ and then Official -Sussman Liaison Officer
There's something wrong with either your browser or youself,
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 16:16
>>25
Ooooh shit, I missed that; could you elaborate / post links to threads?
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 17:23
>>32,33
Firefox has always had issues with italics bleeding out from under [spoiler] tags. Not sure about IE.
>>31
Multiple personalities do not count as fans, sir.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 19:21
>>19
At first this was pretty cool to play with during class. I was able to create a function that would sum all values of a function from a to b with an optional step size. However, trouble occurred with nested lambda statements. It just didn't work. Also, Sussman's interpretation of cons, car, and cdr in one of his lectures doesn't work:
(define (cons a b)
(lambda (m)
(cond ((= m 0) a)
((= m 1) b)
(else (error "Huh?")))))
(define (car x)
(x 0))
(define (cdr x)
(x 1))
It just doesn't work. Still could be a bit useful for simple things. Just don't be expecting a fully complex lisp system in C.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 19:51
>>37
See Greenspun's Tenth Rule - that's the only way to get C to be anything useful.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 20:04
Embedded spoilers aren't exactly special.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-25 23:03
>>38
Or you could just try to think in C-style. Sometimes it's just a bit better to use C. Sometimes lisp. Sometimes (yes) python. The exact proportions vary all the time. The C lambda thing (to me) was just a fun little experiment that also helped me with understanding a few of the exploitable features of C.