/prog/ - "Functional" Programming

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:02

This is a message is a public service announcement:

The operating system you are using is written in C.
The web browser you are using is written in C++.
The web server you are using is written in C.
The website you are using is written in PHP.

"Functional" Programming was useless in the MIT A.I. labs in the 80's and has remained that way to this day.

Stop letting yourself be deluded by the programming charlatans. If "functional" programming was actually functional, then people would actually make software using it.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:14

hax my anus!

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:16

I'm using the House operating system.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:17

¹/₁₀

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:34

>>1
Actually, the website I'm making (a simple BBS, with a BBCode interpreter of course) is written in Haskell.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 19:00

Tired troll is tired

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 21:17

>>1
You're confused old chap. You might want to return to your carers.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 22:04

Obvious troll is obvious

Name: FrozenVoid 2009-07-04 3:21

Obvious Troll? There is lack of good libraries for all these functional programs.
Compare amount of libraries in LISP and amount of C libraries.(with LISP is written thirty years earlier then C)
The syntax of functional programs striving to be 'pure'/'without state' vs dirty/messy C illustrates there is conflict between usability and language design. Such crap would laughed off in C world, where any limitation is promptly disposed off, even if it requires inline assembly(And, i can't ever see inline assembly 'polluting' your precious Scheme/Haskell code)
____________________________________
http://xs135.xs.to/xs135/09042/av922.jpg
As Shakespeare himself knew, the peace, the reconciliation that he created on the stage would not last an hour on the street.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 3:50

>>9
Nice try FV ;) shame about all the fallacies.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 3:52

All I know is that javascript is the most crippled language i've ever come across. Can't do shit with it.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:10

>>9

(let ((x 123456789)

                (y 362436069)

                (z 521288629)

                (w 88675123)

                (v 886756453))

            (%asm

             (:find-property-strict rand)

             (:@ (lambda ()

                   (%asm

                    ;;t=(x^(x>>7))

                    (:@ x)

                    (:dup)

                    (:push-byte 7)

                    (:unsigned-rshift)

                    (:bit-xor)

                    ;; leave t on stack

                    ;;x=y; y=z; z=w; w=v;

                    (:@ (psetf x y

                               y z

                               z w

                               w v))

                    (:pop)

                    ;;v=(v^(v<<6))^(t^(t<<13))

                    ; t ^ (t << 13)

                    (:dup) ;; t

                    (:push-byte 13)

                    (:lshift)

                    (:bit-xor)

                    (:@ v)

                    (:dup)

                    (:push-byte 6)

                    (:lshift)

                    (:bit-xor)

                    (:bit-xor)

                    (:dup)

                    (:coerce-u)

                    (:@ (setf v (%asm-top-of-stack-typed)))

                    ;; return (y+y+1)*v;

                    (:@ y) ;; y v

                    (:dup)

                    (:add-i) ;; y+y v

                    (:push-byte 1)

                    (:add-i) ;; y+y+1 v

                    (:multiply-i)

                    (:coerce-u))))

             (:init-property rand)

             (:push-null)))

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:11

>>9
You're confused old chap. You carers are looking for you so you should return to them.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:30

why is there LISP in this thread? LISP is not a functional programming language!

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 5:17

>>14
Lisp is whatever you want it to be :)

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 6:14

>>15
Unmatched right bracket.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 6:53

>>16
:)(

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:10

>>17
Now you have 2 problems.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:13

_|_

THE PENIS OPERATOR

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:25

>>12
Looks like shit, compare it to Harpy.
Once again, Haskell > ((Scheme)).

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:53

>>19
Looks like shit, compare it to the Balls operator. (_)_)
Once again, Balls > PENIS

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:36

Can someone tell me why are you using Haskell? I really want to know. For me, Haskell is only the huge dependency of XMonad.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:43

>>22
Because it's ELEGANT AS FUCK

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:52

Actually Windows is written in C++. Or so I heard.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:00

>>23
How?

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:01

>>22

loeb :: Functor f => f (f a -> a) -> f a

loeb = fix (fmap . flip id =<<)

You'll shit bricks when you see it.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:24

>>26
Do by ``it'' you mean the right double frown operator?

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 12:21

>>26
You know, the non-pointless version is actually shorter than that. Here, take a look:



loeb f = fmap ($ loeb f) f

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 12:30

>>24
no one uses windows

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 14:29

>>28
no, it's the same length. they're both 8 words/operators and 1 set of parentheses.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 15:43

Bumping this thread for less functional circle-jerking in /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:06

The operating system you are using is written in Objective C++.
The web browser you are using is written in Lisp.
The web server you are using is written in Scheme.
The website you are using is written in HTML.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:13

>>31
Sorry your favorite shit language still hasn't caught up to 1975.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:44

>>33
I've seen a lisp interpreter written in lisp, but I've yet to see a C compiler written in lisp, please enlighten me.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:13

>>34
I've seen a C compiler written in C. In fact, I have written it when I was 12.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:15

>>34
There was one for Lisp machines, obviously. Ten seconds of Googling didn't find me source code to give you though.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:33

>>36
Ah, here we are.
http://www.bitsavers.org/bits/TI/Explorer/zeta-c/

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:52

>>30
Nice try, loser.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 18:38

Lol, kk.

"Functional" Programming

1 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:02

2 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:14

3 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:16

4 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:17

5 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 18:34

6 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 19:00

7 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 21:17

8 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 22:04

9 Name: FrozenVoid 2009-07-04 3:21

10 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 3:50

11 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 3:52

12 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:10

13 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:11

14 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 4:30

15 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 5:17

16 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 6:14

17 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 6:53

18 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:10

19 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:13

20 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:25

21 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 7:53

22 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:36

23 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:43

24 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 10:52

25 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:00

26 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:01

27 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 11:24

28 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 12:21

29 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 12:30

30 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 14:29

31 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 15:43

32 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:06

33 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:13

34 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 16:44

35 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:13

36 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:15

37 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:33

38 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 17:52

39 Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 18:38

41 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-23 22:52

42 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 15:47