You're all little dipshits, none of you know anything about programming.
Those shitty little languages you use... "Haskell"? Give me a break.
If you want to have money and success, you have to learn a real programming language, like C# or Java.
I know C#, I'm an extremely successful man. I have a fancy car, nice house, blonde girlfriend, the whole package.
Enjoy being failures in life and code. Oooh, you can do math, big fucking deal!
I can fuck vaginas.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:31
>>39
whatever it does it can easily be done with java, though perhaps not in the same way.
as a programmer you should know this, it's true for most languages
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:33
>>41
Enjoy your public class HelloWorld { public static void main(String[] args) {System.out.println("Hello, world!");}}
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:37
>>42
Enjoy using a toy language that will NEVER be able to get you a job or be useful in the real world :3
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:37
it seems kinda interesting.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:41
>>43
In my "toy language" I can write `grep` utility in one line...
m:grep @pattern strings -> keep {([$pattern]:!asList)} $strings
//now..
shell "ls ." |> grep @_@".lisp"
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:49
codewar! OFF TO BATTLE
@echo off
echo Hello World! Check it, bitch
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:50
>>45
that doesn't make it any less of a toy language.
any number of other languages can do that too, for instance perl (and it doesn't need to cheat by using shell script).
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:53
>wat
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:54
>>47
You fail. Perl includes builtin REGEXPs. My DSL doesn't. It just so happens, it has the ability to do unrestricted deconstructing-bind.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:55
>>49
I fail because your toy language doesn't include a useful feature?
Your logic fascinating
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:57
i find my useless additions fascinating.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 19:58
>>50
REGEXPs arent useful, but ugly and hard to use.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:02
>>52
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You made me laugh heartily.
You only think they're not useful because you don't know how to use them; you admit to this by saying they're hard to use.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I assure you that they're quite simple and extremely useful; all that is required is to rtfm and practice a little.
I suppose reading is too hard for you too though, right?
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:02
I cant even parse infix expressions with REGEXPs. Useless limited crap.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:03
Find your muse.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:04
>>53
Enjoy your FLEX + BISON + over 9000 of handcoded C/C++ lines of shit
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:04
dubs. check em.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:05
>>54
Cry a little more why don't you?
Your pathetic whining only serves to make my penis harder
Since when have lispfags become so pathetic?
I remember when you guys used to actually sound smart; now you just come off sounding like whiny teenagers.
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:12
>>999 this is mine.
trips bitches. ok. im out.
-apache
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:32
Anyone else wants to argue, that an inferior REGEXes could be compared to a full featured recursive descend parsing with full integration with a language? It is that easy! Just parse HTML using only REGEXes. Anyone?
Name:
Anonymous2010-11-29 20:36
>>64
parsing html with perl regexes is easy.
and please stop capitalising REGEX, i don't know why you're doing that but it makes you look like an idiot. "Regex" is not an acronym, it's just a shortening of "regular expression".
>>68
"my fail" ?
back to /b/ please.
i have no interest in writing a bunch of code that will never even be used solely for the purpose of winning an internet argument with some Lisper who has his head so far up his anus that he can't see daylight.
good day, sir