Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Haskell Point-free is Equivalent to Forth

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 17:36

Nothing but a bunch of stack-twiddling write-only bullshite.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:29

In my Lisp DSL I do it like this:

fadd [@xs x y] -> [@xs x+y]
fsub [@xs x y] -> [@xs x-y]
fmul [@xs x y] -> [@xs x*y]
fdiv [@xs x y] -> [@xs x/y]
fdup [@xs x] -> [@xs x x]
fdrp [@xs x] -> [@xs]
fsay [@xs x] -> do x.say [@xs]
[2 3].fdup.fadd.fmul.fsay // prints 12


where is your haskell now?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:43

>>5
Haskell's

fsay . fmul . fadd . fdup [2, 3]

wont be pf either

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:46

>>7
So is in my DSL:

fanus =: ?.fdup.fadd.fmul.fsay
fanus [2 3]

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:48

>>9
pf isnt a big deal.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:53

>>8
A function with a implicitly named argument is not poinfree.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 18:53

>>11
It has something very similiar.

Name: wiki helps me arguing! 2011-02-09 18:59

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:01

C++ (not C++0x) has something very similiar to lambdas.
It has functors, that are lambdas.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:06

>>17
stop butthurting

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:17

>>19
sorry :-(

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:20

I wonder what a discussion between the ``in Lisp'' guy and FrozenVoid would be like. And who would outtroll who.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:28

>>23
You can filter him by using his DSL's pattern matching syntax as the filter pattern.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:30

>>23
You should use non-anonymouse BBS then. People, like me, who dont care about social norms, quickly get bans on non-anonymous sites. So, you should be safe there.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:32

>>22
And, BTW, I'm not trolling. Just posting my opinion. Sorry, if it insults you, guys, but Computer Science gets quite subjective at times.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:37

>>26
I'm not trolling. Just posting my opinion.
FrozenVoid used to say roughly the same thing.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:53

>>28
The DSL is pseudocode:
http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1296914507/37
f [x _ @xs] -> x+xs.f
How does it know to return 0 in the unmentioned cases, such the empty list case? How does it know what to return in the unmentioned cases of every function?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:53

>>29
Well played, sir.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 19:56

>>26
The only way to prove that you're not trolling is to post the entire implementation of your DSL somewhere. Zip/Rar/7z/tar.bz2/... it up and upload it to any free file host (if you don't know any, I can easily point you to any).

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 20:46

>>35
I chortled.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-09 23:07

>>35
And then Haskell was dead ;_;.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 0:36

>>35
You're not supposed to be doing dirty things like that in HASKAL.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 1:07

>>35
you can use it to do things like this:
fibs = loeb $ 0 : 1 : map (flip (!!) + (flip (!!) . succ)) [0..]

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 1:09

Jesus Christ, can't you just type in the naive recursive definition and have the HASKAL compiler automagically figure out the fastest implementation for it?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 1:15

>>40
yes, you can just do fibs = 0 : 1 : zipWith (+) fibs (tail fibs), but what's the fun in that? the whole point of haskell is to show off ``abstract bullshite" that lisp weenies will never comprehend.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 1:43

>>41
but what's the fun in that?
I thought the entire point of functional programming was to make things easier to comprehend (to the programmer) at the cost of having to develop a smarter compiler.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 2:34

>>42
what's the point of making things easier to comprehend if you're going to limit yourself to the mundane tasks that were already easy?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 5:23

>>39
What's the definition of loeb?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 5:57

>>44
loeb :: Functor a => a (a x -> x) -> a x
loeb = fix (fmap . flip id =<<)

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 7:25

>>45
what

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 7:40

>>45
Why is it so useful?

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 7:47

>>47
Consider this: A pack of wild Niggers.
Savage, slavering Niggers nearing your white home. Trampling your white lawn. Raping your white daughter.
And you can't do shit since they're savages. The Nigger leader grabs your wife and fucks her with his shaman stick.
The primal Niggers finally dominate your household. They watch barbaric shows on TV and you are forced to be their slave.
Such is the downfall of White Man.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 7:50

>>48

*African Americans

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 8:13

HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com PLEASE HACK plentyoffish.com HACK plentyoffish.com

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 8:14

Consider this: A pack of urbanized Whites.
Civilized, free Whites nearing your nigger home. Treating your nigger lawn with lawnmowers. Educating your nigger daughter in a free public school.
And you can't do shit since they're civilized. The White leader grants your wife ability to vote and be elected and guarantees her full civil rights in his presidential speech.
The educated Whites finally dominate your 'hood. They show pop-science shows on TV and you are forced to be their equal.
Such is the upbringing of Nigger Man.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 12:20

>>51
Excellent!

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 15:42

>>30
Addition treats nil as 0.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-10 15:43

>>30
>How does it know what to return in the unmentioned cases of every function?
Nil. Because nil is an identity for most common functions.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List