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

Pages: 1-

Scheme is shit.

Name: Scheme? 2011-12-30 14:48

Fuck Scheme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 14:49

I agree. Common Lisp is much better than Scheme.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 15:02

>>2
Oh no it's not. Scheme is better.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 15:26

Scheme is great. I wouldn't actually use it, though, with all the politics and bullshit going on. At least Common Lisp was practically set in stone in 1994, and lets people to go on with simply hating the standard while providing useful solutions to fix it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 15:29

>>4
``Set in stone'' may be true, but extensions are plentiful and the base is quite solid.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 15:31

(set! in stone)

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 15:36

>>5
--==FUCKING EXACTLY==-- my point. Thanks for restating it.

Name: Anonymous 2011-12-30 21:00

>>6
(and (set! it) (forget it)) - Ron Popeil

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 13:45


The intuition behind the formal definition of cardinal is the construction of a notion of the relative size or "bigness" of a set without reference to the kind of members which it has. For finite sets this is easy; one simply counts the number of elements a set has. In order to compare the sizes of larger sets, it is necessary to appeal to more subtle notions.

Name: Anonymous 2013-09-01 16:03


The above systems can be modified to allow urelements, objects that can be members of sets but that are not themselves sets and do not have any members.

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