|
FamDav posted:theres a distinction between what should be language level and what should be library level. c++ makes all the wrong choices. best description of java generics ever
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
yaoi prophet posted:how much confusion do you think would be avoided if c used different words for functions returning void and like void pointers none
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 05:54
|
|
|
if you don't know what a void pointer is, and don't intuitively understand that it can't possibly be a pointer to a void value, then you have no business writing C i'm not saying void pointers are good design, just that people are stupid
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 05:56
|
|
|
JewKiller 3000 posted:if you don't know what a void pointer is, and don't intuitively understand that it can't possibly be a pointer to a void value, then you have no business writing C They used to be char pointers which I guess made sense at the time
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
it does but then does it mean a string, a byte array, a pointer of some unknown type, please look at any other argument(s) and the seven character name to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 10:19
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:i wish c++ had sane and convenient features rather than a horrifyingly complicated and lovely compile-time environmemt for computation of types. yeah that's basically what i dislike with c++. you can do all kind of neat compile time stuff but you are forced to use functional kinda programming with a very awkward syntax just because the entire thing grew out of a system that was originally only made to do generic containers thing is there's no good alternative mature language with good metaprogramming facilities that compiles to native code rust is promising but looks still quite some way from being a production quality language
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 10:40
|
|
|
jit compilation is better anyway cause it can make the most of whatever the current cpu supports
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 11:40
|
|
|
FamDav posted:considering it took until the yool 2012 for lambdas to make it into these languages, i await 2030 when we finally get typeclasses. Koenig Lookup is far more powerful than typeclasses. suffix posted:like you don't sit there with your c# and java sometimes and think to yourself "boy, i wish i had a turing complete metaprogramming language based on type parametrization right now." Oh man, all the loving time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 11:54
|
|
|
unixbeard posted:jit compilation is better anyway cause it can make the most of whatever the current cpu supports everything has p much the same cpus nowadays desktop: core I whatever mobile: some arm w/ neon I thought the standard fantasy that jit is better than offline compilation was that it could detect hot code paths dynamically
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 12:11
|
|
|
vapid cutlery posted:or having generics without type-erasure maybe it's not a huge problem. when you run into situations where you need reified generics there are ways to carry that information into the function in p. much every jvm language, including java proper. pretty much the only actual problem type-erasure has caused me is not being able to do like so: code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 12:16
|
|
|
type erasure is still a pain in the dick & you can't use primitives as type parameters. not that they'd let you anyway, the assholes
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 12:20
|
|
|
Nomnom Cookie posted:type erasure is still a pain in the dick & you can't use primitives as type parameters. not that they'd let you anyway, the assholes you actually can in scala if you specialize your classes/functions for the primitives code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
Zombywuf posted:Oh man, all the loving time. why don't you just get over it and use common lisp
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 13:31
|
|
|
aside remember amqp? the protocol that released a series of incompatible versions before abandoning the architecture for 1.0 anyway, ages ago, imatix went 'gently caress this poo poo' and wrote 0mq the creator of 0mq then went gently caress this poo poo and forked crossroads.io anyway, the author of that went gently caress this poo poo and made nanomsg 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
tef posted:why don't you just get over it and use common lisp common lisp sounds pretty great on paper. it is pretty much the only high level language other than java and .net that has a mature compiler (in fact it has several) if i hadn't tried to use it to write applications then i would never have found out what a pain in the dick it is in real life
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 14:06
|
|
|
hopefully nanomsg will be ok, since he's writing it in a language he knows instead of trying to learn as he goes
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 14:08
|
|
|
Posting Principle posted:
is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
prefect posted:is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though? ragel
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
prefect posted:is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though? Perl
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
prefect posted:is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though? the regex is the least scary part of that line
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:07
|
|
|
someone taught kids recursion today using my coursework. they drew fractals awwwwww yissss
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:35
|
|
|
tef posted:
hmm... where have i seen that before?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:42
|
|
|
its the triforce from zelda
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:46
|
|
|
its turtles all the way down
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
prefect posted:hmm... where have i seen that before? code:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:its turtles all the way down actually yeah, the fractal lesson is called "Lesson 04: Turtles all the way down". Lesson 2 is called "Turtle Power"
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
prefect posted:hmm... where have i seen that before? tef's twitter account
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
prefect posted:hmm... where have i seen that before? it's the sierpinski gasket. probably seen it on the cover of some textbook or other e: and the other one is the sierpinski arrowhead curve, though i dunno why you'd be more likely to have seen that one than the gasket
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
prefect posted:is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though? regex are gross and only useful to sift through the dejections of another program to find some data if you need to write regex you are doing a job so unimportant that no one bothered to output the data you need in an usable format
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 16:31
|
|
|
tef posted:aside isnt that one of the points of actually labeling software was <1.0? the lineage of forks is dumb but i just use rabbitmq and it works
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Zombywuf posted:Koenig Lookup is far more powerful than typeclasses. koenig lookup is more powerful but doesnt provide me any useful structure, and can cause weird bugs where you end up calling library internal functions because of precedence rules.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 16:44
|
|
|
Zlodo posted:regex are gross and only useful to sift through the dejections of another program to find some data aka linux
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 16:44
|
|
|
Zlodo posted:regex are gross and only useful to sift through the dejections of another program to find some data https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/blob/nom/src/core/traits.pm#L136
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 16:46
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
FamDav posted:koenig lookup is more powerful I have no idea why this keeps getting said. are you guys just looking at typeclasses as only a name overloading mechanism or something? typeclasses also do abstraction (they're way more like concepts than koenig lookup), and even if limited to name overloading, you also get overloading on return type in addition to argument types. so I'm not sure in what sense it's "more powerful"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
prefect posted:is there a language where a nice pile of regex isn't going to look like that, though? Schemes and Lisp often toyed with the idea of alternative function-based approaches to regular expressions. One of them (SRE) had the POSIX regex: code:code:code:code:It's an interesting approach that ultimately seems to have never caught on (much like Scheme itself), and can be somewhat obtained by concatenating strings (although groups of backreferences and poo poo are not safe to merge all willy-nilly)
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
crazypenguin posted:I have no idea why this keeps getting said. are you guys just looking at typeclasses as only a name overloading mechanism or something? i call it more powerful because it's more general and has less structure imposed on it. this can also lead to it interacting poorly with other features of the language resulting in ridiculous errors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:42 |
|
|
koenig lookup is a bad feature because what you really wanted was something like concepts. instead you got something that allowed you to kind of do concepts but also allowed you to get really weird behavior because you didnt happen to know that the library youre working with has a internal function of the same name as your function and you just happened to introduce it as a viable overload because of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2013 17:57
|
|