p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »

Thermopyle: Jul 1, 2003; ...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. �Bertrand Russell

qntm posted:

Perl 5 was and remains a massive, massive, wholly welcome improvement on Bash scripting.

so do a lot of other languages

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2024 12:18

Jerry Bindle: May 16, 2003

where does racket fall on the spectrum? i know where it places me on the spectrum, but there's basically no scripting language i can use at work besides windows .bat files that won't have someone calling me an rear end in a top hat

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:08

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

switch companies or otherwise stop caring about those coworker opinions??

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:11

Jerry Bindle: May 16, 2003

yeah almost definitely going to switch companies when "the time is right"

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:16

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

Barnyard Protein posted:

where does racket fall on the spectrum? i know where it places me on the spectrum, but there's basically no scripting language i can use at work besides windows .bat files that won't have someone calling me an rear end in a top hat

can't you use wscript

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:17

Vanadium: Jan 8, 2005

i can't believe no one else is in disbelief that "1e6" == "1000000" in a new pl in 2015(or later who knows)

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:18

Jerry Bindle: May 16, 2003

Vanadium posted:

i can't believe no one else is in disbelief that "1e6" == "1000000" in a new pl in 2015(or later who knows)

especially crazy since one of the main usecases for perl is text / regex fuckery. don't other plangs get around this by having === operators

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:28

Jerry Bindle: May 16, 2003

Gazpacho posted:

can't you use wscript

i didn't know this was a thing, thanks!

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:28

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

"1e6" == "486"

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:31

Arcsech: Aug 5, 2008

Barnyard Protein posted:

where does racket fall on the spectrum? i know where it places me on the spectrum, but there's basically no scripting language i can use at work besides windows .bat files that won't have someone calling me an rear end in a top hat

racket is a v solid scripting language choice

only real issue as scripting langs go is that nowhere has it installed by default which if you're on windows doesnt matter anyway

it is a lisp, which lots of people have feelings about. but other than that its probably better than any other scripting language really

(semi-comedy option: https://github.com/Gabriel439/Haskell-Turtle-Library )

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:54

qntm: Jun 17, 2009

Thermopyle posted:

so do a lot of other languages

Sure, but the point is that in 1999 liking Perl was a 100% correct opinion.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 20:59

Ralith: Jan 12, 2011; I see a ship in the harbor
I can and shall obey
But if it wasn't for your misfortune
I'd be a heavenly person today

Barnyard Protein posted:

where does racket fall on the spectrum? i know where it places me on the spectrum, but there's basically no scripting language i can use at work besides windows .bat files that won't have someone calling me an rear end in a top hat

Racket is really nice. Tons of libraries, JIT, Lisp's trademark ridiculous flexibility tempered by a lot of hard-learned lessons on encapsulation, etc. Contains a lot of dialects implemented in itself, including Typed Racket which is pretty cool if you like finding your bugs ahead of time.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:07

Wheany: Mar 17, 2006; Spinya^{ha^{ha^haha}ha}ha_{ha_{ha_haha}ha}ha!; Doctor Rope

qntm posted:

Perl 5 was and remains a massive, massive, wholly welcome improvement on Bash scripting.

the only thing worse than a plang is a blang

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:08

Blinkz0rz: May 27, 2001; MY CONTEMPT FOR MY OWN EMPLOYEES IS ONLY MATCHED BY MY LOVE FOR TOM BRADY'S SWEATY MAGA BALLS

haskell makes me irrationally angry because it's really loving hard to visually parse

i mean look at this poo poo:

code:

qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort [y | y <- xs, y < x] ++ [x] ++ qsort [y | y <- xs, y >= x]

what the gently caress does this poo poo even mean goddamn

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:26

DONT THREAD ON ME: Oct 1, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo; Floss Finder

qntm posted:

Ruby was and remains a massive, massive, wholly welcome improvement on Bash scripting.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:34

JawnV6: Jul 4, 2004; So hot ...

ive never touched haskell but knowing the basics of quicksort, the only thing that isn't clear from those examples is the pivot selection?

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:36

DONT THREAD ON ME: Oct 1, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo; Floss Finder

Blinkz0rz posted:

haskell makes me irrationally angry because it's really loving hard to visually parse

i mean look at this poo poo:
code:
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort [y | y <- xs, y < x] ++ [x] ++ qsort [y | y <- xs, y >= x]
what the gently caress does this poo poo even mean goddamn

this is just python comprehensions with function overloading. are you having a hard time with x:xs?

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:43

Malcolm XML: Aug 8, 2009; I always knew it would end like ｔｈｉｓ．

fart simpson posted:

i think the haskell style guides recommend not using list comprehensions anymore

gently caress list comps do notation for life

:supaburn:

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:52

Malcolm XML: Aug 8, 2009; I always knew it would end like ｔｈｉｓ．

Blinkz0rz posted:

haskell makes me irrationally angry because it's really loving hard to visually parse

i mean look at this poo poo:
code:
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort [y | y <- xs, y < x] ++ [x] ++ qsort [y | y <- xs, y >= x]
what the gently caress does this poo poo even mean goddamn

literally the most complicated thing here is the special cased pattern x:xs which is really a compact form of expressing head and tail. The rest is function application and list comprehension; the latter is basically deprecated

if data List a = Empty | Cons a (List a) were the form in the libs u would do
qsort Empty = Empty
qsort (Cons head tail) = ...

# ? Nov 29, 2015 21:56

Brain Candy: May 18, 2006

Blinkz0rz posted:

haskell makes me irrationally angry because it's really loving hard to visually parse

i mean look at this poo poo:
code:
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort [y | y <- xs, y < x] ++ [x] ++ qsort [y | y <- xs, y >= x]
what the gently caress does this poo poo even mean goddamn

i used to feel like you feel until i put some effort into haskell

but now it looks like a clean (and naive) translation of the algo you'd find on wikipedia

# ? Nov 29, 2015 22:01

brap: Aug 23, 2004; Grimey Drawer

i haven't really written any haskell but i was pretty much able to get what that's doing

# ? Nov 29, 2015 22:38

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

Barnyard Protein posted:

i didn't know this was a thing, thanks!

pretend that i said cscript though

and beware, there's no telling when microsoft might decide to stop maintaining it, but if you need a somewhat civilized scripting language that is standard in older versions of windows there it is

# ? Nov 29, 2015 22:49

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

Ericadia posted:

I'm learning it on my free time, any warnings or favorite bits of the language you'd care to share?

In addition to the resources that gonadic io has given you (and this thread), you might want to check out the functional languages thread in CoC. I've always gotten a good answer to my questions there, although it is significantly slower than this thread so you probably don't want to post there if you need a question answered *now* for whatever reason.

JawnV6 posted:

ive never touched haskell but knowing the basics of quicksort, the only thing that isn't clear from those examples is the pivot selection?

That happens in the x:xs part, which splits a list into its head (x) and tail (xs). Since x is what is used in the middle of the expression, that means that the pivot is always chosen to be the first element of the list.

Also, the standard disclaimer here is that this is not an in-place sort, so you can make a good argument that this is not a "true" quicksort. An in-place quicksort is possible in Haskell, but it's somewhat uglier.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 22:56

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

Malcolm XML posted:

gently caress list comps do notation for life

Do notation with lists has always been kind of confusing to me for whatever reason. I always have to think very carefully about exactly how the list monad works before I get it.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 22:58

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

arrays in haskell make me lol

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:00

Xarn: Jun 26, 2015

fart simpson posted:

i think the haskell style guides recommend not using list comprehensions anymore

huh, why?

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:20

Thermopyle: Jul 1, 2003; ...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. �Bertrand Russell

qntm posted:

Sure, but the point is that in 1999 liking Perl was a 100% correct opinion.

oh, yeah, I see what you mean

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:24

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

Gazpacho posted:

arrays in haskell make me lol

Data.Array's indexing is a little weird, but Vector works pretty well IMO.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:29

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

Xarn posted:

huh, why?

Usually they can be more succinctly expressed using map and a filter.

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:29

gonadic io: Feb 16, 2011; >>=

Malcolm XML posted:

gently caress list comps do notation for life

gently caress do notation, monadic comprehensions are great (for clowns, writing clown syntax)

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:39

lord of the files: Sep 4, 2012

fleshweasel posted:

i haven't really written any haskell but i was pretty much able to get what that's doing

i think it's pretty much like any other language. you just have to be using it for a couple of weeks to start to see that that mess of symbols can actually make sense. though haskell can be one of the harder ones to make sense of.

lord of the files fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Nov 30, 2015

# ? Nov 29, 2015 23:59

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005; DEATH TO AMERICA

that qsort function is also written to be a clever 1 liner instead of written in a clear way. this is more like how i'd expect to see it:

gonadic io posted:

if you split that up using 'where' and use 'filter' instead of list comprehensions, it becomes a lot clearer imo

this is what i'd write it as (no actually I'd write it as data.list.sort which is a merge sort but let's ignore that for now). also i'd use data.list.partition instead of two separate filters but i'll leave that as an exercise
code:
qsort :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort lessThan ++ [x] ++ qsort greaterThan
    where
    lessThan = filter (< x) xs
    greaterThan = filter (>= x) xs
feel free to add extra parens if it makes it easier for you too.

# ? Nov 30, 2015 01:41

Internet Janitor: May 17, 2008; "That isn't the appropriate trash receptacle."

would there be actual interest in an APL/J/K thread in CoC, or would it just be pages and pages of "this is unreadable", "what's with the funny symbols", etc

# ? Nov 30, 2015 02:22

triple sulk: Sep 17, 2014

Internet Janitor posted:

would there be actual interest in an APL/J/K thread in CoC, or would it just be pages and pages of "this is unreadable", "what's with the funny symbols", etc

yes

# ? Nov 30, 2015 02:54

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005; DEATH TO AMERICA

i'd be interested in reading it but i imagine it would fade into the archives because i doubt many people are actually gonna start using those languages. we can barely keep a generic "functional programming" thread active in coc

# ? Nov 30, 2015 02:56

jony neuemonic: Nov 13, 2009

Internet Janitor posted:

would there be actual interest in an APL/J/K thread in CoC, or would it just be pages and pages of "this is unreadable", "what's with the funny symbols", etc

do itttttttt.

# ? Nov 30, 2015 02:58

VikingofRock: Aug 24, 2008

Internet Janitor posted:

would there be actual interest in an APL/J/K thread in CoC, or would it just be pages and pages of "this is unreadable", "what's with the funny symbols", etc

would read

# ? Nov 30, 2015 03:43

Blinkz0rz: May 27, 2001; MY CONTEMPT FOR MY OWN EMPLOYEES IS ONLY MATCHED BY MY LOVE FOR TOM BRADY'S SWEATY MAGA BALLS

Malcolm XML posted:

literally the most complicated thing here is the special cased pattern x:xs which is really a compact form of expressing head and tail. The rest is function application and list comprehension; the latter is basically deprecated

if data List a = Empty | Cons a (List a) were the form in the libs u would do
qsort Empty = Empty
qsort (Cons head tail) = ...

my beef is the syntax not the algorithm

i look at that and i understand what it's supposed to do but i just can't visually parse the code

haskell may be a great language but it's biggest failing imo is how concise it is. it's just dense as gently caress

# ? Nov 30, 2015 04:11

Blinkz0rz: May 27, 2001; MY CONTEMPT FOR MY OWN EMPLOYEES IS ONLY MATCHED BY MY LOVE FOR TOM BRADY'S SWEATY MAGA BALLS

gonadic io posted:

if you split that up using 'where' and use 'filter' instead of list comprehensions, it becomes a lot clearer imo

this is what i'd write it as (no actually I'd write it as data.list.sort which is a merge sort but let's ignore that for now). also i'd use data.list.partition instead of two separate filters but i'll leave that as an exercise
code:
qsort :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort lessThan ++ [x] ++ qsort greaterThan
    where
    lessThan = filter (< x) xs
    greaterThan = filter (>= x) xs
feel free to add extra parens if it makes it easier for you too.

this is way more readable btw

# ? Nov 30, 2015 04:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 22, 2024 12:18

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005; DEATH TO AMERICA

Blinkz0rz posted:

this is way more readable btw

well thats what it looks like when you arent trying to do one liners

# ? Nov 30, 2015 04:15

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »