|
that slide deck is rather obtuse about a lot of things, but it does get the general spirit of apl-derivatives right for me. powerful operators with simple syntax, very uniform (limited) data structure options, leading to a lot of work being compressible down into single lines. then comments take on a different nature, commenting more on what the line tries to achieve with what input and output data, as it will tend to be a quite self-contained thing the readability is sort of true, in that one will often just be drilling down into a single line in a systematic way. debugging by rewriting is simultaneously quite true, as the simple structure makes just replacing a line usually pretty straightforward otoh it doesn't really talk about how to structure larger programs, my experiencec is in kx k/q where doing basically small services tended to be a standard approach, but that is not the way in real apl afaik
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
uh if someone finds APL obscure it's because they're a "computer scientist" and not a "seasoned programmer"? That's rich in view of all the dense lambda calculus papers I've dug through the last few days to find something more practice-oriented I can use in a presentation to users of a language with a similar rep
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 18:35
|
|
|
demographically, people with cs degrees and/or significant non-apl experience tend to have very strong negative reactions to apl-family languages apl has largely clung to life via people who are technical, but not traditionally educated as programmers, and therefore willing/able to get past how alien apl is compared to most other things. downside to this is the apl community on average has a weak grasp of many genuinely useful mainstream practices like using revision control systems or contributing to open source. the situation does seem to be getting a bit better lately. i love catching lisp weenies talking about how sexprs (aka "no syntax" or so it is claimed) are perfectly readable if only people would put in some effort to get used to them, and then turning around and shrieking in fear and anger at apl's literally impossible, unusable, unlearnable, inhumane, but most importantly, unfamiliar, syntax.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
What I object to are the implications (1) that the typical procedural programmer is steeped in theoretical computer science tradition (2) that academic computer scientists don't recognize the value of concise notation to a point that their output can be just as obscure As the presentation states, it's a false dichotomy and a poor basis for conclusions The language i was referring to is forth btw Gazpacho fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Mar 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
as soon as I saw suffix's post about APL I knew Internet Janitor would visit the thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
i loving love internet janitors posts
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
apl is great at expressing certain awkward operations in a neat way, like say with the reduce/scan operators. I wish these bits of expressiveness were adopted in other languages, it soothes my math autism. but I don't know how I feel about basing an entire general purpose language on this style
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2018 22:41
|
|
|
there’s not that much difference between APL and more complex regex engines, i feel like if you use regex you can definitely get APL-likes
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2018 09:55
|
|
|
the most important point of apl (or at least apl-likes, i've only ever done k, q, and j); it really is not very difficult. a lot of up-front learning sure, because you do need to understand what the operations do, but it is not *that* long a list if you were to find yourself either doing it professionally or just being sufficiently interesting. not one of those you can just toy with for an afternoon and work with, but it is not some matter of intelligence or innate skill, just work with it for a week and you're onboard (you'll keep learning idioms and other little tricks for a long time though) i am not sure it is all that worth it overall, since it sees such limited use, but i do rather love it for just knocking out some quick code
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2018 10:39
|
|
|
Haha gently caress Groovy: https://pricefx.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/HELP/pages/219481402/Using+Strings+as+Keys+in+Hash+Maps Also, if you're doing an assertEquals() on two strings, you'd better make sure either they have the same type or you imported GroovyTestCase.assertEquals() and not JUnit's Assert.assertEquals() or you're hosed. And God help you if your IDE organizes your imports and can't tell the difference!
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
CPColin posted:Haha gently caress Groovy: https://pricefx.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/HELP/pages/219481402/Using+Strings+as+Keys+in+Hash+Maps wtf is this, it's like the worst parts of dynamic and static typing at the same time
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2018 13:42
|
|
|
i would gladly learn apl, my only requirement is that i get to use one of those awesome keyboards
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 00:27
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:wtf is this, it's like the worst parts of dynamic and static typing at the same time That seems to sum up Groovy in a nutshell, at least from what I've seen about the existing code so far at my current job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:wtf is this, it's like the worst parts of dynamic and static typing at the same time for me, it clears the very VERY low bar of "better than bash"
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:for me, it clears the very VERY low bar of "better than bash" I mean... is it tho
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
Sweeper posted:I mean... is it tho yeah i'm not sure that it really makes it
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:yeah i'm not sure that it really makes it groovy has stupid autoconverting strings that don't work as keys hashmaps bash doesn't have hashmaps for file munging i'd actually use something else, but if you want to do a thing that uses all your cool javas, groovy can actually build objects instead making you pass a pile of strings to something. i've used it for config crap with custom logic with some success. this is opposed to whipping up a lovely DSL that will never have autocomplete (i'd use clojure instead but it's less familiar to people)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
Sweeper posted:I mean... is it tho yes. yes it is. at least groovy has a debugger
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 04:11
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:bash doesn't have hashmaps recent versions of bash have hashmaps actually (it only took them twenty five years to copy the feature from ksh)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:recent versions of bash have hashmaps actually You qualify for a free mug of chicken soup for knowing this
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:11
|
|
|
Treat anybody with deep knowledge of bash the same way you treat a person with deep knowledge of what cleaning products are best at removing what bodily fluids from what kinds of surface, for that person has most certainly Seen Some poo poo
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:13
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:Treat anybody with deep knowledge of bash the same way you treat a person with deep knowledge of what cleaning products are best at removing what bodily fluids from what kinds of surface, for that person has most certainly Seen Some poo poo or has been the mother of a teenage boy
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
getting walked in while using a linux is probably more embarassing
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:32
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:for me, it clears the very VERY low bar of "better than bash" ugh, bash is so irritating *warms up a jvm*
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:ugh, bash is so irritating *warms up a jvm* it's always hilarious when nerds who haven't even looked at java since 2002 try to lay sick burns on it
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 05:49
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:Treat anybody with deep knowledge of bash the same way you treat a person with deep knowledge of what cleaning products are best at removing what bodily fluids from what kinds of surface, for that person has most certainly Seen Some poo poo i suffered terribly for this knowledge, it is true i come from a land of terror and pain to tell you this: friends don't let friends write shell
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 06:01
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:Treat anybody with deep knowledge of bash the same way you treat a person with deep knowledge of what cleaning products are best at removing what bodily fluids from what kinds of surface, for that person has most certainly Seen Some poo poo hi
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
Bash gives syntax errors at run time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:recent versions of bash have hashmaps actually hmm i'm gonna take this knowledge and lock it in a mental drawer labeled 'noooope' and actively forget it if that's okay
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
carry on then posted:it's always hilarious when nerds who haven't even looked at java since 2002 try to lay sick burns on it
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
real scripters use a directory as a hashmap
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
Brain Candy posted:hmm This is a good reaction to learning something new about bash. When i find some esoteric syntax feature I've never seen before I usually start with "wow this could be useful", then verbatim repeat this quote.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:recent versions of bash have hashmaps actually I forgot about this because they call them associative arrays tangentially I hate when people say "associative array" instead of hashmap/dictionary, I always need to think for a second what they mean
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
Symbolic Butt posted:I forgot about this because they call them associative arrays neither hash map or associative array is that good a name, since it states implementation details. just 'map' is my preference (dictionary also seems to suggest strings as keys)
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
stop coddling nbsd you weaklings
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
at this point I'm expecting nbsd to be a ruby core developer
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
if you're not willing to deal with bash's syntax in order to get a task done then maybe it's not worth doing in any language?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:if you're not willing to deal with php's syntax in order to get a task done then maybe it's not worth doing in any language?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:if you're not willing to deal with %L's syntax in order to get a task done then maybe it's not worth doing in any language?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 11:39 |
|
|
bash is documented, php is not
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2018 18:40
|
|