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 »

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

x y problem strikes again

# ? Dec 9, 2012 19:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 07:38

1337JiveTurkey: Feb 17, 2005

rotor posted:

yeah, but you know, baby steps.

you gotta admit that we've got the constantly observing our lives bit down pat and we're pretty good at using that information to make someone else's life easier. the rest is just bikeshedding

# ? Dec 9, 2012 19:49

coaxmetal: Oct 21, 2010; I flamed me own dad

gonna rebutt some of this cuz im bored

Zombywuf posted:

* this:

code:

>>> x = []
>>> y = x
>>> x += [1]
>>> y
[1]
>>> x = ()
>>> y = x
>>> x += (1,)
>>> y
()

not sure what the problem is here, tuples are immutable and lists aren't, so that seems like normal behavior. Or are you confused by assigning by reference?

x is a list, then y is assigned to be the same list, then you concatenate [1] onto the list, and y is that, like you would expect. if you make x a tuple, thats immutable, so y is assigned to that same tuple, but if you change the tuple that x is assigned to, y doesn't get pointed to the new tuple.

# ? Dec 9, 2012 20:15

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

see perl conveniently pre-flattens all your poo poo so we dont ever have to worry about this

besides, tuple is a terrible world

e: keeping freudian typo

# ? Dec 9, 2012 20:18

FamDav: Mar 29, 2008

Ronald Raiden posted:

gonna rebutt some of this cuz im bored

not sure what the problem is here, tuples are immutable and lists aren't, so that seems like normal behavior. Or are you confused by assigning by reference?

x is a list, then y is assigned to be the same list, then you concatenate [1] onto the list, and y is that, like you would expect. if you make x a tuple, thats immutable, so y is assigned to that same tuple, but if you change the tuple that x is assigned to, y doesn't get pointed to the new tuple.

Show him the gift boxes.

# ? Dec 9, 2012 20:27

Sneaking Mission: Nov 11, 2008

tef posted:

x y problem strikes again

xx problem

# ? Dec 9, 2012 20:32

Toady: Jan 12, 2009

rotor posted:

I think we have enough languages, what we need now is a program to write other programs for us because we're super bad at it.

what if WE are the programS??

# ? Dec 9, 2012 22:22

Deacon of Delicious: Aug 20, 2007; I bet the twist ending is Dracula's dick-babies

Toady posted:

what if WE are the programS??

the world and everyone it is awful, so we were all written in p languages and are running on a linux

# ? Dec 9, 2012 22:26

rotor: Jun 11, 2001; classic case of pineapple on pizzadog derangement syndrome

Toady posted:

what if WE are the programS??

naw.

# ? Dec 9, 2012 22:43

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

http://web.archive.org/web/20110726002019/http://diveintomark.org/archives/2004/02/04/incompatible-rss heh

# ? Dec 10, 2012 15:28

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

lol netscape.

# ? Dec 10, 2012 15:35

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

rotor posted:

I think we have enough languages, what we need now is a program to write other programs for us because we're super bad at it.

perl is p. good for this

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:12

Catalyst-proof: May 11, 2011; better waste some time with you

JawnV6 posted:

lisp is p. good for this

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:23

Zombywuf: Mar 29, 2008

Ronald Raiden posted:

gonna rebutt some of this cuz im bored

not sure what the problem is here, tuples are immutable and lists aren't, so that seems like normal behavior. Or are you confused by assigning by reference?

x is a list, then y is assigned to be the same list, then you concatenate [1] onto the list, and y is that, like you would expect. if you make x a tuple, thats immutable, so y is assigned to that same tuple, but if you change the tuple that x is assigned to, y doesn't get pointed to the new tuple.

You have correctly identified all the lines that do not do bad things. The line which does the bad thing is this one:

code:

>>> x += (1,)

This should throw.

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:25

Zombywuf: Mar 29, 2008

Jonnty posted:

clearly the solution is computers which constantly observe us and create programs to make our lives easier and more efficient automatically

We just need to make a program to write programs then tell it to write a better program writing program. Repeat this a few times then make it write a time travel program that sends itself back in time to just before we write the first program writing program.

Development solved. You're all going to have to get new jobs.

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:28

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

Zombywuf posted:

We just need to make a program to write programs then tell it to write a better program writing program. Repeat this a few times then make it write a time travel program that sends itself back in time to just before we write the first program writing program.

Development solved. You're all going to have to get new jobs.

I'm sure Skynet will be able to find new things for us to do.

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:29

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

work from home earn $$$

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:47

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

tef posted:

work from home earn $$$

spam and prevention of are the cutting-edge of ai research, think about that

every false-positive and false-negative a failed turing test with you as the human control input

# ? Dec 10, 2012 16:50

Workaday Wizard: Oct 23, 2009; by Pragmatica

prefect posted:

I'm sure Skynet will be able to find new things for us to do.

7 Scientific Reasons a Skynet Rising Would Fail (Quickly) | Cracked.com

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:12

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Cocoa Crispies posted:

spam and prevention of are the cutting-edge of ai research, think about that

there is a lot of work on text classification, the cutting edge of ai is a lot broader.

(especially with work on statistical nlp, translation especially)

quote:

every false-positive and false-negative a failed turing test with you as the human control input

i once wrote a bot that said 'heh' every 30s and left it running on my irc session.

no-one noticed for a while. someone thought I was doing it on purpose and tried to keep up.

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:14

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Shinku ABOOKEN posted:

7 Scientific Reasons a Skynet Rising Would Fail (Quickly) | Cracked.com

eight reasons we're using an ai to write our dumb and epic fail cookie cutter articles | cracked.com

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:16

0xB16B00B5: Aug 24, 2006; by Y Kant Ozma Post

such epic fail

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:17

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

0xB16B00B5 posted:

such epic fail

*built a markov chain out of "please respond" posts*

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:18

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

criticize my stupid idea please

so for doing types you add a class to a type set, so Integer would be in the set number or something, and you could query the set for other types or objects.

example: you wanted all the types that were real numbers, so querying the number set would return Integer, Fraction, Irrational, whatever

i feel like this is just basically subclassing, but for some reason it feels different idk help me yospos. i also dont know why this would be useful either

edit: also you do perform set operations and stuff obviously, union, intersection, etc

also each type-set keeps track of its members

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:32

gonadic io: Feb 16, 2011; >>=

code:

Haskell> :i Num
class Num a where
  (+) :: a -> a -> a
  (*) :: a -> a -> a
  (-) :: a -> a -> a
  negate :: a -> a
  abs :: a -> a
  signum :: a -> a
  fromInteger :: Integer -> a
        -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Integer -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Int -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Float -- Defined in `GHC.Float'
instance Num Double -- Defined in `GHC.Float'

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:43

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

that's maths but without all the number crunching that's got useful applications in the real world

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:44

Tiny Bug Child: Sep 11, 2004; Avoid Symmetry, Allow Complexity, Introduce Terror

Sweeper posted:

i feel like this is just basically subclassing

it is

Sweeper posted:

edit: also you do perform set operations and stuff obviously, union, intersection, etc

where would the ability to perform this on types be useful

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:44

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

Tiny Bug Child posted:

it is

where would the ability to perform this on types be useful

idk i have thought about it that much yet

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:47

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

AlsoD posted:

code:

Haskell> :i Num
class Num a where
  (+) :: a -> a -> a
  (*) :: a -> a -> a
  (-) :: a -> a -> a
  negate :: a -> a
  abs :: a -> a
  signum :: a -> a
  fromInteger :: Integer -> a
        -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Integer -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Int -- Defined in `GHC.Num'
instance Num Float -- Defined in `GHC.Float'
instance Num Double -- Defined in `GHC.Float'

ive been meaning to play with haskell but i have no problem to solve with it so i havent

it looks neat

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:51

Sweeper: Nov 29, 2007; The Joe Buck of Posting; Dinosaur Gum

what if you could have an infinite set of types im just postin here not thinkin

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:52

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

z0rgohistomorphic prepromorphisms

# ? Dec 10, 2012 17:54

Nomnom Cookie: Aug 30, 2009

What if, like, the types are the program

We'd never have to write code again

# ? Dec 10, 2012 20:51

Opinion Haver: Apr 9, 2007

Zombywuf posted:

You have correctly identified all the lines that do not do bad things. The line which does the bad thing is this one:
code:
>>> x += (1,)
This should throw.

why, it's equivalent to x = x + (1,)

# ? Dec 10, 2012 22:49

Lysidas: Jul 26, 2002; John Diefenbaker is a madman who thinks he's John Diefenbaker.; Pillbug

+= with a tuple is fine, it makes perfect sense

what isn't ideal is

Python code:

>>> x = [1]
>>> y = x
>>> x += [2]
>>> x
[1, 2]
>>> y
[1, 2]

Python code:

>>> x = [1]
>>> y = x
>>> x = x + [2]
>>> x
[1, 2]
>>> y
[1]

list.__iadd__ just calls list.extend and then returns self, list.__add__ has to return a new object. the += is still assigning something to x, but its the same object in this case

Python code:

>>> from dis import dis
>>> dis(compile('x = []; x += [1]', '', 'exec'))
  1           0 BUILD_LIST               0 
              3 STORE_NAME               0 (x) 
              6 LOAD_NAME                0 (x) 
              9 LOAD_CONST               0 (1) 
             12 BUILD_LIST               1 
             15 INPLACE_ADD
             16 STORE_NAME               0 (x) 
             19 LOAD_CONST               1 (None) 
             22 RETURN_VALUE
>>> dis(compile('x = []; x = x + [1]', '', 'exec'))
  1           0 BUILD_LIST               0 
              3 STORE_NAME               0 (x) 
              6 LOAD_NAME                0 (x) 
              9 LOAD_CONST               0 (1) 
             12 BUILD_LIST               1 
             15 BINARY_ADD
             16 STORE_NAME               0 (x) 
             19 LOAD_CONST               1 (None) 
             22 RETURN_VALUE

# ? Dec 10, 2012 23:18

Opinion Haver: Apr 9, 2007

the real answer here is that you should use immutable data structures for everything and not have to worry about this poo poo

# ? Dec 11, 2012 00:19

fritz: Jul 26, 2003

Cocoa Crispies posted:

spam and prevention of are the cutting-edge of ai research, think about that

every false-positive and false-negative a failed turing test with you as the human control input

yes i too read that charles stross novel

# ? Dec 11, 2012 00:26

Jonny 290: May 5, 2005; [ASK] me about OS/2 Warp

lol if you read

# ? Dec 11, 2012 00:29

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

yaoi prophet posted:

the real answer here is that you should use immutable data structures for everything and not have to worry about this poo poo

now you have 32767 problems

# ? Dec 11, 2012 00:41

0xB16B00B5: Aug 24, 2006; by Y Kant Ozma Post

look jsut loving decide what X is already stop changing your mind later int he program

# ? Dec 11, 2012 00:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 11, 2024 07:38

MononcQc: May 29, 2007

immutable data structures are pretty nice to have but also getting well-delimited mutability is a nice tool. I do prefer a clear delimitation between both modes than only mutable if available though.

# ? Dec 11, 2012 01:30

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

«‹›1784 »