 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
...you go to eat a 2 Kg block of chocolate, and you begin by recursively
subdividing it until you reach single-square chunks, and you proceed eat
those in depth-first order. o_O
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:48e12a2a$1@news.povray.org...
> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>
> ...you go to eat a 2 Kg block of chocolate,
Point taken, no need to go further to prove Haskell is horrible for your
health.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
> news:48e12a2a$1@news.povray.org...
>
>> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>>
>> ...you go to eat a 2 Kg block of chocolate,
>
> Point taken, no need to go further to prove Haskell is horrible for your
> health.
Better than taking a pointer to the chocolate first, then consuming it
piece by piece by running it into a for loop incrementing the pointer. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>
> ...you go to eat a 2 Kg block of chocolate, and you begin by recursively
> subdividing it until you reach single-square chunks, and you proceed eat
> those in depth-first order. o_O
You know, I also posted this on the actual Haskell mailing list.
...currently they're debating how you would correctly handle the case of
a chocolate bar containing an infinite number of squares! o_O
(Something about "Dedekind cuts"...)
Seriously, WTF? I was *joking*, people!
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>
> ...you go to eat a ...
I see not much has changed around here. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:15:22 -0400, Tom Galvin <tom### [at] impnospamorg> wrote:
>> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>>
>> ...you go to eat a ...
>
>
>I see not much has changed around here. ;)
>
But it will when we get Pov Ver 4.0 ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> But it will when we get Pov Ver 4.0 ;)
4.0? AFAIK we don't have 3.7 yet! o_O (And the most recent beta expired
a month ago...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:15:22 -0400, Tom Galvin <tom### [at] impnospamorg> wrote:
>
>>> You know you've been using Haskell too long when...
>>>
>>> ...you go to eat a ...
>>
>> I see not much has changed around here. ;)
>>
>
> But it will when we get Pov Ver 4.0 ;)
Will it be bundled with girlfriend 1.0?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> But it will when we get Pov Ver 4.0 ;)
>
> Will it be bundled with girlfriend 1.0?
Hell, at this point I'd settle for girlfriend 0.1 beta1... o_O
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>
>> But it will when we get Pov Ver 4.0 ;)
>
April 1, 2009 :)
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
