|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
>> So why choose ! as "the nth element"?
>
> v!1 is briefer than v[1] :)
So is v@1. But that's not what was chosen.
Personally, I'd kinda like to be able to use v[1], but hey.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> case size c of
>> 3 -> case (size (c ! 0), size (c ! 1), size (c ! 2)) of
>> (1, 2, 3) -> (c ! 0 ! 0) + (c ! 1 ! 0) + (c ! 2 ! 0)
>> _ -> 0
>> _ -> 0
>
> I don't know why, but I got an irresistible urge to write some faux haskell
> after seeing that.
>
> case closed in d by
> x -> case (open, not!, closed, yes!, 2) because
> (1, 2, 3) -> (one, two, three) + x
> hence -> yes
> hence -> no
>
> To me, it makes exactly as much sense. :P
It makes sense to me, but it's awfully ugly. At present I can't think of
a way to do better...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Captain Jack wrote:
> I know it's interesting to *me* because I'd never heard of it before I
> started reading this newsgroup. Always like learning something new... :-)
Heh, yeah. People claim it's the most talked-about language on the
Internet, but I'd never heard of it either until I had a random
encounter one day. And I've never looked back... ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> Now you know how lots of people feel when they have to learn UNIX
> (command line). At some point, you just tell them, "Hey, that's the way
> it is. Weird, obscure, but works, and doesn't really get in your way
> once you know it".
The difference is that unix is 43 years old and there were no established
conventions back then.
If you develop a new programming language today, there should be a good
reason why you go against general conventions. Making it different just for
the sake of being different is not smart.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> Now you know how lots of people feel when they have to learn UNIX
>> (command line). At some point, you just tell them, "Hey, that's the way
>> it is. Weird, obscure, but works, and doesn't really get in your way
>> once you know it".
>
> The difference is that unix is 43 years old and there were no established
> conventions back then.
>
> If you develop a new programming language today, there should be a good
> reason why you go against general conventions. Making it different just for
> the sake of being different is not smart.
Perhaps you're forgetting that Haskell is also 20 years old?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Perhaps you're forgetting that Haskell is also 20 years old?
Hence a complete newcomer as programming languages are concerned.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Perhaps you're forgetting that Haskell is also 20 years old?
>
> Hence a complete newcomer as programming languages are concerned.
Not nearly as new as the likes of Java, Python, Ruby, etc. But sure, not
as ancient as Lisp or C...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Not nearly as new as the likes of Java
Well if you consider 5 years older as "not *nearly* as new"... :P
> Python
Or 1 year older in this case...
> Ruby
Ruby is 5 years newer as well.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Heh. If you mean "why isn't it some random symbol?" then the answer is
> "you can only use symbols for *binary* functions, not *unary* functions
> such as NOT".
It could be worse. It could be APL, where functions are in greek.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The question in today's corporate environment is not
so much "what color is your parachute?" as it is
"what color is your nose?"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Heh. If you mean "why isn't it some random symbol?" then the answer is
> "you can only use symbols for *binary* functions, not *unary* functions
> such as NOT".
How do you negate an integral or floating point value, then?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |