"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:47fd081a$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>
>>       I'll get there one day... One day... One day...  ;)
>
> OK, I was expecting this sentence to contain the word "gadget". Damn it, 
> the 80s have ruined my brain! >_<

    "Dear Mr. Invisible,

       One day, I will use the gadget that you refer to, but for now, I'm 
truly sorry that the gadget that you refer to isn't available.

          You do know that everything on the web is trial and error, do you 
not?

           Just *plink* the keys for now, and you should be good to go.

            Yours,

             Mr. G"

             ;)

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:39:53 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>>>> Comma comma comma comma comma comelia...
>>>>    LOL! That was funny Andrew!  :)
>>> *takes a bow*
>> 
>> Now make a comic out of it. ;-)
> 
> Question: is "comelia" a word?

Does it matter?  ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:47fd2992$1@news.povray.org...
>>>>> Comma comma comma comma comma comelia...
>>>>    LOL! That was funny Andrew!  :)
>>> *takes a bow*

     Deservedly.  :)


>>
>> Now make a comic out of it. ;-)
>
> Question: is "comelia" a word?

    Not as far as I know, but contextually, that word works. I think it 
should be 'Karmelia' - if that is such a word too.

     But thanks for lightening my evening up, I don't care what you said, it 
made me laugh.  :)

       ~Steve~



>
> -- 
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:39:53 +0200, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Question: is "comelia" a word?

"Comelia" is a name.


-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

"Fredrik Eriksson" <fe79}--at--{yahoo}--dot--{com> wrote in message 
news:op.### [at] e6600bredbandsbolagetse...
> On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:39:53 +0200, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Question: is "comelia" a word?
>
> "Comelia" is a name.

    Ah, ok, so perhaps the lyrics went: "Karma, karma, karma Comelia"?

     Very possible.

      ~Steve~


>
>
> -- 
> FE

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
  >     Ah, ok, so perhaps the lyrics went: "Karma, karma, karma Comelia"?
> 
>      Very possible.
> 
>       ~Steve~

Or "Karma Chameleon".







Wait, why am I admitting to remembering this song?

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Erlang has first-class functions as well as closures. Indeed, there 
>> are warnings in the docs saying things like "take care if you store a 
>> closure in a database that when you fetch it back out to run it, 
>> you're running the same version of the interpreter." :-)
> 
> Ooo. So much for "you can upgrade stuff in-place without shutting down". 
> :-P

Heh. Well, you know, I don't think you can actually upgrade the 
interpreter itself without shutting down the node you're running on. On 
the other hand, you could in theory start up a new interpreter, ship the 
running stuff over to it, then shut down the old one.

Upgrading without shutting anything down is easier when it's only Erlang 
code you're upgrading, and not the VM itself, but you *can* do it with 
enough forethought.

> [Mind you, persistent *closures*? That's got to be a fairly rarely used 
> feature...]

Yah.  That they even mention it boggles my mind.

> The I/O monad is unusual as monads go, but essentially the I/O functions 
> return I/O command objects instead of actually *performing* I/O, 

Yeah, that I figured out. I'm just trying to wrap my head around how 
that would work with (say) the clock, or the status of whether your ISP 
is currently screwy, or something like that, just in terms of 
"referential transparency".

I'm trying to figure out conceptually how you represent "the clock" for 
example in a way that it's "referentially transparent".  Or can you not 
actually do that, and that's the point of a monad?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

"Sabrina Kilian" <"ykgp at vtSPAM.edu"> wrote in message 
news:47fd76c4$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>  >     Ah, ok, so perhaps the lyrics went: "Karma, karma, karma Comelia"?
>>
>>      Very possible.
>>
>>       ~Steve~
>
> Or "Karma Chameleon".

  LOL! That's it!

> Wait, why am I admitting to remembering this song?

  I know, I can't stand it either...

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

>> [Mind you, persistent *closures*? That's got to be a fairly rarely 
>> used feature...]
> 
> Yah.  That they even mention it boggles my mind.

5th rule of software design: If it's technically possible to use your 
product in a certain way, somebody will try to actually use it that way.

You *know* this to be true! ;-)

>> The I/O monad is unusual as monads go, but essentially the I/O 
>> functions return I/O command objects instead of actually *performing* 
>> I/O, 
> 
> Yeah, that I figured out. I'm just trying to wrap my head around how 
> that would work with (say) the clock, or the status of whether your ISP 
> is currently screwy, or something like that, just in terms of 
> "referential transparency".
> 
> I'm trying to figure out conceptually how you represent "the clock" for 
> example in a way that it's "referentially transparent".  Or can you not 
> actually do that, and that's the point of a monad?

I'm going to go with "you can't - hence the monad".

The "get time" function just returns an I/O command object. You can 
replace that function call with the command object it returns and the 
meaning of the program is left completely unchanged. Thus it is 
referentially transparent.

The Haskell runtime actually *gets* the clock time, and it does this 
theoretically "after" the Haskell code has already been run and 
generated its giant command object, so...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Sabrina Kilian wrote:

> Or "Karma Chameleon".
> Wait, why am I admitting to remembering this song?

 >:-D Hahahaha!

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message