00:03 (join) dnolen
00:09 (quit) spike2251: Ping timeout: 244 seconds
00:13 (quit) dnolen: Ping timeout: 248 seconds
00:29 (quit) EmmanuelOga: Ping timeout: 244 seconds
01:29 (join) realitygrill
02:02 (quit) freakazoid: Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.
02:08 (join) veer
02:14 (quit) realitygrill: Remote host closed the connection
02:14 (join) realitygrill
02:32 (quit) yoklov: Quit: Leaving.
02:39 (quit) veer: Read error: Connection reset by peer
03:10 (quit) jonrafkind: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
03:13 (quit) realitygrill: Quit: realitygrill
03:23 (quit) tfb: Quit: gone
03:27 (quit) mithos28: Quit: mithos28
03:30 (join) Blkt
03:35 Blkt: good morning everyone
03:35 Blkt: (yes, it is a /amsg, but I love to greet everyone)
03:36 (join) karswell
03:42 (quit) Shviller: Read error: Connection reset by peer
03:42 (join) Shviller
04:20 (join) sindoc
04:31 (join) ahinki
04:43 (join) Demosthenes
04:43 (quit) sethalves: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
04:46 (join) sethalves
04:47 (quit) Demosthenes: Read error: Connection reset by peer
04:48 (join) Demosthenes
05:15 (join) masm
05:58 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
06:03 (join) ahinki
06:08 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
06:09 (join) ahinki
06:11 (quit) Demosthenes: Ping timeout: 255 seconds
06:12 (join) Demosthenes
06:24 (quit) SeanTAllen: Remote host closed the connection
06:42 (join) SeanTAllen
06:44 (join) ahinki_
06:47 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
06:47 (nick) ahinki_ -> ahinki
06:47 (quit) karswell: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
06:48 (join) karswell
07:09 (nick) chaozzbubi -> ChaozZBubi
07:11 (quit) Demosthenes: Read error: Connection reset by peer
07:12 (join) Demosthenes
07:29 (quit) karswell: Ping timeout: 255 seconds
07:32 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
07:38 (join) ahinki
07:43 (nick) ChaozZBubi -> chaozzbubi
08:07 (join) karswell
08:14 (quit) karswell: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
08:30 (nick) chaozzbubi -> ChaozZBubi
08:31 (quit) sethalves: Quit: ERC Version 5.1.4 (IRC client for Emacs)
08:33 (join) veer
08:38 (join) sethalves
08:48 (quit) Demosthenes: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
09:11 (join) ahinki_
09:13 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
09:13 (nick) ahinki_ -> ahinki
09:14 (nick) sethalves -> sethAway
09:20 (join) dnolen
09:20 (quit) dnolen: Client Quit
09:21 (join) metadave
09:27 (join) EmmanuelOga
09:36 (part) metadave: "Leaving"
09:37 (nick) ChaozZBubi -> chaozzbubi
10:14 (join) shadgregory
10:23 (quit) ahinki: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
10:25 (quit) shadgregory: Quit: leaving
10:39 (join) leandrosansilva
10:44 (nick) Nanakhiel -> Qaxz
10:49 (join) freakazoid
11:13 (nick) sethAway -> sethalves
11:13 (quit) freakazoid: Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.
11:16 tauntaun: Whatever happened to that syntactic sugar that lets you define a function in let/letrec without having to write "lambda" explicitly?  I don't see it in the Reference.
11:17 danking: tauntaun: local?
11:18 danking: tauntaun: (local [(define (fact n) (if (zero? n) 1 (* n (fact (sub1 n)))))] ...)
11:19 (join) freakazoid
11:19 tauntaun: danking: 'local' will do, but it's not as terse as the sugar I'm recalling.
11:20 danking: tauntaun: hmm. I don't know then.
11:21 (join) yoklov
11:25 (join) RPR
11:48 (nick) chaozzbubi -> ChaozZBubi
11:49 (quit) veer: Remote host closed the connection
11:56 (quit) freakazoid: Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.
11:59 (join) malkomalko
11:59 (quit) masm: Ping timeout: 268 seconds
12:02 (join) shadgregory
12:04 (join) karswell
12:11 (quit) Blkt: Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)
12:27 asumu: tauntaun: Do you mean the let loop style?
12:28 asumu: rudybot: eval (let loop ([x 5]) (if (zero? x) (0) (cons x (loop (- x 1)))))
12:28 rudybot: asumu: your sandbox is ready
12:28 rudybot: asumu: error: procedure application: expected procedure, given: 0 (no arguments)
12:29 asumu: rudybot: eval (let loop ([x 5]) (if (zero? x) '(0) (cons x (loop (- x 1)))))
12:29 rudybot: asumu: ; Value: (5 4 3 2 1 0)
12:40 (join) mithos28
12:49 (join) masm
12:50 tauntaun: asumu: no, I'm not talking about named let.
12:51 tauntaun: The syntax I'm recalling was available in PLT Scheme about 14 years ago.  Was just wondering if it's still around.
12:55 (quit) mithos28: Quit: mithos28
13:20 (join) freakazoid
13:29 (join) shofetim
13:29 shofetim: is there a list of latex dependancies for scribble anywhere? scribble --pdf is dying and it looks like latex can't find everything it wants...
13:33 RacketCommitBot: [racket] plt pushed 3 new commits to master: http://git.io/pKI62Q
13:33 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] fix for `scribble --text' and tables - Matthew Flatt
13:33 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] int -> intptr_t fixes - Matthew Flatt
13:33 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] win64: fix JIT SSE-based FP - Matthew Flatt
13:35 (part) sindoc
13:52 (quit) leandrosansilva: Read error: Connection reset by peer
14:08 offby1: eli, or whoever's responsible: it is a real pleasure to use the racket documentation on the web; it's so fast -- even searching -- that I don't feel the need to use the local pages.
14:12 (quit) Oxryly: 
14:16 (join) Oxryly
14:18 bremner: yeah, that is nice.
14:18 (join) jonrafkind
14:28 offby1: hmm, with gracket-text, I just evaluated (plot), and got back a #(struct:object:image-snip% ...).  How do I render that?
14:33 yoklov: they have a "draw" function which can take a dc.  (also i think drracket will automatically draw them as output)
14:34 yoklov: http://docs.racket-lang.org/gui/snip_.html?q=image-snip#(meth._(((lib._racket/snip..rkt)._snip~25)._draw)) ?
14:38 yoklov: is that what you mean?
14:45 (quit) yoklov: Quit: Page closed
14:46 RacketCommitBot: [racket] plt pushed 2 new commits to master: http://git.io/TN7IcA
14:46 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] Fixes and improvements to `net/unihead'. - Eli Barzilay
14:46 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] More fixes and improvements to `net/unihead'. - Eli Barzilay
14:47 eli: offby1: But you've used it for a ton of time now...
14:59 (join) JoelMcCracken
15:17 Oxryly: eli: (define enum-test (_enum '(a b c d)))
15:17 Oxryly: eli: how do I write an expression to get the value of a (or b or c ....)?
15:21 jonrafkind: you want a bitmask I think
15:21 jonrafkind: and then you can (arith-or) them
15:21 jonrafkind: enums are meant to be mutally exclusive
15:22 Oxryly: heh, my question is more basic. the value of a is zero, how do I access that?
15:22 jonrafkind: what do you mean 'access it'
15:23 jonrafkind: you want to get the value of an enum?
15:23 (join) anRch
15:23 Oxryly: jonrafkind: yes
15:24 jonrafkind: well.. you should never need it
15:24 jonrafkind: what do you need it for?
15:24 Oxryly: jonrafkind: I'm connecting to an API that's returning an enum type and I need to check its value
15:25 jonrafkind: C makes no distinction between enum and bitmasks, so people abuse enum and put bitmasks in there, but you have that ability in racket
15:25 jonrafkind: if it was truly an enum then you wouldn't need the value since there would only be one value for any enum
15:26 jonrafkind: but you are saying the API returns 0x1 | 0x4000 or something and you want to check for each of those values, right?
15:26 Oxryly: jonrafkind: yes... by referring to the names I've typed out defining the enum type
15:26 jonrafkind: but im saying you can use a bitmask instead of an enum to accomplish this
15:27 jonrafkind: just change _enum to _bitmask
15:27 Oxryly: jonrafkind: no, I have a foreign function that is returning a value of type enum-test (as I defined above). I'd like to see if that value equals a, b, c, or d. I just don't know the syntax to do that
15:28 jonrafkind: (case (some-ffi-function) [(a) ...] [(b) ...]) ...)
15:28 Oxryly: oh
15:28 jonrafkind: you will get a symbol out of it so you can call (member (some-ffi-function) '(a b c)) too
15:28 Oxryly: oh the ffi turns the value into a symbol! i see
15:29 Oxryly: I thought I could type something like enum-test-a and it would yield 0
15:30 (quit) RPR: Read error: Operation timed out
15:31 (join) RPR
15:32 jonrafkind: thats a good question I think, how to get the actual value of an enum
15:33 jonrafkind: probably a function should be added to the ffi
15:34 Oxryly: well I believe the symbol approach will work well for my purposes
15:36 (join) yoklov
15:36 jonrafkind: yea, its worked for me too. i havent needed to convert an enum to a number in racket yet
15:38 (quit) RPR: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
15:44 (join) MayDaniel
15:50 (quit) karswell: Read error: Operation timed out
16:01 RacketCommitBot: [racket] plt pushed 1 new commit to master: http://git.io/A69DpQ
16:01 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] mysterx: fix private/mxmain hack to avoid cross-module optimization - Matthew Flatt
16:05 offby1: eli: sure, I've used it for a ton of time.  But better late than never
16:05 offby1: yoklov: I haven't read the doc you pointed me to (too busy) but if it "takes a DC", it's probably not what I want, since I don't know what a DC is nor how to get one.
16:08 yoklov: oh
16:09 yoklov: how would you like to render it?
16:09 yoklov: to an image?
16:09 yoklov: dc=drawing context (i think)
16:13 (join) dyoo
16:13 yoklov: regardless, (send (send an-image-snip get-bitmap) save-file "an-image-snip.png" 'png) would save it to a file
16:16 yoklov: if you just want to look at it your best bet is using drracket as it automatically displays image snips.
16:20 (quit) dyoo: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
16:28 (quit) EmmanuelOga: Ping timeout: 244 seconds
16:32 yoklov: or if you want it to be in an window you can do it like this https://gist.github.com/1507796
16:37 (quit) JoelMcCracken: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
17:04 (nick) ChaozZBubi -> chaozzbubi
17:07 (quit) shofetim: Read error: Connection reset by peer
17:16 eli: offby1: :)
17:17 eli: Oxryly: Using _enum means that you send out these symbols and you receive the symbols back -- the ffi is taking care to translate input symbols to numbers, and translate output numbers to symbols for you.
17:22 (quit) malkomalko: Remote host closed the connection
17:23 (quit) MayDaniel: Read error: Connection reset by peer
17:30 tonyg: I find myself requiring both racket/set and racket/match. I should clearly first require racket/game.
17:31 jao: tonyg, :)
17:36 (join) RPR
17:49 Oxryly: eli: got it... thanks!
18:06 (quit) anRch: Quit: anRch
18:24 (join) AlbireoX
18:24 Qaxz: offby1, do you still love me?
18:24 AlbireoX: Hey
18:24 AlbireoX: what's so good about racket?
18:25 Qaxz: Euhhrr
18:25 yoklov: haha, compared to what?
18:25 Qaxz: It has batteries included some would say.
18:25 yoklov: ^
18:25 Qaxz: Compared to cake, it doesn't ruin your teeth.
18:25 Qaxz: Compared to women, it never menstruates
18:25 Qaxz: compared to men, it doesn't become a total jerk all off the sudden
18:26 Qaxz: compared to US head of states, it doesn't start wars for vaguely inexplicable reasons
18:26 Qaxz: So yeah
18:26 Qaxz: good stuff there
18:27 (quit) shadgregory: Quit: leaving
18:27 jonrafkind: AlbireoX, it has an extensive macro system
18:27 yoklov: seriously though, it's a really great programming language with a really full and diverse standard library
18:28 Qaxz: You mean 'library', there is no 'standard' libarry since it has only one implementation
18:28 yoklov: yup, that's what i mean then
18:28 Qaxz: Not to mention the macro system is hygienic
18:28 Qaxz: so even better for your teeth.
18:32 (join) realitygrill
18:33 (join) jeapostrophe
18:35 (quit) jeapostrophe: Client Quit
18:35 (join) jeapostrophe
18:37 (join) realitygrill_
18:37 (quit) realitygrill: Read error: Connection reset by peer
18:37 (nick) realitygrill_ -> realitygrill
18:42 (quit) realitygrill: Ping timeout: 276 seconds
18:48 (join) malkomalko
18:53 (quit) jeapostrophe: Quit: leaving
19:13 (quit) acarrico: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
19:27 (quit) masm: Quit: Leaving.
19:31 asumu: AlbireoX: You can program in functional or OO (or ...) style in Racket.
19:31 asumu: And using macros you can turn it into whatever language you want (mostly).
19:39 RacketCommitBot: [racket] plt pushed 3 new commits to master: http://git.io/XRS5sA
19:39 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] remove libfit - Matthew Flatt
19:39 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] slight modernization of the Slideshow tutorial - Matthew Flatt
19:39 RacketCommitBot: [racket/master] src/README corrections (of out-of-date information) - Matthew Flatt
19:49 yoklov: you can't have a first class, er, method, can you?
19:50 yoklov: i guess the term would probably be first class message
19:51 AlbireoX: So why is RAcket better than Python?
19:51 yoklov: more to learn in racket
19:52 yoklov: also its a lisp :P
19:53 (join) sindoc
19:55 yoklov: seriously though AlbireoX, why one programming language is better than another is a hard to say, and the answer is really subjective.
19:56 yoklov: if you value syntactic extensibility in your language, you might prefer racket over python
19:56 yoklov: however if you value the overall readability of the expressions, you might prefer python over racket
19:58 yoklov: those are just examples, but you get my point.
20:01 (join) karswell
20:03 (part) sindoc
20:05 tauntaun: Doesn't Python restrict the length of lambda expressions to one line?
20:05 asumu: yoklov: What do you mean by first class message?
20:06 asumu: (local member names might fit the bill depending on what you mean)
20:06 asumu: rudybot: doc define-local-member-name
20:06 rudybot: asumu: http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/createclass.html#(form._((lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fclass-internal..rkt)._define-local-member-name))
20:06 asumu: yoklov: ^
20:06 tauntaun: yoklov: I'm afraid the answer is not as subjective as all that.
20:07 asumu: AlbireoX: In many people's opinions, Racket has fewer bad design choices than Python. More uniformity.
20:07 asumu: Also, it is extensible so you can fix Racket's warts if you so feel.
20:07 asumu: However, there's no objective answer here.
20:07 tauntaun: ?!
20:07 tauntaun: Excuse me, but it seems to me that Python is *objectively* inferior to Racket.
20:10 bremner: unless you really hate parentheses
20:10 (quit) karswell: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
20:10 asumu: I do think Racket is superior to Python, but I think it depends on what you value.
20:11 asumu: (also, this is a fascinating discussion but I have to go eat dinner so BBL)
20:12 tauntaun: asumu & bremner: it seems to me that the putative "inconvenience" of parentheses is insignificant when compared to the constant silliness of Python's colons, elifs, etc.
20:12 yoklov: parentheses suck when you have to write mathematical expressions.
20:12 yoklov: that is when writing in a lisp is…
20:12 yoklov: less awesome :(
20:12 offby1: it seems to me that dinner is *objectively* superior to all programming languages
20:12 tauntaun: yoklov: and since when is Python used as a substitute for matlab?
20:13 asumu: yoklov: you could write reader syntax for that if it hasn't already. :)
20:13 bremner: since sage/scipy/etc..
20:13 tauntaun: asumu: you keep stressing the extensibility of the parser and the syntax.  But why?
20:13 yoklov: er, at the end of the day you're gonna have to do math in any programming language you choose if you use it long enough
20:13 tauntaun: Racket is *already* superior.
20:14 tauntaun: (and with Racket I include other Schemes and maybe also CL.)
20:14 chandler writes fully parenthesized expressions in any language
20:14 yoklov: I agree, but you have to /learn/ racket before you can extend the reader syntax to be more friendly
20:14 yoklov: by then you dont care
20:15 bremner: syntax wise, I think a more interesting comparison is Haskell, where they really thought about what the syntax should be.
20:15 tauntaun: yoklov: your comment about math is misleading.  None of these languages is commonly used for heavy-duty numerical work.
20:15 yoklov: right
20:15 yoklov: but
20:15 yoklov: this is from real code i've written:
20:15 yoklov: (lerp (fl+ y-center (fl* (fl/ (fl* (fl- 0.5 cz) 2.0) z0) fov))
20:15 yoklov: (fl+ y-center (fl* (fl/ (fl* (fl- 0.5 cz) 2.0) z1) fov))
20:16 bremner: tauntaun: I know several working mathematicians who exclusively use python. Math != numbers
20:16 yoklov: that just sucks.
20:16 tauntaun: bremner: I love Haskell; it's the only language I know who's syntax is arguably (only arguably) better than those of the Lisps.
20:16 bremner: err, numerics
20:16 jonrafkind: people who like prefix syntax suffer from stockholm syndrome
20:16 yoklov: lol
20:17 yoklov: honestly i love writing in lisp, but i think of the syntax as a tradeoff
20:17 jonrafkind: hopefully honu will make you feel better about it
20:17 yoklov: you write the abstract syntax tree directly
20:17 jonrafkind: its racket just with better syntax
20:17 yoklov: and you get the benefits of that
20:17 bremner: I think PLAI explains the lisp position well; something along the lines of, "in this book, we are not very interested in concrete syntax, but very interested in abstract syntax"
20:18 tauntaun: yoklov: well perhaps you might profit from more extensive use of cut & curry?
20:19 offby1 notices the little stick figured in the lower-right of drracket ... after he's been running a few minutes he starts to sweat
20:19 tauntaun: Before anyone fusses about Scheme's concrete syntax, they should take a hard look at those of Python, Ruby, etc.
20:19 offby1: *figure
20:20 yoklov: python and ruby look like pseudocode.  that makes them really attractive to people
20:21 tauntaun: yoklov: Yes, and the concrete syntax of pseudocode is attractive to flies, being something akin to a piece of shit.
20:21 yoklov: lol
20:21 bremner: ok, now you're just being silly/defensive
20:21 yoklov: i'm don't disagree entirely
20:22 yoklov: i just think that prefix notation can be a bit...
20:22 tauntaun: bremner: silly/defensive is a bit wide of the mark.  I am *bitter*.
20:22 bremner: about what? that no-one loves scheme?
20:22 tauntaun: Yes!
20:22 chandler: yoklov: your messy expression would look better without the "fl" operators.
20:23 yoklov: right
20:23 AlbireoX: tauntaun: how are colons sillier than ()()()
20:23 yoklov: i did just copy it right out of existing code though.
20:23 tauntaun: That my students have already heard of crap languages like Ruby and then ask me why we're not studying *that*.
20:23 yoklov: AlbireoX: the parentheses allow you to see what your code is really doing
20:23 AlbireoX: So do the :
20:23 yoklov: not really
20:23 tauntaun: AlbireoX: exactly what is that, anyway?
20:23 yoklov: you have to have significant whitespace
20:23 AlbireoX: Because everything is indented
20:23 yoklov: and the whitespace… sometimes its not clear
20:24 yoklov: indentation doesn't matter at all in racket or lisps
20:24 AlbireoX: when is whitespace not clear
20:24 yoklov: its not clear if you are writing code
20:24 AlbireoX: Yeah, but the indentation allows you to see your code
20:24 yoklov: which writes code
20:24 AlbireoX: How so?
20:24 tauntaun: AlbireoX: you haven't answered my question.  Where did you cook up ()()() from?
20:24 AlbireoX: tauntaun: Experience with racket
20:24 AlbireoX: I'm just saying it uses a lot of parentheses
20:24 tauntaun: AlbireoX: please supply a context.
20:25 tauntaun: ()()() is itself not an expression; just three in a row.
20:25 tauntaun: Where did you find this code?
20:25 yoklov: don't be a jerk
20:25 AlbireoX: -_-
20:26 AlbireoX: <AlbireoX> I'm just saying it uses a lot of parentheses
20:26 yoklov: it does.
20:26 yoklov: there is actually a benefit to that though.
20:26 AlbireoX: (blah (blah))[(blah)]
20:26 AlbireoX: How is that a benefit?
20:26 yoklov: it is not a benefit in and of itself
20:26 yoklov: but
20:26 yoklov: it allows you to perform really incredible metaprogramming
20:26 chandler: AlbireoX: Parens and significant whitespace are actually quite similar. If you are used to indentation signifying blocks of code, then you can quickly eyeball a program and see its structure. Similarly, if you're used to s-expressions, you see past the parens and read the abstract syntax of the program.
20:27 tauntaun: AlbirreoX: because it's better than if ( blah ): then blah(blah) else: blah
20:27 tauntaun: (or whatever)
20:27 AlbireoX: tauntaun: how so?
20:27 tauntaun: Guess which one's terser?
20:27 tauntaun: og
20:27 AlbireoX: python is less terse
20:27 tauntaun: Exactly.
20:27 AlbireoX: i mean
20:27 AlbireoX: less words
20:27 chandler: Significant whitespace seems intuitive if you're used to the common indentation style used in languages like C and JavaScript. But it wouldn't have been so intuitive to me when I was starting programming, because nobody used indentation in Applesoft BASIC.
20:28 chandler: (well, I'm sure *somebody* did, but it wasn't me!)
20:28 AlbireoX: Ok, so let's say you have a 1000 line program in python
20:28 tauntaun: ...yes?
20:28 AlbireoX: Since you guys don't think whitespace matters, it'd be 200 in racket
20:28 AlbireoX: Could you really read that racket better?
20:28 tauntaun: Of *course*
20:28 chandler: Lines aren't really a good measure of anything.
20:28 yoklov: ^
20:29 AlbireoX: (define (divideByZero num1 num2)(if (= num2 0) "Infinity and beyond." (/ num1 num2))
20:29 tauntaun: Btw, whitespace and indentation do matter to good Scheme style.
20:29 AlbireoX: tauntaun: so why not use Python
20:29 AlbireoX: if you're indenting anyway
20:29 chandler: And it might not be 200 lines of Racket. It might be 1500 lines of Racket. Nobody outside of the very passionate set of language warriors on the internet cares.
20:29 yoklov: the parentheses just help remove any ambiguity
20:29 AlbireoX: One : vs 3 ( if ()
20:29 AlbireoX: How is indentation ambiguous at all?
20:30 tauntaun: AlbireoX: we're just going around in circles now.  The Python equivalent of what you wrote takes longer to read and longer to write.
20:30 AlbireoX: longer to read?
20:30 AlbireoX: how?
20:30 bremner: anyway if terseness is your main issue, apl, haskell and probably ten other languages are terser than both python and racket
20:31 tauntaun: Because you're eye has to scan and parse silly keywords like 'then' and 'else' and even sillier colons, and the whole thing has to be laid out on more lines than is necessary.  I feel like I'm repeating myself. :-(
20:31 yoklov: the parentheses make it syntactically pure
20:31 bremner: terseness doesn't matter until you lose it completely and get java
20:31 tauntaun: you're -> your
20:31 AlbireoX: "then" and "else" aren't silly
20:31 AlbireoX: they're readable
20:31 bremner: tauntaun: thank you for that important point.
20:31 yoklov: yeah, but they dont really mean anything.
20:32 yoklov: lisps express exactly the same thing without those
20:32 tauntaun: AlbireoX: Best of luck! Happy Holidays! :-)
20:32 yoklov: just using parentehses to indicate the structure
20:32 AlbireoX: luck?
20:32 AlbireoX: They mean the same thing
20:32 AlbireoX: they're just more readable
20:33 AlbireoX: and you still need ( if ()
20:33 AlbireoX: vs if blah:
20:33 chandler: It's not more readable or less readable. It's just different.
20:33 bremner: AlbireoX: you're not going to convert anyone here to python. Most of us already know python
20:34 AlbireoX: But you're adding extra symbols with Racket
20:34 AlbireoX: ( if () = 3
20:34 AlbireoX: if : = 1
20:34 bremner: ok, either say something interesting, or I'm out of this conversation.
20:35 AlbireoX: I'm saying, why use Racket when you can use python?
20:35 yoklov: AlbireoX: have you ever heard of a macro
20:35 chandler: AlbireoX: To answer your original question, which I don't think has yet received a satisfactory answer, where Racket excels is in solving a fundamental challenge of software design that's ill addressed outside of the Lisp family.
20:35 AlbireoX: so far all the arguments for racket are bad
20:35 AlbireoX: What is that challenge, chandler
20:35 yoklov: again, have you ever heard of a macro
20:36 AlbireoX: Not in programming, what is it
20:36 yoklov: it allows you to do things like add keywords to the language.
20:36 yoklov: so you could just
20:36 yoklov: define a conditional form
20:36 yoklov: like if
20:36 yoklov: or define a new looping construct
20:36 yoklov: or
20:36 AlbireoX: but why would you need a new construct?
20:37 yoklov: who knows?
20:37 AlbireoX: what's an example
20:37 AlbireoX: If there is one needed, someone can just add to python's source code
20:37 AlbireoX: do you use any macros?
20:37 AlbireoX: that are out of the ordinary
20:37 yoklov: regularly?
20:37 yoklov: i have a few in my init file
20:37 yoklov: h/o
20:37 AlbireoX: like what
20:38 chandler: When writing code, often times the design of the system becomes obscured by the mechanics of making the computer do what you want to do. You're trying to express an idea, and you have in your head certain concepts about how that idea should be expressed, but you find yourself doing certain things - shuffling around state, calling functions to take certain side effects at certain well-defined points in the program execution, etc. - that ...
20:38 chandler: ... detract from the task at hand. Eventually, you become bogged down by these operations. They slow your progress and your understanding of the task at hand.
20:38 tauntaun: AlbireoX: why troll #racket when you could troll #stubborn?
20:38 yoklov: and Albireox: "someone can just add to python's source code" isn't really true.
20:38 AlbireoX: yoklov: it's an open source project
20:38 yoklov: right
20:38 yoklov: but
20:38 yoklov: they might not add it
20:39 yoklov: and then you'd be rolling it yourself
20:39 yoklov: and its really
20:39 yoklov: a terrible idea
20:39 yoklov: and plus it would be harder
20:39 yoklov: you could introduce variable capture
20:39 yoklov: and have very hard to detect bugs
20:39 yoklov: and you can't just
20:39 chandler: Where Racket excels is that it gives you the power to clean that cruft away from your program - to write it *once* as it ought to be written, and not spread across dozens of places where it blocks your ability to see what your program is actually doing.
20:39 yoklov: add a few lines of code
20:39 yoklov: and have this new piece of syntax in your program
20:40 yoklov: easy as writing a function
20:40 yoklov: in terms of typing at least
20:40 AlbireoX: so why not use a function?
20:40 yoklov: also python is in c, right?
20:40 yoklov: macros are a lot like functions
20:40 yoklov: but
20:40 yoklov: macros operate on the code they are given
20:40 yoklov: wheras
20:41 chandler: Very occasionally, the maintainers of languages like Python will add something new to the language to address a very common concern, but the authors of Racket have also done so, and further empowered you to do so when you need it, even if *your* concerns aren't the same as the concerns of other users of the language.
20:41 yoklov: functions operate on the values in that code
20:41 chandler: yoklov: You're missing the forest for the trees.
20:41 yoklov: i know its not a really great explanation
20:41 yoklov: but
20:41 (join) Camaroow
20:42 AlbireoX: So why would you need to use a macro/
20:42 AlbireoX: Why not just import a library?
20:42 Camaroow: Macros can be made in many different languages, what makes racket special?
20:42 yoklov: are you referring to c macros?
20:43 yoklov: or other lisp macros
20:43 Camaroow: Or are you referring to TeachPacks?
20:43 yoklov: what?
20:43 AlbireoX: ?
20:43 AlbireoX: No, I'm saying, why not use a python module to accomplish what you want?
20:44 yoklov: what if you wanted to add javascript style prototypal inheritance to your language.
20:44 yoklov: for example.
20:44 Camaroow: Or why not use Scheme?
20:44 yoklov: oh.
20:44 yoklov: racket has more libraries than scheem
20:45 yoklov: thats why i use it over scheme at least
20:45 Camaroow: But you can't redfine in racket, there are only constants.
20:45 Camaroow: redefine*
20:45 yoklov: err
20:45 (quit) jonrafkind: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
20:45 chandler: AlbireoX: Recently I found myself working with a binary data format which was defined as a sequence of <Tag, Length, Value> tuples. The tag was four bytes, the length also four bytes, and the value had the specified length.
20:46 yoklov: Camaroow: that's not true /at all/
20:46 yoklov: how do you use rudybot?
20:46 chandler: Each type of tag had to be handled in a very specific way. But I wasn't just working with one such format; there were several such formats, and each tag meant something different in each one.
20:47 yoklov: rudybot init racket
20:47 yoklov: *crosses fingers*
20:47 chandler: Wouldn't it be nice if my programming language had a control structure that would deal with this directly?
20:47 AlbireoX: chandler: Yeah, it's called an object
20:47 chandler: ?
20:47 yoklov: Camaroow: do (define x 3) (set! x 5) (displayln x) in racket
20:47 yoklov: and
20:47 chandler: This tag-length-value format is handled in Python directly?
20:48 yoklov: you'll see 5
20:48 yoklov: not constant.
20:48 AlbireoX: make a MyTuple(data)
20:48 bremner: rudybot: init racket
20:48 rudybot: bremner: your sandbox is ready
20:48 AlbireoX: you can define the class yourself
20:48 AlbireoX: You don't have to modify the behavior of the language
20:48 AlbireoX: Just add a new class
20:48 chandler: Macros don't modify the behavior of the language; they *extend* the behavior of the language.
20:49 AlbireoX: Ok, you don't have to extend the language
20:49 AlbireoX: Just define the class yourself
20:50 Camaroow: yoklov: They are teaching Racket at my school and you can not do:
20:50 Camaroow: (define x = 5)
20:50 Camaroow: (x = 2)
20:50 yoklov: ah
20:50 yoklov: well
20:50 yoklov: you can't have an = sign there
20:50 yoklov: rudybot: init racket
20:50 rudybot: yoklov: your sandbox is ready
20:50 yoklov: rudybot: (define x 3)
20:50 rudybot: yoklov: Done.
20:50 yoklov: rudybot: (display x)
20:50 rudybot: yoklov: ; stdout: "3"
20:50 Camaroow: Well I forget the racket syntax, but it will say "X is already defined you can not redfine it".
20:51 yoklov: rudybot: (set! x 5)
20:51 rudybot: yoklov: Done.
20:51 yoklov: rudybot: (display x)
20:51 rudybot: yoklov: ; stdout: "5"
20:51 Camaroow: I use the ide DrRacket...
20:51 yoklov: Right
20:51 Camaroow: My teacher is MrSchmurr.
20:51 yoklov: err
20:51 yoklov: okay.
20:51 offby1: Camaroow: a new tool in the Racket toolkit
20:52 AlbireoX: yoklov: (set! x 5) is not easier than "x = 5"
20:52 Camaroow: offby1: What? i am not sure what version we use, all I know is that you can't redfine variables.
20:52 yoklov: AlbireoX: thats true, but you shouldn't be changing the value of variables anyway
20:53 yoklov: Camaroow: you can't use define twice on the same variable.
20:53 Camaroow: Plus there aren't any classes in racket, there are rkt files but you can say class className implements otherClassName {
20:53 yoklov: so...
20:53 Camaroow: }
20:53 yoklov: err
20:53 yoklov: just don't.
20:53 Camaroow: Just don't what?
20:53 Camaroow: Just don't use a better language?
20:53 yoklov: define the same thing twice
20:53 yoklov: no
20:53 yoklov: and racket has classes
20:53 yoklov: (require racket/class)
20:54 Camaroow: That adds a racket file but you don't have to put define the class name at the top or anything
20:54 AlbireoX: yoklov: Why not change the value of a variable? It's a variable.
20:54 yoklov: (define class-name (class other-class-name … ) )
20:54 yoklov: AlbireoX, because if you dont change the state of the variables, you don't have to worry about timing.
20:55 yoklov: if you don't mutate any values
20:55 yoklov: time doesnt exist
20:55 AlbireoX: timing?
20:55 Camaroow: File>new file>nameofFile
20:55 yoklov: and you never have to wonder what the value of x is
20:55 Camaroow: then just start typing:
20:55 Camaroow: (define x 5)
20:55 Camaroow: (string-append "no") or something similar
20:55 AlbireoX: what?
20:55 yoklov: by not changing the state of variables you eliminate a /huge/ class of bugs
20:55 yoklov: where you thought something was in this state
20:55 yoklov: but
20:55 Camaroow: /huge/
20:55 yoklov: it wasnt
20:56 yoklov: huge.
20:56 Camaroow: How is racket better then an OOP programing language?
20:56 Camaroow: like java.
20:56 yoklov: hahah
20:56 yoklov: learn scheme and find out.
20:56 bremner: is it sunday?
20:56 yoklov: thats all i can say.
20:56 yoklov: java is painful.
20:56 chandler: AlbireoX: Sorry, I had gotten called away. The point wasn't whether you could *write* a parser for that format in Python (of course you can!) or whether you could use classes to stucture it. The point was to pose a thought experiment: what if that functionality was already built into the language? What if I could just write (in a C-ish pseudocode) tlvSwitch (value in myData) { case TAG_1: ...; case TAG_2: ...; }
20:57 Camaroow: Learn Java, then you will be like "Damn, I should of been coding in java all this time :O."
20:57 yoklov: i know java
20:57 AlbireoX: chandler: There's enums in java where you can do that. Or constants.
20:57 Camaroow: Then you are lieing through your teeth when you say "racket is better"
20:57 chandler: AlbireoX: That doesn't do all the work for you.
20:57 AlbireoX: and in python, you can also do something similar
20:57 AlbireoX: AlbireoX: how does it not do all the work?
20:57 yoklov: alright now i know you are a troll.
20:57 bremner: yep
20:58 chandler: Enums don't magically parse out the value parts based on the tag. You still have to write the mechanics of that yourself.
20:58 Camaroow: TROLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO RACKET SUCKS TORLOLOLOLLOLO TORTILLAS!!!!!!!!!!     JAVA RULESSSS!!!!!! OOP NOT PROCEDURAL!
20:58 Camaroow: sadlsad
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 AlbireoX: chandler: define "value parts"
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: sa;'
20:58 Camaroow: dl;sa
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: as;'
20:58 Camaroow: dsa;
20:58 Camaroow: das;;d
20:58 Camaroow: ;'
20:58 AlbireoX: :o
20:58 Camaroow: SA
20:58 chandler: AlbireoX: As I said, the format consisted of a number of tag-length-value tuples, which are all in one byte stream.
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:58 Camaroow: d
20:59 Camaroow: d
20:59 (part) Camaroow
20:59 chandler: AlbireoX: So the first four bytes are a tag, the second four bytes are a length, and then the N bytes following that are a value. Then another tag-length-value tuple, etc. until the byte string is exhausted.
20:59 AlbireoX: chandler: They don't magically do it. But racket doesn't magically do it either. You have to code a macro.
20:59 chandler: Yes. I'm getting to that.
21:00 chandler: Suppose handling these formats was already baked into your language. Would you use that language feature if you needed it, or would you go write it out longhand each time you needed it? Would you define your own class abstraction and implement some kind of visitor pattern instead of just writing the obvious tlvSwitch statement?
21:01 AlbireoX: You don't even have to do that
21:01 AlbireoX: Make an abstract class
21:01 AlbireoX: inherit from that class
21:01 AlbireoX: Make a class.getValue() thing
21:01 AlbireoX: you won't even need a switch
21:01 AlbireoX: And you can always copy and paste from your own code instead of " write it out longhand each time"
21:02 chandler: You haven't answered the question. Would you do that in preference to using the built-in language feature?
21:02 AlbireoX: Yes, I would do that
21:02 AlbireoX: Because it really isn't built in
21:02 AlbireoX: It's a macro
21:02 chandler: OK. I don't know what to do with that answer. Have fun using Python.
21:02 AlbireoX: And if you move to a different computer, you'll need to copy and paste everything.
21:03 yoklov: thats true with every language.
21:03 AlbireoX: Not really
21:03 (join) Camaroow
21:03 yoklov: err.
21:03 chandler: That applies to your class file too.
21:03 yoklov: ^
21:03 chandler: Macros are just code.
21:03 AlbireoX: chandler: it does, but the class file is part of the code
21:03 chandler: So are macros.
21:04 AlbireoX: Unless macros are stored in the same folder as the project
21:04 Camaroow: package com.bireosoft.opengl;
21:04 Camaroow: import static org.lwjgl.opengl.GL11.*;
21:04 Camaroow: import static org.lwjgl.opengl.GL15.*;
21:04 Camaroow: import java.nio.FloatBuffer;
21:04 Camaroow: import java.nio.IntBuffer;
21:04 (quit) Camaroow: Excess Flood
21:04 chandler: Of course they are.
21:04 chandler: They're stored in the same *file*.
21:04 AlbireoX: Some languages have dependency management, like Java and Maven
21:04 (join) Camaroow
21:04 chandler: Macros are just little bits of code that let me tell the compiler "when I say tlv-switch, this is what I mean: it's a control structure used to parse a byte string...".
21:05 chandler: They're part of the code. They refer to functions I write and are used in functions I write.
21:05 AlbireoX: chandler: so basically it's just an inline function?
21:05 Camaroow: public class Teaching {
21:05 Camaroow: public static void main(String[] args) {
21:05 Camaroow: String stringName = "lol";
21:05 Camaroow: if (stringName.equals("bob")) {
21:05 Camaroow: System.out.println("Hello World!");
21:05 Camaroow: } else if (stringName.equals("david")) {
21:05 Camaroow: System.out.println("Your string does not equal bob, it equals david.");
21:05 Camaroow: }
21:05 Camaroow: }
21:05 Camaroow: public class Teaching {
21:05 Camaroow: public static void main(String[] args) {
21:05 (quit) Camaroow: Excess Flood
21:05 yoklov: lol
21:05 yoklov: what an ass
21:05 AlbireoX: lol
21:06 (join) Camaroow
21:06 AlbireoX: chandler: so why use a macro when a class is just about the same thing?
21:06 yoklov: AlbireoX, you're going to have to just trust that macros aren't just an inline function or class.
21:06 yoklov: really, they're weird.
21:06 chandler: AlbireoX: Sort of. The very first macro systems were built around functions which took parameters that weren't evaluated - in other words, if you called one with the argument X, the function would actually get the symbol X, not the value of the variable X. Over time, the systems have evolved to become easier to program with.
21:06 yoklov: they're unique to lisp
21:07 offby1: I think there are a few non-lisp languages with lisp-like macros
21:07 offby1: can't think of their names offhand
21:07 chandler: Dylan.
21:07 yoklov: factor
21:07 offby1: perl 6
21:07 AlbireoX: so why use a macro when a class is just about the same thing?
21:07 yoklov: lol
21:07 yoklov: its nto
21:07 yoklov: not*
21:07 yoklov: at all.
21:07 Camaroow: rudybot: (for ([i '(1 2 3)])    (display i))
21:07 rudybot: Camaroow: your sandbox is ready
21:07 rudybot: Camaroow: ; stdout: "123"
21:07 AlbireoX: yoklov: what is the difference?
21:07 AlbireoX: IF all you're doing is the tuple stuff
21:08 yoklov: well
21:08 yoklov: i mean
21:08 yoklov: obviously you can do anything in any language
21:08 yoklov: heck
21:08 chandler: AlbireoX: Classes are a very useful way of structuring programs. They aren't a one-size-fits-all tool, though. When you start to see people talking about "design patterns", you can be sure that classes aren't really providing the necessary abstractions.
21:08 offby1: yoklov: well, uh
21:08 yoklov: you could do the tuple stuff in assembly
21:08 yoklov: but
21:08 yoklov: it would suck.
21:08 AlbireoX: chandler: How are they not 1 size fits all?
21:08 yoklov: program more and you'll see yourself writing the same classes a lot
21:08 chandler: Classes are not control structures, for instance.
21:08 AlbireoX: yoklov: No, I'll use a library
21:09 AlbireoX: or a module
21:09 Camaroow: rudybot: (for ([i (in-naturals)])    (display i)))
21:09 rudybot: Camaroow: i guess the real question is... what should EDITOR be set to when [ ! -z $INSIDE_EMACS ] and [ -z $DISPLAY ]?
21:09 yoklov: can't always do that.
21:09 Camaroow: opps
21:09 AlbireoX: yoklov: why not
21:09 Camaroow: (for ([i (in-naturals)])   (display i))
21:09 Camaroow: rudybot: (for ([i (in-naturals)])   (display i))
21:09 chandler: You can implement control structures using classes, but that doesn't mean they *are* classes. The program still screams "I'm using classes here to try to implement a control structure!". The medium becomes the message.
21:09 (quit) rudybot: Remote host closed the connection
21:09 yoklov: sometimes one doesnt exist for what you want to do
21:10 Camaroow: lol
21:10 yoklov: so you have to write a /slightly/ different one.
21:10 Camaroow: rudybot left :(
21:10 Camaroow: rudybot: (define x 5)
21:10 Camaroow: D:
21:10 AlbireoX: chandler: The classes still fit all. They fulfill all of the design patterns.
21:11 AlbireoX: yoklov: You just get the source of the library and modify it
21:11 yoklov: okay well you really can't always do that
21:11 yoklov: has to be open source
21:11 yoklov: also
21:11 AlbireoX: yoklov: and wouldn't mean modifying the macro, anyways?
21:11 yoklov: if you write this as a macro it will just be using the macro differently
21:11 yoklov: not writing a different one.
21:12 AlbireoX: So why not use the library differently?
21:12 Camaroow: rudybot: (for ([i (in-range 1 4)])    (display i))
21:12 chandler: AlbireoX: And given a hammer, all thumbs are nails, etc.
21:12 yoklov: okay so one key thing to think about with programming languages is what abstractions they provide
21:12 AlbireoX: chandler: that's my point. Why use a macro when you already have classes?
21:13 yoklov: ...
21:13 yoklov: nevermind.
21:13 yoklov gives up
21:13 chandler: Because I don't like hitting my thumb with a hammer?
21:13 yoklov: everybody here is a troll.
21:13 yoklov: well
21:13 AlbireoX: chandler: But you guys just proved that they're about the same thing
21:13 Camaroow: yoklov: add back rudybot plesae.
21:13 Camaroow: please
21:13 AlbireoX: <yoklov> if you write this as a macro it will just be using the macro differently
21:13 chandler: I didn't even understand that.
21:13 AlbireoX: You can use libraries differently
21:13 yoklov: lol
21:13 chandler: Libraries are just things other people have written.
21:13 AlbireoX: Yeah
21:13 chandler: Racket has classes, by the way. They're just macros other people have written.
21:14 AlbireoX: And macros are things you've written
21:14 chandler: That doesn't solve all problems.
21:14 AlbireoX: Yoklov said you don't change them
21:14 AlbireoX: You just use them differently
21:14 Camaroow: Macros, as in Keyboard Macros lolzol:?
21:14 AlbireoX: People use libraries for different things
21:14 AlbireoX: That's why they exist
21:14 Camaroow: Libraries are easy with Maven.
21:14 chandler: OK, I give up.
21:14 Camaroow: is there RacketToMaven?
21:15 Camaroow: or MavenToDrRacket?
21:15 Camaroow: So giving up meaning: racket is not superior?
21:15 AlbireoX: So basically, macros are more powerful than classes, but their power doesn't really matter as it just creates new languages.
21:16 Camaroow: Who wants Albireox's ASL?
21:16 Camaroow: Age, Sex, Location?
21:16 AlbireoX: ?
21:16 bremner: AlbireoX: ok, you win. Python is better. We're all going away now.
21:17 tauntaun: AlbireoX: Let's face it.  You're a genius.  Why don't you go join your genius brethen in #brilliant-syntax-better-semantics.
21:18 Camaroow: No his brilliant friends are all at #bukkitdev/#spoutdev
21:19 (part) Camaroow
21:20 AlbireoX: tauntaun: I'm not a genius. The people who made python are the geniuses.
21:21 tauntaun: AlbireoX: Amen. Feel free to join them in #python ;-)
21:22 AlbireoX: i'm already there
21:24 asumu: tauntaun: I stress extensibility because Racketeers often use multiple languages. #lang racket itself is built on a smaller core.
21:24 (join) acarrico
21:24 (join) Camaroow
21:27 tauntaun: asumu: My point was that Scheme syntax is superior even without extensibility.
21:28 (part) Camaroow
21:28 asumu: tauntaun: While I agree with you, I don't think that argument would win over a Pythonista.
21:30 asumu: AlbireoX: If you ever decide you don't like Python's OO system, how do you change it in Python? You're basically beholden to Guido's vision of the language.
21:30 asumu: Not so in Racket or Scheme. You don't like the OO system? Write a macro wrapper over it or write your own.
21:31 asumu: There are also just weird warts in Python. Why are statements and expressions separate? Why is lambda crippled?
21:32 yoklov: tauntaun: honestly i do agree with you almost always
21:32 yoklov: i just think that s expressions have one fatal flaw
21:32 yoklov: and its numeric expressions
21:33 yoklov: 3 + 7 * 5 / 2 - 4 is easier to read and write than  (- (+ 3 (* 7 (/ 5 2))) 4)
21:34 asumu: yoklov: http://planet.racket-lang.org/package-source/soegaard/infix.plt/1/0/scribblings/manual.html
21:34 yoklov: i mean, yeah you cna do stuff like that
21:34 asumu: (I would try it interactively, but rudybot seems to be gone?)
21:34 yoklov: yeah that troll crashed him
21:35 yoklov: but its really not worth it to me to import a library
21:35 yoklov: its a really minor inconvenience
21:35 tauntaun: yoklov: i agree; that's where special reader syntax comes in handy.
21:35 yoklov: yeah
21:36 yoklov: i mean that's not really a feature of s expressions though :p
21:39 yoklov: and really i'm a lisp noob who barely understands normal macros, extending the syntax of the reader sounds like an entire level beyond my comprehension
21:40 asumu: yoklov: It's not too bad. Joan Arnaldich wrote a tutorial sort of article a while back: http://jarnaldich.me/2011/08/07/raw-strings-in-racket.html
21:40 tauntaun: tauntaun: yoklov: yes, I'm agreeing with you on that point.  That is a weakness of S-expressions.
21:41 asumu: I'd argue though that s-expressions are verbose, but it's nice that the order of operations is explicit.
21:41 yoklov: ^
21:42 asumu: Or maybe RPN like on HP calculators would be better.
21:43 yoklov: eh, always seemed equivalent to s expressions to me.
21:46 (quit) freakazoid: Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.
21:48 yoklov: really though, overall, i <3 the parentheses. they make my code feel so much more comfortable
21:53 (part) RPR: "ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)"
21:57 (join) RPR
22:04 (part) rsimoes
22:07 (join) rsimoes
22:15 AlbireoX: asumu: I just don't use python if I don't like Python's OO system. o_0
22:15 AlbireoX: that's kind of the point when using a language
22:15 AlbireoX: If you don't like it, use a different one
22:17 rsimoes: OO in general makes me want to kick puppies =[
22:22 jamessan: it's just like any other paradigm.  there are places it makes sense to use and places it doesn't.
22:32 (quit) malkomalko: Remote host closed the connection
22:34 (quit) RPR: Remote host closed the connection
22:35 Qaxz: AlbireoX, well, what if you like part of the language but dislike anther part?
22:35 Qaxz: The point about Racket, scheme, lisp in general is the extend of customization you enjoy.
22:36 (join) veer
22:38 (join) rackitrocks
22:47 (quit) rackitrocks: Quit: Leaving
22:56 (join) mithos28
23:09 AlbireoX: Qaxz: Then you make your own language.
23:12 Qaxz: Well, there's a investment/reward system, writing a macro is a lot easier than specifiying a whole language an implementing it.
23:13 Qaxz: Anyway, that's one of the things that makes racket cool, the macros, there's other stuff, such as the clearness and simplicity of the language, and it doesn't menstruate, but neither does python I hear/
23:13 Qaxz: In my own person opinion, python is sheer poison to the mind and its use should be prohibited on pain of death, but luckily I have yet to become Dear Leader of this planet. =)
23:15 mithos28: Qaxz: what makes python so bad in your opinion?
23:16 Qaxz: mithos28, I find the syntax exceptionally hard to read and it's pretty clear the language is basically stuck in itself currently
23:16 (join) jonrafkind
23:16 Qaxz: As in the hack upon hack with no foresight syndrome, the discussions on adding a conditional expression were amusing to read
23:16 Qaxz: it was pretty clear they worked themselves in a corner.
23:17 AlbireoX: Qaxz: what's hard to read about it?
23:18 Qaxz: Stuff like a = b if cond else c gets completely cryptic for sufficiently complex expressions, at least to me anyway
23:19 Qaxz: Also, I find the whitespace stuff without a type system tha at least constantly bugs you if you screw it up a bit awkward to work with.
23:19 AlbireoX: Whitespace isn't annoying
23:19 AlbireoX: your editor is just bad
23:19 Qaxz: Anyway, if you want this language to be prohibited on pain of death, then vote for me for Dear Leader of the World, Supreme Commander, Aeternal Praesident.
23:19 Qaxz: Yes it is.
23:20 Qaxz: It is svery annoying
23:20 Qaxz: *objectively*
23:20 AlbireoX: how so?
23:20 mithos28: Qaxz: have you used haskell?
23:20 Qaxz: mithos28, painful painful memories
23:21 Qaxz: "unexpected use of ;, maybe bad layouting"
23:21 mithos28: because of the whitespace or other things?
23:21 Qaxz: 99% of the time, 1% of the time an actual type error
23:21 tauntaun: Qaxz: what's so bad about Haskell?
23:21 Qaxz: well, one of the reasons
23:21 Qaxz: Well, haskell isn't so bad, I just felt they could have gone with less 'mathematical textbook notation' esque syntax.
23:22 Qaxz: And well, I think the typesystem is in the end more impractical than that it's worth a lot
23:22 Qaxz: At least, the errors it caught for me weren't type errors
23:22 tauntaun likes types
23:22 mithos28: what kind of type system do you like then?
23:22 tauntaun: Qaxz: what do you mean?
23:22 Qaxz: they were either due to bad layouting or operator praecidence
23:22 tauntaun: a type error is a type error.
23:22 Qaxz: No, I mean, errors as in bad layouting
23:22 Qaxz: And stuff
23:23 tauntaun: 'layout' isn't a verb.
23:23 Qaxz: Well, you know wha tI mean.
23:23 mithos28: tauntaun: the difference between a conceptual type error, and an error in what you wrote
23:23 Qaxz: Like, especially with using the | notation
23:23 Qaxz: For cas
23:23 Qaxz: For cond*
23:23 Qaxz: Basically
23:23 tauntaun: I don't get it.  That's just syntax.  I never had a problem with that.
23:23 Qaxz: I never really got around how that works, it always says bad layout and I just get it right on trial on error.
23:23 Qaxz: Well, I had.
23:24 Qaxz: It always gives me errors like 'unexpected ;, possibly due to bad layout'
23:24 Qaxz: Then I trial and error some whitespaces and then it works.
23:24 tauntaun: Have you tried getting a Haskell book and imitating its code listings?
23:24 Qaxz: Sure, but I'm pretty bad at it
23:24 (join) aed
23:24 Qaxz: Like, the formal rules for whitespace are pretty complex
23:24 tauntaun: ...bad at typing in code?
23:24 (part) aed
23:24 Qaxz: I think they like you to do it 'on feeling'
23:25 Qaxz: And for some reason I never got a feeling for how to do it in Haskell.
23:25 tauntaun: Well if you're in Emacs, you just hit tab.
23:25 mithos28: It is pretty much indent more if it is a sub expression
23:25 Qaxz: THat'swhat they say
23:25 Qaxz: And I find it a flat out lie.
23:25 tauntaun: Were you using a controlled substance when typing?
23:25 yoklov: is that really what the rule is?
23:26 yoklov: like, is that all it takes to make it work?
23:26 mithos28: yoklov: That is my rule of thumb, I cannot think of a time where it has failed me. But it might not be 100%
23:26 tauntaun: Why are there all these questions?  You just hit tab.
23:27 yoklov: emacs one cycles through a bunch
23:27 yoklov: sometimes the first one looks wrong for the expression i'm about to type
23:27 mithos28: tauntaun: some of use use editors that are from a more civilized age
23:27 tauntaun: ...then hit tab again.
23:27 yoklov: i.e. this needs to be 'where'
23:27 yoklov: and i'm unsure if it matters
23:28 yoklov: if the rule is just "more for subexpressions" i feel like a fool for worrying.
23:28 tauntaun: mithos28: hey, I like emacs, vi, and gedit.  They should all let you just hit tab.
23:28 yoklov: emacs for life
23:28 mithos28: I'm a vim person, but I don't trust its tabbing at all
23:28 AlbireoX: vim
23:29 AlbireoX: vim on unix, sublime on windows
23:29 yoklov: heathens :p
23:29 mithos28: especially in racket, it is awful
23:29 mithos28: but so is anything trying to indent racket, besides maybe check-syntax
23:29 tauntaun: gedit has a nice Haskell mode.
23:30 Qaxz: tauntaun: http://codepad.org/vfko7AHN
23:30 Qaxz: Here we go
23:30 mithos28: the problem is that indentation needs to be more aware than regexps, which is what editors use
23:30 Qaxz: I just made that
23:31 tauntaun: Qaxz: it's nice that you can just make stuff up.  But the way to learn a language is to read a book and imitate it.
23:31 tauntaun is just getting snarkier and snarkier tonight.
23:32 mithos28: just indent because it is a sub expression
23:32 mithos28: line 3 and 4 are sub expressions of the factorial definition
23:33 mithos28: so must be indented more than it
23:33 mithos28: putting 4 spaces at the beginning of those lines fixes the layout errors
23:33 tauntaun: Actually I wouldn't indent the guards at all; I'd start them on the same line as 'factorial n'.
23:33 tauntaun: But even that's wrong.
23:34 tauntaun: You should have two 'fact' lines: one for 0, and one for n.
23:34 tauntaun: But what's the point of fixing specific errors?  The way to learn is to learn systematically, from a book.
23:36 mithos28: tauntaun: the '|' needs to be at least on the 'a' column of factorial otherwise it is a parse error. Also I agree that two fact lines is the better way to write it
23:37 Qaxz: tauntaun, http://codepad.org/yNuQvDME ah, I got it to work
23:38 Qaxz: tauntaun, books seldom explain the layouting, they just say 'indend sub expressions a level deeper', and they are flat out lying when they say that because it doesn't work at all in a lot of cases.
23:38 tauntaun rolls his eyes.
23:38 mithos28: which cases?
23:38 tauntaun: I liked you better when you were a misogynist, and I definitely liked you better when you were Lajla.
23:39 tauntaun: Btw, prefer 'where' to 'let'.  This is Haskell, not Scheme.
23:39 Qaxz: mithos28, the case right there
23:39 Qaxz: where apparently indenting deeper wasn't enough, it had to be intended even deeper or something.
23:40 Qaxz: And apparently (++ " " ++) doesn't work, oh well.
23:40 Qaxz: I expected it to, never used it.
23:40 mithos28: you indented the guard even less than the definition of factorial, so yes it didn't work
23:40 Qaxz: Why is it not a nesting of let but of factorial?
23:41 mithos28: because factorial is nested inside the let
23:41 Qaxz: THen why is factorial not indented?
23:41 Qaxz: Can you put the guards on the same line by the way?
23:41 Qaxz: I never tried
23:41 mithos28: what do you mean factorial is not indented?
23:42 (join) dnolen
23:42 Qaxz: http://codepad.org/TQb8in3Y this works
23:42 Qaxz: Ahh, yeah
23:42 Qaxz: I can dick that
23:42 Qaxz: ehh
23:42 Qaxz: dig
23:42 Qaxz: Yeah, totally dig that.
23:42 mithos28: Qaxz: it is indented two more columns then let in that example
23:43 Qaxz: But it's on the same line
23:43 Qaxz: there's just a space.
23:43 mithos28: in the previous one (where they are on the same line) it is 4 more columns
23:45 Qaxz: What
23:45 Qaxz: I do not follow.
23:45 mithos28: look at what column the 'f' is on versus the 'l'
23:46 (quit) jao: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
23:50 mithos28: has anyone on here used whalesong?
23:52 offby1: dyoo shows up occasionally
23:52 mithos28: yeah, i'd ask him but its late in providence, and he's not online
23:53 (join) rudybot
23:56 (quit) acarrico: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
23:56 Qaxz: mithos28, I do not understand, this is much too advanced for me.
23:57 mithos28: Just look at examples and eventually it will become second nature