00:03:03 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:03:48 -!- phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:13:06 -!- YokYok [~david@AClermont-Ferrand-651-1-24-147.w86-194.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Quit: leaving] 00:16:07 Could we take a second to turn to exercise 1-5 of SICP, and evaluate the definition (define (p) (p))? Is this the equivalent to a while(1){} in C? 00:16:20 If I run (p) in the interpreter, I cannot exit. heh. 00:18:54 O_o 00:19:14 I got lisp works 00:19:22 can I use that to program Scheme 00:19:26 or I need something else 00:19:34 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 00:19:35 No, that's Common Lisp, not Scheme. 00:19:41 (which is discussed at #lisp) 00:19:56 so what I need to run scheme 00:20:04 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 00:21:33 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Client Quit] 00:21:54 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 00:24:39 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 00:25:59 Indian, DrRacket 00:26:22 DrDuck, true 00:26:59 weirdo, true as in? 00:27:12 ________________ <---------- Fill in that blank right there. 00:27:32 DrDuck, it's equivalent to an infinite loop, yes 00:28:29 is racket and drracket same? 00:28:52 Well how do you represent (p) if you're tearing down abstraction for applicative and normal order evaluation for exercise 1-5, or is it not even necessary since x is always 0? 00:29:13 hmm it says racket language? 00:36:31 Indian, drracket is a GUI for racket. and racket has support for r[567]rs 00:36:43 ok 00:37:52 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 00:47:27 So for applicative order evaluation, tearing away abstraction is of the operand parameters are of the highest priority and in normal order evaluation, tearing away abstraction from operands is of the highest priority until it's absolutely necessary to start on the operand parameters? 00:50:41 no idea what you're talking about, sorry 00:51:29 Open up your SICP. 00:53:26 i've never read it 00:54:44 weirdo: Not R7RS yet! 00:57:47 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@c-24-5-7-139.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: realitygrill] 00:58:33 cky, would you like to make things clear for me? 00:59:58 DrDuck: Uh, okay. 01:00:20 :{F 01:00:45 DrDuck: (define (p) (p)) does indeed define a function that does an infinite loop. 01:01:21 http://pastebin.com/pBTEteNK 01:01:26 That was my interpretation. 01:01:50 Wanting to get a good grasp of applicative and normal order evaluation. 01:03:06 I just loaded racket 01:03:11 it looks cool 01:03:18 I need to get my hands dirty 01:03:43 DrDuck: Almost. Normal-order would say: (if (= x 0) 0 (p)), and since (p) is not evaluated, it just returns 0. 01:03:48 weirdo: what is the difference between common LISP and scheme 01:04:02 Indian: That's like asking what the difference between Perl and JS is. :-) 01:04:24 Indian: They're very different languages; it's not easy to make a meaningful comparison between the two. 01:04:28 Lisp is a family of languages 01:04:31 ok 01:04:38 to which Scheme belongs 01:05:04 so why you guys prefer scheme to CLISP 01:05:37 cky, I thought the book said interpreters tend to lean more towards normal order evaluation. If that's the case, why did my interpreter just jump into a infinite loop? 01:05:38 :< 01:05:46 When calling (test 0 (p)) 01:05:49 . 01:06:26 where did it say that? 01:06:30 most interpreters are applicative order 01:06:35 unless you're using haskell 01:07:04 Oh. I see. 01:07:06 You're right, 01:07:09 Indian, scheme has call/cc, other dialects generally do not 01:07:13 I'm looking at it on page 17. 01:07:28 "Lisp uses applicative-order evaluation, [. . .]." 01:07:31 Sorry. 01:07:34 Scheme is required to do applicative-order. 01:08:18 DrDuck: Scheme does not use normal-order. 01:08:29 DrDuck: What jcowan said. 01:08:37 Right. 01:08:42 I see it in the book now. 01:09:02 call/cc 01:09:08 what is that 01:09:23 Indian: It allows you to access hyperspace in your program. 01:09:24 :-P 01:09:29 ok 01:09:43 (Sorry, I was being facetious.) 01:09:43 you can kind of fake other orders by wrapping arguments within lambdas or promises 01:10:21 -!- rageous [~chatzilla@67-6-75-73.mpls.qwest.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:12:12 Indian: Don't worry about continuations for now. Once you've finished reading HtDP and learnt more Scheme, you can then read http://pl.barzilay.org/lec27.txt. 01:12:37 ok 01:12:39 cool 01:13:03 Indian: (call/cc is a short name for call-with-current-continuation, hence it has everything to do with continuations (or "hyperspace" as I joking referred to them above).) 01:13:43 cky: but why is not scheme popular as other languages 01:14:03 Indian: Because it has a steeper learning curve than "popular" languages. 01:14:10 ok 01:14:17 sounds good 01:14:19 Indian: A lot of "mainstream" programmers don't like to think functionally. 01:14:52 programming language popularity exhibits positive feedback dynamics 01:15:07 cky: english is not my first lnaguage 01:15:09 turbofail: Just like keyboard layouts. *ducks* 01:15:23 so can you please tell what you mean functionally in this context 01:16:02 Indian: Functional programming is a style of programming that encourages immutable objects. Immutable objects are objects whose contents do not change. 01:16:05 "Functional programming" is programming through the use of functions only, without state variables that can be altered. 01:16:21 To "change" the content of objects, you create a new object with the new values, instead. 01:16:22 then again just about everything involving groups of humans results in some sort of positive feedback dynamics 01:16:52 No it doesn't! 01:17:22 *jcowan* strives to provoke positive feedback 01:17:31 YES IT DOES 01:17:39 *turbofail* launches nukes 01:17:50 so what does immutable objects give? more control of the program? 01:17:51 TISSO 01:18:19 Indian: Immutable objects are easier to reason about, since you don't have to think about what value it has "at a given point in time". 01:18:24 Indian: Possibilities for optimization that don't exist when there are mutations whose order must be carefully controlled. 01:18:26 Its value is always the same, no matter what time. 01:18:54 Indian: Also, immutable objects are much easier to use with concurrent programming; for example, no synchronisation is necessary when using the same immutable object between different threads. 01:19:15 nice 01:19:19 sound interesting 01:19:35 Yes, I like it very much. 01:19:50 I try to use functional programming at work whenever possible, but it's hard to convince workmates to do the same. :-) 01:20:04 I wish they teach this stuff in CS graducation programmes in India 01:20:33 phax [~phax@adsl-68-73-148-217.dsl.ipltin.ameritech.net] has joined #scheme 01:20:33 -!- phax [~phax@adsl-68-73-148-217.dsl.ipltin.ameritech.net] has quit [Changing host] 01:20:33 phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has joined #scheme 01:20:47 It's okay. You learn this stuff when you do "real" programming. :-) 01:21:01 cky: I dont do programming at all 01:21:02 Another benefit of immutable objects is that identical instances can be coalesced, and you can intern instances. 01:21:06 I like to read code 01:21:09 success. 01:21:10 (_GENSYM_290 = number) 01:21:10 Indian: Hehehehe, I see. 01:21:35 coalesced, and you can intern instances. 01:21:44 what is that coalesced 01:21:58 example would be good 01:22:36 Okay, here's an example (in Java): In Java, all strings are immutable. So if you want to have two strings "Hello, world!" in your program, they can point to the same string instance, with no possibility of failure. 01:23:27 Since the string can't be changed, there is no problem even if two completely unrelated parts of the program used the same string instance. 01:23:51 Whereas if strings could be changed, and two unrelated parts of the program used the same string instance, then if one part changed the string, it would inadvertantly affect the other part also. 01:24:17 ok 01:24:44 So you are either copying strings all the time to be safe, or using a complex protocol to determine who owns what objects at what times. 01:24:53 but is it not give the programmer a choice to decide between mutable and immutable objects? 01:25:20 Indian: Java does give you a choice: you can use a StringBuilder (mutable) to build a String (immutable). 01:25:40 Or use a character array as a mutable string equivalent. 01:25:49 scheme decides to give you mutable strings by default for some reason 01:25:52 That too, but then you have to implement your own array expansion. 01:26:02 but you think avoiding mutable is altogther a good pratice 01:26:14 Indian: I think immutable _by default_ is a good practice. 01:26:24 Well, one must model the Real World sometimes where things change. 01:26:27 Indian: Of course sometimes there are cases where mutable is more useful. But those should be limited. 01:26:36 But using mutability carefully and selectively makes for better programs. 01:26:37 ok 01:27:09 can one use mutable objects in scheme at all by any other means 01:27:26 erm, well, embarrassingly, essentially all objects in Scheme are mutable. 01:27:39 But you have the facilities to do without mutation. 01:28:10 So, the use of immutable objects in Scheme is more like a social contract, rather than be something that is enforced by the system. 01:28:40 ok 01:28:42 -!- zmv [~daniel@c95334de.virtua.com.br] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 01:28:45 sweet 01:28:46 if you do end up using mutability in scheme, though, you have to shout a lot in your code 01:29:14 -!- hussaibi__ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:29:16 which presumably discourages people from doing so 01:29:22 I just picked up racket and the intial syntax looks like common LISP 01:29:34 hussaibi__ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 01:29:37 Indian: Syntax is skin deep. 01:29:53 Indian: The actual underlying semantics are markedly different. 01:29:58 ok 01:31:27 hussaibi [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 01:34:22 -!- hussaibi_ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 01:34:30 hussaibi_ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 01:34:36 -!- hussaibi__ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 01:35:22 -!- betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 01:38:23 betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has joined #scheme 01:46:50 -!- phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 01:53:57 i could really use stamourv's knowledge to my ends 01:54:05 too bad he's idling 01:55:33 i almost got type intersections working 01:57:48 -!- Indian [~Indian@unaffiliated/londonmet050] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:02:54 If you have one file loaded already into the Scheme interpreter, can you load another file into the interpreter and be able to use functions from the previous file loaded? 02:05:25 dostoyevsky, you might wanna make your compiler self-hosting, i.e. write it in Scheme with minimal C support like calling the initial thunk 02:12:59 Anyone? 02:15:04 DrDuck: that depends on your scheme implementation 02:15:09 what are you using? 02:15:33 mit-scheme 02:16:31 hm 02:16:40 well anyway i suspect the answer is yes 02:17:48 You're right. 02:21:26 willian [~god@117.36.37.157] has joined #scheme 02:25:44 rimmjob_ [~user@adsl-108-204-208-237.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 02:26:35 is the little schemer suitable for someone with a few months of casual python experience? 02:29:14 i have a problem with drracket debugger 02:29:25 it's very slow when there are more than a few variables set 02:29:29 esp. with large lists 02:34:17 rimmjob_: have you looked at the book at all yet? 02:34:38 -!- hussaibi_ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 02:34:40 hussaibi__ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 02:36:14 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:38:50 im on page 3 02:44:21 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 02:47:00 wsimpson [~wsimpson@76.73.221.195] has joined #scheme 02:50:22 how to infer from 'fib' the return value more specific than 'number'? 02:50:31 because that's the most my inference engine can do 02:50:39 i can't really establish programmer intent 02:50:54 -!- zanea [~zanea@210-86-94-112.jetstream.xtra.co.nz] has quit [Quit: leaving] 02:54:38 well you may be able to infer that, say, if a float is passed in, it will remain a float 02:56:54 i'm not sure how to construct a type system powerful enough to establish arithmetic promotion 02:57:49 that might be more of an abstract interpretation thing 03:02:38 what does it mean? 03:02:59 maybe attach a function to a type that determines the type? 03:04:16 what i was referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_interpretation 03:04:54 yeah, thanks 03:08:12 -!- Brendan_T [~brendan@static.112.22.47.78.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 03:09:58 still wrong, but getting there: (lambda => (if ((_GENSYM_289 real)) (real) (number))) 03:11:34 A float *always* remains a float, actually, just as 3 always remains 3. 03:12:32 perhaps what i meant was "given a float returns a float" 03:13:32 zanea [~zanea@210-86-94-112.jetstream.xtra.co.nz] has joined #scheme 03:16:56 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable110.176-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 03:24:53 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: Boy, you're gonna carry that weight, carry that weight, a long time...] 03:25:07 -!- willian [~god@117.36.37.157] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:30:20 what are the benefits of having unification variables for such simple type systems? 03:32:17 Exercise 1.6 of SICP reaches and exceeds the maximum recursion depth. I've tried to figure out how by stepping through an iteration by using the normal evaluation method, but I don't seem to see the difference of the new-if definition from a the original definitions. Would someone mind enlightening me a bit? 03:32:22 *DrDuck* looks at cky 03:33:57 *offby1* looks at his feet 03:35:28 what's the fundamental difference between new-if and the built-in one? 03:37:09 *DrDuck* goes back to section 1.1.6 to look for clues 03:40:47 -!- Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 03:44:28 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 03:46:20 realitygrill [~realitygr@c-24-5-7-139.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 03:46:53 -!- tupi [~david@189.60.160.15] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:52:03 genieliu [~genieliu@59.78.62.120] has joined #scheme 03:55:24 DrDuck: What offby1 said. 03:55:56 Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 03:56:05 DrDuck: Hint: You can't use normal-order evaluation rules for function calls. 03:59:00 Why not? 03:59:27 because stuff gets evaluated before it is passed to a function 03:59:31 and is evaluated exactly once 03:59:34 01:07:34 < jcowan> Scheme is required to do applicative-order. 03:59:34 01:08:18 < cky> DrDuck: Scheme does not use normal-order. 03:59:34 01:08:29 < cky> DrDuck: What jcowan said. 03:59:37 DrDuck: ^^--- 03:59:38 unless a previous term doesn't return 04:00:06 Right. I mean't applicative order. 04:00:14 DrDuck: Do not forget that all function calls use applicative-order in Scheme. There are no exceptions to that. :-) 04:01:12 DrDuck: In the case of the new-if (which is a function), that means the recursive call to sqrt-iter has to complete before new-if gets called. 04:01:16 Ad infinitum. 04:01:27 When you have multiple layers of operands to be executed such as (new-if (good-enough? x guess)), do you start with the innermost or outermost? 04:01:44 Ahh. 04:01:54 I think I understand. 04:02:17 DrDuck: Applicative-order implies that the innermost is evaluated first. 04:02:29 phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has joined #scheme 04:02:49 crap 04:02:50 In particular, given an expression like (a (b) (c (d))), d is guaranteed to complete before the call to c; b and c are guaranteed to complete before the call to a. 04:03:06 Whether d is called before b, or whether c is called before b, is unspecified. 04:03:22 DrDuck: Why is it that (if (= 3 4) (/ 5 0) (/ 5 1)) does not crash with a divide-by-zero error? 04:03:24 The order could very well be d, b, c, a; or d, c, b, a; or b, d, c, a. 04:03:34 i'm gonna need multiple-values type inference *and* robustness when there are wrong argument counts etc. 04:04:04 jcowan, because the conditional statement is false. 04:04:20 And yet it says (/ 5 0) right there. 04:05:10 I see what you guys are saying, the priority of evaluation is different with functions and conditional statements. 04:05:19 That's what you guys are saying, right? 04:05:44 DrDuck: "if" is not a function, and (in Scheme) cannot be implemented as a function, because it requires special evaluation rules. 04:05:53 :] 04:06:14 DrDuck: Any time you need to implement anything other than standard applicative-order evaluation rules, you have to use macros. 04:06:25 (Or a built-in special form like "if".) 04:07:01 Ahh ok. I don't believe I've gotten to macros yet. 04:07:34 No problem. What they really are is syntax extensions: they allow you to write new bits of syntax that work however you want, but fit seamlessly in with the rest of the language. 04:07:43 DrDuck: You will learn about macros in your Scheme travels, at some stage. It's one of Scheme's fundamental features. 04:07:54 But certainly not an *elementary* feature. 04:07:59 Indeed. 04:09:21 :] 04:09:27 Thanks, guys. 04:10:25 I can't wait to get to a point where SICP starts using data structures or classic algorithms. I'm ready to start referencing to CLRS -- just bought it. :D 04:12:26 scheme has no record-types without srfi 04:12:27 :) 04:12:36 sicp tends to make everything out of lists/vectors 04:12:54 but record types won't do you any good if you can't read programs 04:33:25 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 04:35:44 homie` [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-143-43.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 04:37:12 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-152-142.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 05:01:52 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 05:01:59 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 05:04:07 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 05:16:58 what to do when type-inferring a recursive function? return an empty-set when recursion occurs? 05:32:20 -!- phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 05:35:54 If the recursion is bad, then blow up; the type of (define (a) (a)) is unimportant. 05:36:07 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 05:36:24 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 05:36:34 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Client Quit] 05:37:27 Otherwise you can generally ignore it. 05:39:21 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 05:47:36 -!- githogori [~githogori@c-24-7-1-43.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 05:47:40 -!- wsimpson [~wsimpson@76.73.221.195] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:48:48 and it seems like i have to 05:49:01 traverse functions in right order 05:53:23 -!- teurastaja [~samuel@modemcable072.213-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 05:55:37 (lambda => ((((real)) . (real)))) 06:09:42 -!- jcowan [~John@cpe-74-68-112-189.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:15:59 bocarat [~louie@208.75.213.229] has joined #scheme 06:16:55 -!- bocarat [~louie@208.75.213.229] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:20:50 sajith [~sajith@c-98-220-223-87.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 06:23:03 ok, another problem 06:23:39 is it OK for type of fib to be real -> real? 06:23:43 -!- Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 06:24:08 surely, it could return ((integer -> integer) (real -> real)) ... 06:24:16 and so on 06:25:35 Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 06:31:04 but it seems inconsistent with what stamourv wrote 06:31:10 that only functions have intersection types 06:31:20 unless i find some way to propagate these changes to functions... 06:31:21 *shrug* 06:37:51 -!- Nisstyre [~nisstyre@infocalypse-net.info] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 06:51:35 -!- zanea [~zanea@210-86-94-112.jetstream.xtra.co.nz] has left #scheme 06:54:03 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 07:01:29 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:05:55 drdo [~drdo@91.205.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #scheme 07:23:00 Nisstyre [~nisstyre@infocalypse-net.info] has joined #scheme 07:31:01 -!- betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 07:33:57 betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has joined #scheme 07:34:03 -!- turbofail [~user@c-71-198-168-93.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:38:39 -!- gtoast [~gtoast@99-100-70-120.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: gtoast] 07:39:42 -!- replore [~replore@ntkngw133234.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:47:51 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 07:51:19 leo2007 [~leo@222.130.143.196] has joined #scheme 07:51:24 -!- drdo [~drdo@91.205.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:53:38 -!- betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 07:54:06 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 07:54:26 -!- genieliu [~genieliu@59.78.62.120] has quit [Quit: leaving] 07:55:41 -!- pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 08:01:32 betta_y_omega [~betta_y_o@90.166.231.220] has joined #scheme 08:09:17 pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has joined #scheme 08:14:50 jewel [~jewel@196-215-16-133.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 08:19:45 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has joined #scheme 08:29:18 -!- hussaibi__ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 08:29:27 -!- hussaibi [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 08:36:57 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@c-24-5-7-139.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: realitygrill] 08:50:36 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-215-16-133.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 08:56:41 -!- Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 08:56:49 Riastrad1 [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 09:01:10 does it matter which scheme i use for the little schemer? 09:04:06 -!- yell0 [~yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 09:05:17 yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 09:09:07 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 09:14:51 choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 09:19:23 -!- X-Scale [email@2001:470:1f14:135b::2] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:22:11 -!- rimmjob_ [~user@adsl-108-204-208-237.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 09:25:02 -!- pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-d9bfd411.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services] 09:25:11 pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-5f7681fb.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 09:32:40 rimmjob_ [~user@adsl-108-204-208-237.dsl.hstntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 09:35:11 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 09:44:20 -!- leo2007 [~leo@222.130.143.196] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 23.3.50.1] 10:06:31 EbiDK [~ebi@3e6b7ac3.rev.stofanet.dk] has joined #scheme 10:08:40 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 10:14:14 leo2007 [~leo@123.114.46.7] has joined #scheme 10:25:04 -!- dsp_ [~tt@acidlab.technoanimal.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 10:37:10 -!- EbiDK [~ebi@3e6b7ac3.rev.stofanet.dk] has left #scheme 10:40:48 ohwow` [~o@uh.wow.prettyru.de] has joined #scheme 10:46:27 yow, racket sig11'd during gc 11:10:39 gtoast [~gtoast@99-100-70-120.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 11:20:49 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 11:21:31 -!- homie` [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-143-43.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 11:25:42 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 11:25:52 homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-143-43.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 11:33:44 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 11:45:06 another sig11 during gc 11:45:10 -!- choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 11:47:58 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 11:49:17 drwho [~drwho@c-68-81-106-70.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 11:51:59 rimmjob_: Probably not, though some may be more comfortable than others in practical use. 11:52:33 rimmjob_: IIRC, Racket has a language for the Little Schemer. So it might be easier with it. Otherwise, if you know some programming, you could adapt any scheme to match the language of the Little Schemer. 12:02:11 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 12:13:14 -!- yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 12:14:36 yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 12:19:46 -!- yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:20:02 yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 12:27:03 Eataix [~Eataix@CPE-58-165-251-47.lns1.civ.bigpond.net.au] has joined #scheme 12:37:25 -!- gtoast [~gtoast@99-100-70-120.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: gtoast] 12:38:41 -!- Eataix [~Eataix@CPE-58-165-251-47.lns1.civ.bigpond.net.au] has quit [] 12:42:38 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 12:49:08 genieliu [~genieliu@59.78.62.120] has joined #scheme 13:03:34 -!- penryu [~tanuki@unaffiliated/penryu] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 13:03:50 -!- rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 13:08:46 -!- yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:09:32 yell0 [~yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 13:32:36 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 13:32:41 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:33:53 blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 13:42:11 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:43:49 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 13:43:56 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 13:56:30 phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has joined #scheme 13:56:34 weirdo: Are you using a stable release? 13:57:31 But yeah, GC'ing is hard.. I also currently get nothing but segfaults when I try to let GC run in the background 13:58:23 dostoyevsky, yes 13:58:31 don't let it run into race conditions 13:58:35 pause all threads when running gc 13:58:54 tupi [~david@189.60.160.15] has joined #scheme 13:59:55 I am in testing mode right now... so I let GC run in parallel.. two threads.. and then try to use locks to make it crash less often... which sometimes works 14:02:21 -!- leo2007 [~leo@123.114.46.7] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 23.3.50.1] 14:02:38 oh come on 14:02:40 ... 14:02:45 it has no chance of working 14:03:25 -!- genieliu [~genieliu@59.78.62.120] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 14:04:18 *dostoyevsky* doesn't really see a reason why it shouldn't 14:04:37 jewel [~jewel@196-215-16-133.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 14:06:33 -!- yell0 [~yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:07:10 Riastrad1: Does MIT Scheme support custom reader macros? (I'd like a date-time type for a DSL) 14:08:14 yell0 [~yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 14:14:50 -!- yell0 [~yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Quit: leaving] 14:15:45 yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 14:18:40 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 14:22:21 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 14:25:32 kenjin2201 [~kenjin@218.235.8.175] has joined #scheme 14:30:04 choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 14:33:51 leo2007 [~leo@123.123.248.219] has joined #scheme 14:51:34 drwh0 [~drwho@c-68-81-106-70.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 14:52:14 -!- incubot [incubot@klutometis.wikitex.org] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:52:17 -!- drwh0 [~drwho@c-68-81-106-70.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit] 14:52:46 incubot [incubot@klutometis.wikitex.org] has joined #scheme 14:53:27 kuribas [~user@d54C430C4.access.telenet.be] has joined #scheme 14:53:36 jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has joined #scheme 14:54:12 -!- drwho [~drwho@c-68-81-106-70.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 14:54:39 -!- doc_who [~doc_who@pool-108-28-6-47.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 14:54:47 -!- alvis [~alvis@tx-71-2-127-56.dhcp.embarqhsd.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 15:00:20 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 15:02:45 zmv [~daniel@c95334de.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 15:16:46 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 15:35:51 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:38:42 Indian [~Indian@unaffiliated/londonmet050] has joined #scheme 15:39:19 -!- Riastrad1 is now known as Riastradh 15:41:33 primitive operations 15:41:49 is that mean operations that can be carried out on the set of data 15:44:45 programming languages are primitive 15:45:04 ecraven, no, not really. 15:51:04 replore_ [~replore@ntkngw133234.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 15:55:51 Riastradh: I found out that 2011-08-07 is read as a symbol by default, good enough for now :) 16:00:01 gtoast [~gtoast@99-100-70-120.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 16:02:27 any one using drracket 16:02:35 cannot find the key bindings 16:04:59 rapacity [~prwg@unaffiliated/rapacity] has joined #scheme 16:12:26 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:13:15 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 16:14:42 hmm 16:14:51 javascript will probably blow up when compiling my typed scheme :) 16:17:03 oldpier [~oldpier@nusnet-185-65.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has joined #scheme 16:19:58 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 16:26:47 Indian: edit->keybindings 16:27:30 I saw ESC;0 16:27:42 but it wont work 16:36:01 -!- choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 16:36:10 What are you trying to do? That command doesn't do much for me either, but it does something "zero times" right? 16:40:21 I am trying to find what key I need to repeat the last command 16:40:30 stonee [~stonee@178.113.208.250.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has joined #scheme 16:44:13 I don't know if there is a command to do that. 16:44:22 The repeat-n commands will do the next thing n times. 16:44:31 (AFAICT) 16:44:47 -!- stonee [~stonee@178.113.208.250.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:45:37 ok 16:45:46 I meant keyboard short cut 16:45:51 to run last command 16:47:23 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has joined #scheme 16:50:26 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-178-122.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 16:52:51 That's what I mean, I'm not sure there is such a binding. 16:53:18 -!- Indian [~Indian@unaffiliated/londonmet050] has quit [Quit: Indian] 16:54:56 githogori [~githogori@c-24-7-1-43.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 16:56:13 -!- yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:56:23 yell0_ [~yello@178.162.154.183] has joined #scheme 17:07:56 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 17:09:10 -!- saccadewrk [~saccadewr@nat/google/x-flhkvrcugszuduyy] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 17:09:18 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 17:13:15 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 17:13:25 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 17:14:04 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 17:14:20 -!- jrapdx [~jra@c-98-246-157-58.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:14:28 saccadewrk [~saccadewr@nat/google/x-citsdmfqyuzdkvhz] has joined #scheme 17:19:33 jrapdx [~jra@c-98-246-157-58.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:23:45 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:24:06 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 17:27:53 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 17:32:47 homie` [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-195-199.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 17:35:06 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-143-43.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 17:35:58 -!- homie` [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-195-199.netcologne.de] has quit [Client Quit] 17:40:21 pandeiro [~pandeiro@bd21c741.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 17:44:24 homie [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-195-199.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 17:44:54 -!- pandeiro [~pandeiro@bd21c741.virtua.com.br] has quit [Client Quit] 17:45:19 X-Scale [email@89.180.143.4] has joined #scheme 17:46:17 phao [phao@187.91.225.142] has joined #scheme 17:46:31 http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html 17:51:19 oh you, F# 17:54:01 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 17:56:04 choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 17:59:08 -!- replore_ [~replore@ntkngw133234.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:07:15 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:08:38 at which stage do i unify type variables? 18:08:43 so far i only make unions 18:08:58 that is, in type recovery 18:12:53 -!- phao [phao@187.91.225.142] has quit [Quit: Fui embora] 18:15:08 Indian [~Indian@unaffiliated/londonmet050] has joined #scheme 18:24:06 realitygrill [~realitygr@c-24-5-7-139.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 18:37:30 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 18:43:03 ecraven, hmm, you shouldn't rely on that. If `2011-08-07' reads as a symbol, that is basically only an accident. 18:51:30 -!- phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 18:54:14 weirdo, context? 18:54:55 jewel, i made a primitive type system without unification variables and i wonder whether they are useful for the scheme type system w/o records 18:58:11 -!- oldpier [~oldpier@nusnet-185-65.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 19:06:16 can some one tell what is primitve 19:06:35 HG` [~HG@p5DC057A9.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 19:08:04 teurastaja [~Samuel@modemcable072.213-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 19:14:45 -!- teurastaja [~Samuel@modemcable072.213-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Quit: --> Put something intelligent here when I'm more bored <--] 19:17:47 -!- kenjin2201 [~kenjin@218.235.8.175] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:18:51 Indian: A primitive function is one that has to be implemented directly by the implementation, and can't be built upon other functions. 19:19:28 Indian: For example, in most Scheme implementations, the arithmetic functions (+, -, *, /, etc.) are primitives. 19:19:43 (Well, most that I've seen, anyway. I'm sure there are counterexamples.) 19:22:13 I found this in dictionary 19:22:15 Computing a simple operation or procedure of a limited set from which complex operations or procedures may be constructed, esp. a simple geometric shape that may be generated in computer graphics by such an operation or procedure. 19:24:27 Okay, but that doesn't relate to what a primitive is in Scheme. 19:25:57 ok 19:25:58 Another example: expt can be implemented in terms of exp and log, so it usually isn't a primitive, but exp and log would be primitives (especially because FPUs have instructions for these operations). 19:26:57 so bascially primitve function is something that has to work on its own with out being dependant on another functions 19:28:06 Right, in terms of there being no other functions that it can sensibly be based on. 19:31:58 -!- zmv [~daniel@c95334de.virtua.com.br] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 19:32:10 ok 19:33:44 zmv [~daniel@c95334de.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 19:35:01 (remainder A B) 19:35:05 oops 19:35:11 ( remainder a b) 19:35:33 (remainder 10 5) 19:35:36 gives zero 19:35:39 That would usually be a primitive too, as CPUs (or at least the ones I know of) provide division instructions that return the remainder as well. 19:35:48 Yes, that is correct. 19:38:51 inexact representation is something that cannot be represented accurately ? 19:41:14 Indian: It means it represents a number that isn't necessarily exact. 19:41:30 Indian: For example, there is no way to represent pi exactly on computers. 19:41:45 -!- DT`` [~Feeock@net-93-149-46-58.cust.dsl.teletu.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 19:42:02 So, 1/3 is exact, while 0,33333333333 is inexact 19:42:32 phax [~phax@unaffiliated/phax] has joined #scheme 19:43:51 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 19:48:21 weirdo, I'm interested to see your work 19:49:03 cky: ok thanks 19:49:18 jewel, http://piec.itcrew.pl/seaking - synchronizes every hour 19:50:28 (sqrt -1) 19:50:32 0+1i 19:51:16 what is that 0+1i 19:52:38 Indian: It's a complex number. 19:52:42 ok 19:52:47 With 0 as the real part, and 1 as the imaginary. 19:52:56 sweet 19:54:09 DT`` [~Feeock@net-93-149-45-200.cust.dsl.teletu.it] has joined #scheme 19:56:53 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 19:57:09 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 19:57:39 -!- blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 19:58:43 smtlaissezfaire_ [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has joined #scheme 19:58:50 blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 20:02:46 doc_who [~doc_who@pool-108-28-6-47.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 20:10:36 replore_ [~replore@ntkngw133234.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 20:24:03 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-215-16-133.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 20:28:39 tricus [~tricus@h69-130-142-158.cncrtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has joined #scheme 20:28:40 -!- tricus [~tricus@h69-130-142-158.cncrtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:30:20 -!- Obfuscate [~keii@ip98-176-16-175.sd.sd.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 20:30:58 Obfuscate [~keii@ip98-176-16-175.sd.sd.cox.net] has joined #scheme 20:31:29 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 20:32:23 -!- cbrannon [~cbrannon@gentoo/developer/cbrannon] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 20:33:22 cky: 20:33:26 see this 20:33:34 (define (area-of-disk r) 20:33:34 (* 3.14 (* r r))) 20:33:47 (define (area-of-ring outer inner) 20:33:48 (- (area-of-disk outer) 20:33:48 (area-of-disk inner))) 20:34:02 the second one is not a primitive function right? 20:35:30 Indian: the term "primitive function" doesn't mean anything. 20:36:20 There is strictly no structural difference between those two functions. 20:38:11 -!- blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20:38:16 A primitive function is one that has to be implemented directly by the implementation, and can't be built upon other functions. 20:39:46 that is what cky 20:39:48 said 20:39:59 in that case define (area-of-ring outer inner) 20:40:07 should not be a prmitive fucntion 20:41:12 -!- zmv [~daniel@c95334de.virtua.com.br] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 20:42:58 cmatei [~cmatei@78.96.101.240] has joined #scheme 20:46:30 blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 20:47:39 -!- yell0_ is now known as yell0 20:47:54 -!- yell0 [~yello@178.162.154.183] has quit [Quit: leaving] 20:48:29 yell0 [yello@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 20:48:33 Indian: assume the implementation doesn't provide -, but provides area-of-ring instead? 20:48:48 ? 20:49:07 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has left #scheme 20:49:11 Perhaps it's an implementation optimized for computing circles, not for mere aritmethic. 20:49:15 arithmetic 20:50:28 Indian: The "can't be built upon other functions" property is quite strong. By the Turing Equivalence theorem, every function can be built upon other functions. 20:51:26 ok 20:51:36 this is getting confusing 20:52:19 As I said, you shouldn't be concerned by "primitive", since it's a rather meaningless thing. 20:53:10 It's the choice of the implementation what functions it implements. 20:58:54 -!- copumpkin is now known as tater 20:59:00 -!- tater is now known as copumpkin 21:07:41 -!- HG` [~HG@p5DC057A9.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:10:53 -!- smtlaissezfaire_ [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire_] 21:11:32 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 21:20:56 AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable110.176-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 21:22:06 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 21:36:11 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-176.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 21:40:08 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-87-79-195-199.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 21:45:04 mejja [~user@c-0eb9e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #scheme 21:45:55 -!- kennyd [~kennyd@78-1-141-228.adsl.net.t-com.hr] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 21:49:43 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-178-122.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:50:34 kennyd [~kennyd@78-1-141-132.adsl.net.t-com.hr] has joined #scheme 21:52:58 wisey [~Steven@host86-150-109-116.range86-150.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 21:53:54 (convert-gui Fahrenheit->Celsius) 21:54:43 should I enter that in the upper section or lower section of the drracket 21:59:10 gnomon [~gnomon@CPE0022158a8221-CM000f9f776f96.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 22:06:34 -!- choas [~lars@p578F6A59.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 22:07:20 adu [~ajr@64.134.99.85] has joined #scheme 22:09:23 hussaibi_ [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 22:09:23 hussaibi [~hussaibi@wirewall.cs.toronto.edu] has joined #scheme 22:16:20 -!- joast [~rick@76.178.178.72] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 22:18:06 -!- mejja [~user@c-0eb9e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.87 [Firefox 5.0/20110615151330]] 22:24:00 Indian: hm in the lower, I guess 22:24:05 it's called REPL 22:24:13 (Read-Eval-Print-Loop) 22:26:15 ok 22:35:46 -!- blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:36:46 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 22:38:32 Indian: My memory is that it will work in either the upper or lower section. 22:38:42 ok 22:39:03 Indian: (My memory is that the HtDP instructors used the term "Interactions Window" rather than the classic term "REPL") 22:39:13 ok 22:39:34 also HtDP have solutions but they are only available to teachers? 22:39:40 Indian: The distinction between putting it in the upper versus putting it in the lower is whether you want that expression to get evaluated every time you hit the Run button at the top of DrRacket 22:40:00 I did put in the top 22:40:11 and then I can use the function by passing parameters 22:40:54 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 22:41:30 pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 22:43:13 what are teachpacks? 22:43:22 I see that on HtDP book 22:43:33 When the function is fully developed, test it using the teachpack convert.ss 22:44:22 also what you called a scheme and a cuntion 22:44:27 I mean function 22:44:36 -!- pnkfelix [~Adium@c-71-225-165-188.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit] 22:45:16 blb [~blb@c-24-11-236-117.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 22:45:23 (let loop (print (eval (read))) (loop)) 22:47:53 turbofail [~user@c-71-198-168-93.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 22:51:23 -!- adu [~ajr@64.134.99.85] has quit [Quit: adu] 22:55:32 fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 23:04:39 -!- fbass [~fbass@75-173-76-35.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 23:19:36 cbrannon [~cbrannon@gentoo/developer/cbrannon] has joined #scheme 23:19:37 penryu [~tanuki@unaffiliated/penryu] has joined #scheme 23:31:25 -!- cbrannon [~cbrannon@gentoo/developer/cbrannon] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:39:22 hakkum [~hakkum@c-67-181-176-186.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 23:42:51 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 23:52:05 preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme