00:06:15 kniu [~kniu@HOHOHO.RES.CMU.EDU] has joined #scheme 00:07:21 -!- luz [~davids@139.82.89.70] has quit [Quit: Client exiting] 00:18:35 zmanning [~zmanning@64.122.14.80] has joined #scheme 00:18:51 marcob [~marco@95.238.65.93] has joined #scheme 00:23:20 copumpkin [~copumpkin@c-75-69-96-50.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 00:30:26 saccade_ [~saccade@209-6-54-113.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #scheme 00:30:28 -!- Kusanagi [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has quit [] 00:43:09 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:47:29 Kusanagi [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has joined #scheme 00:49:14 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 00:50:07 bokr [~eduska@95.154.102.124] has joined #scheme 01:02:11 -!- bweaver [~user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 01:03:30 -!- masm [~masm@bl10-6-247.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 01:13:43 -!- foof [~user@118-021-204-067.jp.fiberbit.net] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.2 (IRC client for Emacs)] 01:24:16 rogue [rogue@unaffiliated/rogue] has joined #scheme 01:27:11 -!- Fabse [~mightyfid@wikipedia/Track-n-Field] has quit [] 01:31:58 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@ip70-189-108-199.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Quit: josephholsten] 01:33:20 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 01:34:05 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 01:39:25 -!- fnord123_ [~fnord123@94-194-63-222.zone8.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 01:40:30 -!- Mr_Awesome [~eric@c-98-212-139-181.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:40:49 -!- pavelludiq [~quassel@87.246.56.214] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:44:30 -!- mejja [~user@c-52b1e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:47:56 uman [~uman@unaffiliated/uman] has joined #scheme 01:49:35 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 01:50:09 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:54:32 foof [~user@118-021-204-067.jp.fiberbit.net] has joined #scheme 02:03:15 Mr_Awesome [~eric@c-98-212-139-181.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:04:20 -!- Skewb [~Skewb@83.231.91.158] has quit [] 02:07:59 Hi. 02:08:07 I'm trying to implement some functions to handle sets. 02:08:20 http://dpaste.com/167617//plain/ 02:08:33 could someone give some ideas on how to implement 'subset'? 02:18:49 you mean like intersection? 02:19:05 oh wait 02:19:11 I'm reading your paste now, nm 02:19:29 oh! your mean subset? 02:20:12 josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 02:20:41 I have no idea 02:22:06 hehe 02:22:15 this version looks more readable though http://dpaste.com/167621//plain 02:23:00 I'm not sure that you can, given that the only inspector you have for the type is the membership test 02:24:42 speaking of which, I would add (define (set-member? set value) (set value)) 02:24:59 yeah 02:25:03 makes things more readable 02:25:10 or similar to keep the implementation of the sets separate from the interface 02:25:14 but all this system seems useless without "subset?" 02:26:16 hadronzoo [~hadronzoo@64.134.146.34] has joined #scheme 02:26:20 it really seems like you need to be able to fold over at least one of the parameters of subset? 02:26:47 "fold over"? 02:28:05 like (define (subset? set ls) (every (lambda (n) (member? set n)) ls)) 02:28:18 where the second argument is a list 02:28:29 yeah 02:28:35 that's not nice 02:28:43 -!- mario-goulart [~user@67.205.85.241] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:29:48 I think it'd be necessary to parse 02:29:51 the definition of both sets 02:30:03 and see if adding the rule of creation of a set 02:30:06 set1* 02:30:09 to set2 02:30:12 would change set2 02:30:19 if not, s1 is subset of s2 02:30:24 but I don't think that is easy hehe 02:30:44 anyway 02:30:53 I'll leave that as a challenge for the future 02:31:44 -!- saint_cypher [~saint_cyp@adsl-99-2-72-93.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 02:34:56 SharkBrain, just to "finish" 02:34:58 I don't want to do that 02:35:06 beause I want to be able to handle infinite sets 02:35:18 that's why I'm focusing on rules and not lists 02:35:23 and I also don't know how to use lists 02:35:33 LOL 02:35:39 :-) 02:35:41 way to bury the lead 02:35:56 I think a way to create sets 02:35:59 from lists is good 02:36:09 but that can be done if the user knows how to declare a list 02:36:30 like .. (define (list-set x) (is x in the list 3, 4, 5, 6, ... ???)) 02:37:19 happening to know that a set is formed by a list can help subset? 02:37:28 so... maybe doing that I just said is not a good idea 02:37:33 but anyway, I gotta study 02:37:47 (define (list->set ls) (lambda (x) (member ls x))) 02:37:58 I mean (define (list->set ls) (lambda (x) (member x ls))) 02:38:00 ... 02:38:19 that's good. 02:38:27 I also think that if I could parse this code 02:38:29 I could spot lists 02:38:31 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:38:45 so, maybe implement "lists sets" that way would matter 02:39:59 -!- arcfide [arcfide@adsl-99-14-211-89.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has left #scheme 02:58:13 adu [~ajr@pool-74-96-89-29.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 02:58:42 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 03:26:52 emit [~emit@unaffiliated/emit] has joined #scheme 03:34:34 samth [~samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 03:40:42 -!- hadronzoo [~hadronzoo@64.134.146.34] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 03:59:58 here, http://www.schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS/HTML/r5rs-Z-H-8.html#%_sec_5.2 04:00:00 -rudybot:#scheme- http://tinyurl.com/yaqadkd 04:00:14 I have that define can be done this way 04:00:32 (define ( ) ) 04:00:38 but... I cannot find what is 04:00:41 what is it? 04:01:25 scheme epressions 04:02:05 it's equivalent to (define (lambda )) 04:02:17 yea, but is still there 04:02:30 so... body is ... 04:02:50 and combination is (a b c d ... n) 04:03:37 you've lost me 04:03:42 hehe 04:04:00 hmm yes 04:04:05 body is a list of combintions 04:04:10 nevermind.. 04:07:44 -!- marcob [~marco@95.238.65.93] has quit [Quit: marcob] 04:12:46 -!- uman [~uman@unaffiliated/uman] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 04:29:28 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has quit [Quit: josephholsten] 04:29:59 josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 04:30:27 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has quit [Client Quit] 04:31:01 -!- xwl_ [~user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:31:31 xwl_ [~user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has joined #scheme 04:32:34 -!- samth [~samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 04:42:46 1/EXIT 04:42:52 oops sorry 04:42:53 -!- SharkBrain [~gerard@210.48.104.34] has quit [Quit: leaving] 04:48:10 arcfide [arcfide@adsl-99-186-238-34.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 04:49:43 -!- parolang` [~user@8e4a01246100775874c4f448e9887093.oregonrd-wifi-1261.amplex.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:01:51 -!- nothingHappens [~nothingha@173-31-122-80.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 05:08:36 -!- samth_away [~samth@punge.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 05:09:20 samth_away [~samth@punge.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 05:28:28 jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 05:31:17 -!- bzzbzz [~franco@modemcable240.34-83-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Quit: leaving] 05:32:26 reynard [~alan@n11649161176.netvigator.com] has joined #scheme 05:33:26 -!- acrylicist [~sj@unaffiliated/acrylicist] has quit [Quit: EPIC5-1.0[1581] - amnesiac : Z] 05:33:54 -!- foof [~user@118-021-204-067.jp.fiberbit.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 05:46:12 -!- reynard [~alan@n11649161176.netvigator.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:49:37 -!- zmanning [~zmanning@64.122.14.80] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 06:41:26 Syntropy|Laptop [~who@unaffiliated/syntropy] has joined #scheme 06:46:19 bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 06:52:59 zmanning [~zmanning@c-24-20-40-207.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 07:00:06 hkBst [~hkBst@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has joined #scheme 07:08:50 HG` [~HG@xdsleg241.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 07:13:04 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has joined #scheme 07:13:29 myu2 [~myu2@161.90.128.210.bf.2iij.net] has joined #scheme 07:18:12 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:27:03 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-74-96-89-29.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu] 07:33:09 dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has joined #scheme 07:33:25 -!- arcfide [arcfide@adsl-99-186-238-34.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 07:35:20 -!- dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has quit [Client Quit] 07:40:58 lisptastic [~user@cpe-76-177-227-49.natcky.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 08:01:35 attila_lendvai [~ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has joined #scheme 08:06:49 -!- araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 08:10:53 melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has joined #scheme 08:19:53 Edico [~Edico@unaffiliated/edico] has joined #scheme 08:37:32 vy [~user@nbvyazici.cs.bilkent.edu.tr] has joined #scheme 08:44:09 -!- attila_lendvai [~ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 08:49:07 aack [~user@a83-163-241-74.adsl.xs4all.nl] has joined #scheme 08:49:46 -!- dmoerner [~dmr@90-84.res.pomona.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 08:50:21 dmoerner [~dmr@90-84.res.pomona.edu] has joined #scheme 08:51:17 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@pantagruel.mccme.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 08:55:47 attila_lendvai [~ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has joined #scheme 08:59:41 karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has joined #scheme 09:01:27 fnord123 [~fnord123@94-194-63-222.zone8.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme 09:01:57 pavelludiq [~quassel@87.246.56.214] has joined #scheme 09:02:20 -!- Syntropy|Laptop [~who@unaffiliated/syntropy] has left #scheme 09:08:13 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme 09:22:59 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:24:06 udzinari [~user@nat/ibm/x-qikvbjrazndfsbjl] has joined #scheme 09:25:04 schmir [~schmir@p54A91D21.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 09:37:05 -!- karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:42:29 masm [~masm@bl7-202-250.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 09:55:35 -!- Kusanagi [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:55:54 arcfide [arcfide@adsl-99-50-230-191.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 09:55:54 -!- arcfide [arcfide@adsl-99-50-230-191.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has left #scheme 09:58:20 -!- PygoscelisPapua [~pygospa@g225237245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 10:00:54 -!- myu2 [~myu2@161.90.128.210.bf.2iij.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:01:07 karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has joined #scheme 10:01:29 Kusanagi [~Lernaean@24-107-60-232.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com] has joined #scheme 10:01:30 -!- Kusanagi [~Lernaean@24-107-60-232.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com] has quit [Changing host] 10:01:30 Kusanagi [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has joined #scheme 10:02:10 PygoscelisPapua [~pygospa@f055075199.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 10:10:02 -!- jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:21:30 -!- zmanning [~zmanning@c-24-20-40-207.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 10:23:14 cky_ [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 10:25:37 -!- cky [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:31:45 alaricsp [~alaric@85.189.36.251.griffin.managedbroadband.co.uk] has joined #scheme 10:41:19 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A91D21.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 10:43:34 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 10:45:49 xwl [~user@123.115.109.149] has joined #scheme 10:54:44 -!- stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 10:55:22 stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has joined #scheme 10:59:25 -!- stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has quit [Excess Flood] 10:59:41 stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has joined #scheme 11:02:11 -!- karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:02:34 mario-goulart [~user@67.205.85.241] has joined #scheme 11:25:22 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-173-88-196-177.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 11:26:43 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 11:29:04 alvatar [~alvatar@112.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 11:29:56 -!- pavelludiq [~quassel@87.246.56.214] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:30:05 if I write a function in sheme, can I count on it having the same behaviour when ported to C? 11:30:28 Isn 11:30:32 't that the definition of a port 11:30:40 (in terms of order of growth) 11:30:57 I'm reading "Orders of Growth and Kinds of Procedures" 11:31:05 If you use the same algorithm, sure 11:31:36 Orders of growth are attributed to algorithms, not generally to procedures AFAIK 11:31:51 If you port the order of growth behaviour of a program, then the port will have the same order of growth. 11:31:54 because.. I find my self thinking recursivly for all problems 11:32:48 morphir: excuse my ignorance, but is that a famous reading? (otherwise, could I get a link) ;) 11:32:49 If you port an iterative algorithm (which uses recursive notation in Scheme) to a recursive algorithm (by using recursive notation in your port), of course you'll see some different behaviour 11:33:02 It might even crash :) 11:33:20 A real port would involve reworking it to a for loop, or a while loop, probably 11:33:45 alvatar: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Electrical-Engineering-and-Computer-Science/6-001Spring-2005/LectureNotes/index.htm 11:33:46 -rudybot:#scheme- http://tinyurl.com/d7mpe 11:33:56 L4 11:34:07 aaah, MIT opencourses :) 11:34:11 thanks morphir ! 11:34:23 sjamaan, or just longjmp carefully! 11:34:35 :) 11:38:33 -!- stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:39:27 stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has joined #scheme 11:40:47 sjamaan: when sussman talks about that he wants us to get the feel for these patterns (the types of growth) 11:41:18 I suspect that will be easier with scheme, than say C. 11:41:37 I don't see why either would be easier 11:42:07 because of memory clutter you have in cC 11:42:10 C* 11:44:50 Orders of growth are going out of vogue. It's a useful abstraction, but too abstract sometimes 11:45:06 It says nothing about heapsort versus mergesort, for example 11:45:19 (On random access inputs) 11:53:24 -!- phao [~phao@189.107.158.82] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 11:55:51 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 11:55:53 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 11:57:10 -!- masm [~masm@bl7-202-250.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 11:57:11 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5ad4c06e.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 12:07:57 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsleg241.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: HG`] 12:23:11 lol. History behind currying: 12:23:18 Named after Haskell Curry, one of the inventors of combinatory logic. Curry 12:23:18 always insisted that he got the idea of using h from M. Sch� 12:23:18 onnkels [Sch24] (see 12:23:18 [CF58, pp. 8, 10]), but most workers seem to prefer to pronounce currying rather 12:23:21 than sch� 12:23:25 onnkeling. 12:23:31 hkBst_ [~hkBst@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has joined #scheme 12:23:43 err.. 12:23:44 sch� 12:24:52 damn you irssi... doesnt support utf8. 12:25:51 -!- hkBst [~hkBst@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 12:25:57 So... Curry curried sch�nfinkeling? 12:25:58 "shoenfinkeling" was the right word 12:26:11 -!- udzinari [~user@nat/ibm/x-qikvbjrazndfsbjl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:30:58 karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has joined #scheme 12:31:11 schmir [~schmir@p54A9138A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 12:36:41 so basically, when you have tail call recursion you end up with exponenital growth 12:37:07 where as with iteration (a loop) you end up with linear growth 12:37:48 but isn't linear growth prefered? (since its more predictable) 12:38:11 Recursion and iteration of what leads to growth of what? 12:39:36 time. 12:39:58 *morphir* hides 12:40:37 *morphir* peaks carefully up 12:40:40 Please don't curry my whats. 12:40:50 samth [~samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 12:48:26 (* 4 (* 3 (fact 2))) <--- in that computation, the 4 is not kept track of. Right? 12:49:21 its not before it hits the base case it starts to collect the breadcrumbs 12:49:25 Your questions don't make much sense as they're phrased 12:49:53 saying... oh, there is 3 ... oh, there is 4 12:50:24 Jafet: its a tail call recursion 12:50:37 If that is the final expression of a procedure called fact, then it is not a tail recursive call. 12:50:41 (fact 4) 12:50:53 factorial that is 12:51:26 Simply evaluate the procedure. If you end up with a form that is a function call to itself, then it is tail recursive. 12:52:03 yeh, I know 12:52:06 -!- nullpo [~nullpo@221x252x46x83.ap221.ftth.ucom.ne.jp] has quit [Quit: Leaving...] 12:52:37 but what I meant to ask is: does it accumulate the "breadcrumbs"? 12:53:01 because a recursive pyramide can get quite large 12:53:36 you understand what I mean? 12:54:47 each stack frame is always focused towards the current computation 12:55:14 No, you don't know. 12:55:39 bweaver [~user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 12:55:51 That form is a call to the procedure *, not fact. 12:59:05 slide 4.1.9 at lecture4webhand.pdf 12:59:13 there you will see what I mean 12:59:39 in that slide, they try to visualize how the computation goes about� 13:00:23 but the computer does not make such a pyramide pattern of course 13:01:15 I won't read that, whatever it is. Explain your thoughts completely, or get someone else to read that 13:01:17 thats just a pedagocical "trcik" 13:01:30 trick* 13:01:49 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 13:04:52 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 13:06:25 myu2 [~myu2@161.90.128.210.bf.2iij.net] has joined #scheme 13:23:50 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 13:23:55 Jafet [~Jafet@124.13.146.39] has joined #scheme 13:23:56 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@124.13.146.39] has quit [Changing host] 13:23:56 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 13:27:30 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@c-75-69-96-50.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: copumpkin] 13:29:28 luz [~davids@139.82.89.70] has joined #scheme 13:30:54 pavelludiq [~quassel@87.246.12.90] has joined #scheme 13:41:20 foof [~user@118-021-204-067.jp.fiberbit.net] has joined #scheme 13:49:03 -!- karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:52:53 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@112.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: leaving] 13:53:56 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-173-88-196-177.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 13:54:51 -!- necroforest [~jarred@pool-71-191-247-161.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:58:04 copumpkin [~copumpkin@dhcp-212-226.cs.dartmouth.edu] has joined #scheme 14:09:31 josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 14:15:22 -!- rstandy [~rastandy@net-93-144-149-236.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 14:21:00 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has quit [Quit: josephholsten] 14:28:37 -!- stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 14:35:33 josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 14:36:27 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@ip68-0-123-16.tu.ok.cox.net] has quit [Client Quit] 14:37:51 -!- myu2 [~myu2@161.90.128.210.bf.2iij.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:38:46 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Quit: leaving] 14:48:17 -!- schmir [~schmir@p54A9138A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:49:20 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 14:49:35 -!- Nshag [user@lns-bzn-37-82-253-22-113.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 14:55:53 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 14:56:31 anyone know of a way to visualize your scheme application in a graph? 14:57:37 Of functions and their call sites? 14:58:55 foof: yes 14:59:56 DrScheme can show where identifiers are referenced, but just hovering over one variable at a time - I don't think it can display a whole graph for the program. 15:00:18 josephholsten [~josephhol@70.234.132.145] has joined #scheme 15:02:53 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:02:57 morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has joined #scheme 15:04:55 Nshag [user@lns-bzn-44-82-249-237-1.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 15:17:40 dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has joined #scheme 15:18:03 wg1: The inmates are running the asylum 15:18:08 ;-) 15:18:45 hello dharmatech 15:18:51 Sup big Q! 15:19:26 Not much, trying to get people to give me money so I can get more supplies print books 15:19:27 ;) 15:21:55 many of us are doing similarly. 15:22:26 haha 15:22:33 My "scheme" ... my "gambit", or "racket", if you will; is to persuade my employer to give me money so I can get more supplies, such as food, kitty litter, beer, etc. 15:23:36 What's the ratio of implementors to non-implementors on WG1? 15:23:38 ;-p 15:24:51 foof: I did not catch your reply earlier (if you had one) 15:25:18 the questions was: anyone know of a way to visualize your scheme application in a graph? 15:25:31 er.. -s 15:25:57 Looks like the ratio is 2/21 15:26:03 morphir: Somewhere I wrote a script to convert sexps to a graphviz dot file 15:26:21 morphir: But that just displays syntactic structure, really 15:27:25 -!- xwl [~user@123.115.109.149] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 15:27:59 dharmatech: What do you consider an implementor? 15:28:34 -!- cky_ [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 15:29:11 One way to count would be designed, developed, and maintained, an implementation that is available and currently in use. 15:29:28 By that definition, foof qualifies. 15:29:31 Who else though? 15:32:23 It looks like on R5RS the ratio was 2/16 15:32:32 Hanson and Dybvig 15:32:55 Yikes... I mean 5/16 15:33:02 Rees, Kelsey, Clinger 15:33:18 Quadrescence: that sounds really cool 15:34:14 Quadrescence: yeah, I would love to have such a thing available 15:34:39 it would be cool if that was a feature available in slime 15:34:49 -!- mreggen [~mreggen@cm-84.215.18.49.getinternet.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:35:15 Professor ratio in R5RS was: 7/16 15:36:03 Looks like the PhD ratio was 16/16 :-) 15:37:27 zmanning [~zmanning@64.122.14.80] has joined #scheme 15:38:28 And by '16' I mean '19' in all those. 15:38:31 :-) 15:39:39 HG` [~HG@xdslar193.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 15:39:42 dharmatech: I guess I fall under that definition except with "available" and "in use" 15:40:04 Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-48-133.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 15:40:11 Quadrescence, Hand it over! ;-) 15:41:47 It's interesting to have a more "user" dominated group, should give things a different flavour. 15:41:49 dharmatech: Well, if you add the restriction "scheme implementations only", the forget it. I have no even attempted to try to make a standard Scheme because there are a lot there now, and I wanted to make something that cured what I saw as shortcomings to the language (and hence I made "delta") 15:43:42 I actually really appreciate the researchy/off-the-wall ideas being thrown around. But of course, they don't belong in WG1. It would be great of the folks proposing those ideas hacked them up. 15:44:36 For example, it would be cool to see Lord Scheme in action. Or to see Harvey Scheme as an example of minimalism. 15:45:05 It seems like folks on the WG1 are just ignoring reminders that it's not the place for wild ideas. 15:45:12 Depends what you mean by researchy/off-the-wall. If they're fleeting ideas, then they don't really belong for serious consideration (since this is a language standardization committee, not a Make-A-New-Language committee). 15:46:52 Personally, I'm all /for/ making radical changes /if they do more positive than negative/ for the language. For instance, something I really wish could be standardized are soft/optionally static types. I am just very hesitant to post these ideas since they are so different, and it'd really be an uphill battle. 15:47:37 Yeah; there's one implementor who might go with you on that, and he's not on the team (Bigloo/Serrano). :-) 15:48:12 Radical change should be accompanied by a name besides "Scheme". :-) Like Kernel for example. 15:48:12 Yeah. I'd still do it differently than him. 15:48:53 -!- sstrickl [~sstrickl@pool-141-157-183-82.bos.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: sstrickl] 15:49:46 I guess there seems to be a lot of users who are very keen on backwards compatibility, which I personally find somewhat depressing. 15:51:05 Scheme is like Detroit. :-D 15:51:11 I don't think the language should be transformed into something extravagantly new, but maintaining strict compatibility, for example, just inherits old problems and kludgy "fixes" at the same time, which precisely goes against what WG1 is for: something more minimalistic and pedagogical. 15:52:04 Well, what's one place where you think breaking compatibility is in order? 15:52:27 R6RS did that so it's not unprecedented. 15:52:47 I think WG1 should take ERR5RS as a starting point. 15:53:19 Or at least consider it and mention why they chose not to go with it. 15:53:41 To reject it lightly is silly; Clingers a smart dude. 15:53:52 -!- hkBst_ [~hkBst@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:55:05 Quadrescence: Historically reports did break compatibility pretty freely 15:55:20 For example, '() used to be considered false up until R4, I think 15:56:25 I get the feeling that the current team is gonna throw out identifier macros and maybe syntax-case. Perhaps WG2 will keep syntax-case. 15:57:20 Clinger argued against identifier macros. 15:57:26 Dybvig is for them. 15:57:28 -!- HG` [~HG@xdslar193.osnanet.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 15:57:29 I actually wish low-level macros were in WG1, and all that junk is added to 2 16:02:02 It is awkward to me to see an elaborate macro system in a minimal language whereas comparing to common lisp, the opposite of a minimalist language, provides principally low-level macros 16:02:34 -!- samth [~samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:05:08 Well I like the Chibi approach to macros. 16:05:31 So if WG2 could build syntax-case ontop of er, that would be nice. 16:05:43 But nobody's yet proven that this can be done. 16:05:48 Or at least demonstratedit. 16:07:58 cky [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 16:08:42 -!- offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:08:43 The problem is with symbols. If the symbol data type was actually what syntax-case calls an identifier, and marks were preserved between phases, then the obvious complexity would disappear. 16:08:57 There's alot I appreciate about PLT, I just wish it were faster (at least as fast as Larceny or Ikarus). 16:09:45 And it would be nice if they made the #!r6rs optional. 16:16:52 offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has joined #scheme 16:17:25 chandler, Do you mean the complexity of syntax-case on top of er? I.e. that would become easier if symbols were more endowed? 16:20:51 foof: I think chibi has an alignment bug in emit_word(); in the next-to-last line, it potentially writes to an unaligned address 16:21:58 hey rotty! 16:22:06 dharmatech: Hi! 16:25:59 dharmatech: Explicit renaming wouldn't make much sense in such a system; rather, ordinary backquote-style macros would be automatically hygienic. 16:28:20 -!- bokr [~eduska@95.154.102.124] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 16:31:57 Fabse [~mightyfid@wikipedia/Track-n-Field] has joined #scheme 16:35:17 chandler, Aha. Well yeah, there's another example of a technique that's definately worth exploring but as far as I know, hasn't been yet. 16:35:26 At least in Scheme. 16:45:44 -!- samth_away is now known as samth 16:52:28 -!- cky [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Rebootin'] 16:53:49 -!- mhoye [~mhoye@shell.off.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 17:03:36 JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-96-235-15-67.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 17:05:06 cky [~cky@cpe-065-190-148-048.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 17:05:36 jlongster [~user@c-68-59-187-95.hsd1.tn.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:07:18 dharmatech, the #!r6rs is optional 17:07:38 you only need it in PLT if you want to treat the program as a PLT module as well 17:08:26 samth, Is it optional in library files as well? 17:09:07 samth, Hello by the way. You're the typed scheme guy right? Nice to meet you. :-) 17:09:35 -!- foof [~user@118-021-204-067.jp.fiberbit.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 17:10:06 dharmatech, I am indeed the typed scheme guy 17:12:20 yeah, it's optional in library files too 17:12:53 again, if you want drscheme to be able to run your file, you'll need the #!r6rs 17:17:55 $ plt-r6rs ++path /home/dharmatech/scheme /tmp/test.sps 17:18:26 ypsilon is able to run 'test.sps' but plt-r6rs errors out. 17:19:51 http://gist.github.com/321917 17:20:07 I've got 'abc.sls' in '~/scheme'. 17:22:18 sstrickl [~sstrickl@nomad.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 17:22:18 All the other implementations are able to run 'test.sps' by setting an environment variable (e.g. YPSILON_SITELIB) pointing to '~/scheme'. 17:22:35 i used 'plt-r6rs --install foo.sls' 17:22:46 and then everything worked fine from there 17:23:28 Right; is there a way to not have to '--install'? I.e. direct MzScheme to a location where libraries are located? 17:24:46 The '--install' works on my end too by the way. :-) 17:26:52 Anywho, thanks for the help samth. 17:28:19 jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:28:30 rstandy [~rastandy@net-93-144-184-166.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has joined #scheme 17:28:37 bbl... 17:28:43 -!- dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 17:29:03 mcarter [~mcarter@217.155.40.178] has joined #scheme 17:30:03 albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has joined #scheme 17:30:47 hello, what's the difference betwen a (define a 10) (do something here) and (let ((a 10)) (do something here)) ? 17:32:09 -!- mcarter [~mcarter@217.155.40.178] has quit [Client Quit] 17:33:31 sphex [~nobody@modemcable072.42-37-24.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 17:34:27 albacker: The former is two statements: (begin (define a 10) something ...) 17:34:51 albacker: The latter is equivalent to ((lambda (a) something ...) 10). 17:35:41 albacker: In other words, using DEFINE that way produces a side-effect in the environment, but LET establishes a new lexical scope. 17:36:55 albacker: If you use DEFINE inside another DEFINE, there's not much difference. For example (define (foo) (define a 10) something ...) is equivalent to (define (foo) (letrec ((a 10)) something ...)). 17:37:53 albacker: It's the top-level where it makes the most difference. 17:38:50 bweaver, i asked because i didn't understand why this worked http://pastebin.com/jaqHQvcW 17:39:40 if we called this 3 times i would get 1, 2, 3 as output (for each call). and i couldn't see why. since we do a let counter 0, and then we increment it by one. 17:39:51 aren't we re-initialising it each time the function is called? 17:41:22 albacker: When this form is evaluated, the LET creates a "private" lexical scope for the LAMBDA, which is returned from the LET. 17:42:13 albacker: INC-COUNTER is bound to the evaluated LAMBDA expression, which is a procedure "closed over" the binding COUNTER. 17:43:02 albacker: Each time INC-COUNTER is called, the body is evaluated to increment the COUNTER binding, which is not reset to zero every time INC-COUNTER is called. It is set to 0 when the LET is evaluated. 17:43:43 so that let is not evaluated everytime the function is called? 17:44:56 Right, it is only evaluated once: at the time DEFINE is evaluated. 17:45:04 stepnem [~stepnem@88.103.132.186] has joined #scheme 17:45:16 The result of evaluating it is a procedure (the LAMBDA) that is closed over the COUNTER binding. 17:46:08 albacker: Here's an alternative way to make a counter that might be more clear: . 17:46:12 so in fact the inc-counter is just the lambda function that's there, with a variable in it's environment 17:46:49 albacker: Yes, and the purpose of using the LET is to make sure the COUNTER binding is scoped so only the LAMBDA can access it. 17:47:41 alvatar [~alvatar@242.127.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 17:48:11 i see. 17:48:37 is it me or everybody gets confused at this place? 17:50:37 it can be quite difficult to wrap your head around scheme :P 17:50:49 *elly* spent a lot of time very, very confused 17:51:22 well i got introduced to it last year, then i worked with scheme and learned the fun (the lambda of scheme, but without knowing about lambda expressions on scheme), and now i'm going back to it. 17:51:33 it's fun to learn it, but it sux. at school they never explain everything. 17:51:34 nice :) 17:51:45 learning this at school sux * 17:51:58 s/scheme/ocaml 17:52:02 duh -_- 17:53:03 albacker: Have you seen SICP and the Little Schemer ? 17:53:23 They're both nice books to work through if you're trying to learn on your own. 17:54:13 thanks. 17:55:00 i think i've worked with tspl4 17:55:00 -!- vlekkie [~phillip@84-104-203-195.cable.quicknet.nl] has quit [] 17:55:13 HG` [~HG@xdslfi152.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 17:59:23 mhoye [~mhoye@shell.off.net] has joined #scheme 18:01:17 Let's do the time warp: Norvig's "Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years" essay, (c) 2001, contains a reference to Gladwell's "Outliers" book, (c) 2008. Hmmmm. 18:03:25 -!- kniu [~kniu@HOHOHO.RES.CMU.EDU] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 18:03:52 and it's actually 2004 not 2010... 18:06:50 interesting article.. 18:07:16 Daemmerung: O_o new edition? 18:08:41 elly: apparently "timeless wisdom" insists on being timeless in multiple senses of the word 18:09:16 -!- HG` [~HG@xdslfi152.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 18:10:19 yeah :P 18:10:45 path[l]_ [~path@122.167.240.108] has joined #scheme 18:12:55 -!- path[l] [~path@122.167.244.232] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 18:12:55 -!- path[l]_ is now known as path[l] 18:17:57 kniu [~kniu@CMU-311358.WV.CC.CMU.EDU] has joined #scheme 18:27:43 marcob [~marco@host214-10-dynamic.7-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has joined #scheme 18:29:24 -!- JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-96-235-15-67.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 18:32:00 saint_cypher [~saint_cyp@adsl-99-2-72-93.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 18:34:16 JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-96-236-172-81.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 18:36:42 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 18:41:16 schemer999 [~schemer99@cpe-76-90-137-46.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 18:47:34 -!- albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 18:48:02 -!- marcob [~marco@host214-10-dynamic.7-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has left #scheme 18:52:00 -!- minion [~minion@common-lisp.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 18:57:31 bzzbzz [~franco@modemcable240.34-83-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 19:00:06 antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has joined #scheme 19:00:16 -!- snorble [~none@s83-179-14-105.cust.tele2.se] has left #scheme 19:03:44 snorble [~none@s83-179-14-105.cust.tele2.se] has joined #scheme 19:03:48 -!- JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-96-236-172-81.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:03:57 mejja [~user@c-68b6e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #scheme 19:05:43 Blkt [~user@93-33-135-217.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has joined #scheme 19:07:58 Narrenschiff [~ritchie@xolotl.plus.com] has joined #scheme 19:11:02 dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has joined #scheme 19:15:03 -!- alaricsp [~alaric@85.189.36.251.griffin.managedbroadband.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 19:19:41 -!- dharmatech [~dharmatec@206.55.180.51] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:19:57 Skewb [~Skewb@83.231.94.166] has joined #scheme 19:20:08 albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has joined #scheme 19:27:18 hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5ADF4.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 19:34:11 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@70.234.132.145] has quit [Quit: josephholsten] 19:34:34 wingo [~wingo@223.Red-79-150-127.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 19:39:01 Fare [~Fare@c-24-218-127-11.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 19:39:01 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@dhcp-212-226.cs.dartmouth.edu] has quit [Quit: copumpkin] 19:44:29 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Quit: +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++] 19:46:04 pdponze [~pierre@144.85.124.96] has joined #scheme 19:46:49 uman [~uman@unaffiliated/uman] has joined #scheme 19:50:55 -!- uman [~uman@unaffiliated/uman] has quit [Client Quit] 19:54:34 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@242.127.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: leaving] 19:56:16 -!- melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 19:56:23 -!- Narrenschiff [~ritchie@xolotl.plus.com] has quit [Quit: Narrenschiff] 20:01:48 -!- rstandy [~rastandy@net-93-144-184-166.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 20:02:11 jengle [~9598170a@gateway/web/freenode/x-vkohpbflfdxrnoxk] has joined #scheme 20:02:45 -!- Skewb is now known as Skewb|afk 20:05:06 -!- sstrickl [~sstrickl@nomad.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Quit: sstrickl] 20:05:28 sstrickl [~sstrickl@dublin.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 20:05:29 -!- sstrickl [~sstrickl@dublin.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:05:48 sstrickl [~sstrickl@nomad.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 20:10:40 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 20:13:29 -!- Nshag [user@lns-bzn-44-82-249-237-1.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:17:53 -!- Modius [~Modius@cpe-70-123-130-159.austin.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 20:24:36 HG` [~HG@xdslfi152.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 20:29:28 jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has joined #scheme 20:34:37 -!- Skewb|afk is now known as Skewb 20:34:42 szgyg [~chatzilla@dsl5401B25B.pool.t-online.hu] has joined #scheme 20:46:17 nijm [~nick@94-195-227-153.zone9.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme 20:47:45 pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has joined #scheme 20:48:43 copumpkin [~copumpkin@c-75-69-96-50.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 20:49:47 SharkBrain [~gerard@210.48.104.34] has joined #scheme 20:51:23 Nshag [user@lns-bzn-44-82-249-237-1.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 20:52:16 Hi all, I've just started reading the little shemer and I'm very confused. I'm on the first commandment and I'm trying out the code listings. (car '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish) is supposed to evaluate to ((hotdogs)), but I get the whole list. 20:52:40 ...? 20:53:05 can you copy and paste from your REPL into here? 20:54:04 (car '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish) 20:54:13 ;Value 13: (((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish) 20:54:32 huh; which scheme is that? 20:54:44 er 20:54:49 your parents are unbalanced, by the way 20:55:00 so I hope you aren't typing just that :P 20:55:01 that's a little personal 20:55:06 Moin moin! 20:55:25 -!- luz [~davids@139.82.89.70] has quit [Quit: Client exiting] 20:56:14 ah. 20:56:40 -!- szgyg [~chatzilla@dsl5401B25B.pool.t-online.hu] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20:57:14 What exactly is the quote ' doing? 20:57:36 it is preventing the form from being evaluated 20:57:54 compare the results of '(+ 1 1) versus (+ 1 1) 21:03:17 so it's a sort of base case? Otherwise it would try to evaluate + to something. Is that right? 21:03:25 no, it's not a base case 21:03:37 it "quotes" a form so that the form is not evaluated by the evaluator :P 21:03:57 quote is a special form, right? 21:04:19 yes 21:04:46 in the sense that in the evaluator, (quote x) evaluates to x, not to whatever x evaluates to :PO 21:04:50 er, :P 21:08:25 rudybot: init scheme 21:08:37 Daemmerung: your scheme sandbox is ready 21:09:07 rudybot: eval (define demo '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish)) 21:09:17 rudybot: eval (car demo) 21:09:17 Daemmerung: ; Value: ((hotdogs)) 21:09:32 what about car '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish), why does that evaluate to the whole list? 21:09:48 without the outer parenthesis 21:09:53 It doesn't. What else are you typing? 21:10:13 rudybot: eval (car '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish)) 21:10:13 Daemmerung: ; Value: ((hotdogs)) 21:10:37 rudybot: init scheme 21:10:40 nijm: your scheme sandbox is ready 21:11:06 rudybot: eval car '(((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish) 21:11:07 nijm: ; Value: (((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish) 21:11:24 No. You have to supply outer parens. 21:11:36 (car foo) not: car foo 21:11:48 josephholsten [~josephhol@wsip-70-184-255-252.ok.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 21:12:08 without the outer parens, CAR is never called 21:12:22 "car foo" is two expressions: car, and foo. "(car foo)" is one expression: the CAR of foo. 21:12:27 instead you get this: 21:12:28 Does anybody have the little schemer hand? 4th edition, p.6, first two listings 21:12:33 rudybot: eval 1 2 3 21:12:34 *to hand 21:12:35 elly: your sandbox is ready 21:12:35 elly: ; Value: 3 21:13:00 nijm: You can see why the ()'s are important: Type car then ENTER. Then the '(((hotdogs)) ... part and ENTER. 21:13:11 nijm: That is not a listing that you can type into a REPL as-is. That is not a program. 21:13:43 Look at the first two entries on that page. 21:13:56 *Daemmerung* is slwo today, excuse dlow typing, too many diff kbds 21:14:31 "What is the car of L?" vs "What is (car L)?" 21:14:36 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 21:14:48 You must be right, but the book is misleading: "(because (car l) is _another_ way to ask for "the car of the list l". referring to the 1st listing, where it says just car l 21:15:30 -!- zmanning [~zmanning@64.122.14.80] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 21:15:31 that bonus ( before because that I just added is helping nobody. 21:15:33 No. Did you really type "the car of the list l" into your REPL? 21:15:40 no 21:16:08 I typed "car (((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish)" 21:16:15 nijm: If you have a function, then it will be executed if you enclose it in parentheses. 21:16:24 nijm: And car is a function. 21:16:39 nijm: Nowhere in the book does it say that you can type that. 21:16:55 nijm: If you do not enclose a function in parentheses, it will be treated as a symbol. 21:17:16 I believe you, I'm just saying the book doesn't say that 21:17:28 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@wsip-70-184-255-252.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:17:33 nijm: That's because you probably shouldn't be using the computer right now 21:17:45 The book is best enjoyed while working through on paper 21:17:47 josephholsten [~josephhol@wsip-70-184-255-252.ok.ok.cox.net] has joined #scheme 21:17:55 Trying to do things in a real scheme will just confuse you 21:18:01 It is doing :-) 21:18:21 For example the quote thing; that's painstakingly worked around in the book until it's time to explain it properly 21:18:35 You'll notice that quote is never used in the book until much later on 21:18:54 What it really means on p.6 of the book in 1 is (car l), and in 2, ((car l)) 21:19:05 They will always refer to lists in roundabout ways like saying "what is the car of (((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish)?" 21:19:20 Or "What is (car l) where l is the list (((hotdogs)) (and) (pickle) relish)?" 21:20:07 Right, I'll get off here then before I get lost in the details and miss the point 21:20:15 thanks guys 21:21:04 I fetched my copy of TLS 21:21:19 Do you still want an answer to your question? 21:22:33 mreggen [~mreggen@cm-84.215.18.49.getinternet.no] has joined #scheme 21:22:42 -!- bweaver [~user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 21:22:43 go on 21:23:15 OK, can you point me to the exact question (or answer?) that confuses you? 21:23:40 if you've got the 4th edition, its on page 6, the first two questions. 21:23:54 I have that edition 21:24:18 The answer to the second makes it out as though (car l) is another way of doing car l, but car l doesn't actually work 21:24:32 It asks "what is the CAR of L where L is ..." 21:24:33 So what I think it means is ((car l)) is another way of doing (car l) 21:24:44 It doesn't 21:25:14 It just means that (car l) is asking in *code* what "the CAR of L" is asking in English 21:25:40 or COBOL 21:25:41 Excuse me, "the CAR of the list L" is asking in English 21:25:53 (was missing "the list" in there) 21:26:10 Does that make sense, nijm? 21:26:16 Perfect, thank you 21:26:19 Cool 21:32:42 -!- jengle [~9598170a@gateway/web/freenode/x-vkohpbflfdxrnoxk] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 21:34:39 gnomon: tmux has matured enough to be usable, I have finally made the switch from GNU screen 21:38:55 zbigniew: What does tmux do better than screen? 21:42:15 -!- metasyntax` [~taylor@75-149-208-121-Illinois.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Be seeing you.] 21:43:05 jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 21:47:53 -!- schemer999 [~schemer99@cpe-76-90-137-46.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 21:49:08 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 21:50:08 -!- Edico [~Edico@unaffiliated/edico] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 21:50:54 -!- kniu [~kniu@CMU-311358.WV.CC.CMU.EDU] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 21:51:02 amoe [~amoe@cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust380.brig.cable.ntl.com] has joined #scheme 21:51:14 -!- amoe [~amoe@cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust380.brig.cable.ntl.com] has left #scheme 21:52:07 zbigniew, that is very interesting to note! 21:52:22 pbusser: primarily it provides far greater control over windows and splits, the splitting paradigm makes more sense to me, you can move windows between sessions, more logical configuration, etc. 21:52:23 I'll have to give it another try. 21:53:05 gnomon: even 4-5 months ago it wasn't ready (the last time I checked), but it has really improved 21:53:41 That is really welcome news. Thanks for poking me about it. 21:53:45 -!- pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:53:49 i'm a huge screen user btw, sometimes i run 3 nested screens, so this is not faint praise 21:54:07 zbigniew, I take it that this is in response to a note made recently on a certain site? 21:54:09 pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has joined #scheme 21:54:19 gnomon: use CVS HEAD for best results 21:54:26 Will do. 21:54:50 gnomon: actually, I'm responding late to a conversation we had months ago, when I had some severe utf8 breakage with screen, and you mentioned tmux; nothing more 21:55:39 zbigniew, ah, how wonderfully coincidental! I just posted something yesterday praising screen and noting that tmux and dtach compete in that space, but in my experience not hugely well. 21:55:57 I will have to revisit them both. 21:57:11 screen still has some advantages in dealing with old and/or recalcitrant terminals, but i'm using tmux full-time on OS X and Linux now 21:57:17 -!- pdponze [~pierre@144.85.124.96] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:57:48 undoubtedly, screen will remain essential when I need to deal with HP-UX 21:58:14 well, back to working on chicken-doc 21:58:49 -!- hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5ADF4.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:59:40 -!- pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:00:04 pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has joined #scheme 22:00:37 *mario-goulart* uses tmux too 22:01:07 a screen alternative? this sounds like an interesting heresy 22:04:19 schemer999 [~schemer99@cpe-76-90-137-46.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 22:06:58 -!- attila_lendvai [~ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 22:07:36 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:08:57 arcfide [arcfide@140-182-146-242.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu] has joined #scheme 22:09:09 jonrafkind [~jon@c-98-202-82-46.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 22:12:48 zbigniew, one last thing: how is tmux's digraph input support? Excellent, incomplete, non-existent? Can I tell it to insert arbitrary Unicode codepoints? 22:13:09 kniu [~kniu@HOHOHO.RES.CMU.EDU] has joined #scheme 22:13:31 aspect, tmux originally showed up on my radar when I was trying to figure out why terminals under screen scroll so slowly when my window has vertical splits in it. 22:14:55 -!- bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:15:16 bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 22:17:08 -!- morphir [~morphir@84-52-234.12.3p.ntebredband.no] has quit [Quit: leaving] 22:17:12 -!- bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Client Quit] 22:19:48 -!- jlongster [~user@c-68-59-187-95.hsd1.tn.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 22:21:12 phao [~phao@189.107.159.187] has joined #scheme 22:23:40 -!- pbusser [~pbusser@ip138-238-174-82.adsl2.static.versatel.nl] has quit [Quit: Client Quit] 22:23:52 -!- bipt [bpt@cpe-075-182-095-009.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 22:24:33 -!- Blkt [~user@93-33-135-217.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:27:51 rstandy [~rastandy@net-93-144-48-208.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has joined #scheme 22:29:25 *elly* wants to write something like twisted / POE 22:31:01 flonum [~ben@24-138-98-109.zing-net.ca] has joined #scheme 22:31:17 mario-goulart: does tmux behave properly with tiling window managers? screen gets messed up frequently when moving around and hence resizing windows... 22:31:53 rotty: I don't know. I don't use a tiling WM here. 22:32:21 Moving around and resizing seem to work fine. 22:34:42 -!- josephholsten [~josephhol@wsip-70-184-255-252.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 22:36:00 -!- arcfide [arcfide@140-182-146-242.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:36:12 arcfide [arcfide@140-182-146-242.dhcp-bl.indiana.edu] has joined #scheme 22:36:21 -!- flonum [~ben@24-138-98-109.zing-net.ca] has left #scheme 22:41:45 -!- aack [~user@a83-163-241-74.adsl.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:42:06 -!- Fare [~Fare@c-24-218-127-11.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 22:44:14 -!- wingo [~wingo@223.Red-79-150-127.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 22:44:31 mario-goulart: tmux seems nice, and have a way more accessible "command set" as screen 22:44:53 I'll try and see if it behaves better visually in my environment as well 22:44:59 if so, I'm sold :-) 22:48:03 rotty, I've never had screen itself mishandle a window resize. Applications inside it are a different story, but these days most console-mode applications that I still use tend to handle sigwinch usefully. 22:49:26 gnomon: do you use a tiling WM? I use awesome, and it messes up on the lower border, displaying multiple status lines, or shifted statusline. it does so often enough that it's annoying. 22:49:42 it can be fixed by resizing a few times more 22:50:14 rotty: I use the very basic features of tmux. One of the things I like is the possibility of having things similar to tabs, so I can easily see what window I'm using (a screenshot: http://parenteses.org/mario/misc/tmux.png). I use a window manager trick to make the terminal window appear/disappear by pressing C-space (and M-left/right to navigate in "tabs"). 22:52:30