00:04:15 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@76-10-139-177.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 00:04:27 Paraselene_ [~Not@81-178-167-119.dsl.pipex.com] has joined #scheme 00:04:43 -!- Paraselene [~Not@81-178-167-119.dsl.pipex.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 00:05:26 -!- masm [~masm@2.80.136.181] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:09:51 -!- foof [~user@lain.inunome.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:22:18 rbarraud [~rbarraud@118-93-90-205.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has joined #scheme 00:23:19 -!- hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5B34C.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:26:38 -!- rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 00:30:36 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@81.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: leaving] 00:34:24 jar_ [~jar@209-6-213-168.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #scheme 00:36:11 -!- jar_ [~jar@209-6-213-168.c3-0.arl-ubr1.sbo-arl.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Client Quit] 00:41:23 emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has joined #scheme 00:41:32 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-87.vinet.ba] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:42:02 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-87.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 00:50:04 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-136-216.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 00:59:23 hadronzoo [~hadronzoo@64.134.146.151] has joined #scheme 01:00:32 -!- Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:02:17 Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 01:04:42 -!- askhader [~askhader@taurine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 01:05:24 askhader [~askhader@taurine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca] has joined #scheme 01:10:06 -!- saint_cypher [~saint_cyp@dsl081-240-057.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:10:55 eli` [~eli@c-24-61-14-53.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 01:11:28 -!- eli is now known as Guest29776 01:11:58 -!- eli` is now known as eli 01:22:37 -!- eli [~eli@c-24-61-14-53.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 01:23:28 -!- Guest29776 is now known as eli 01:35:17 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 01:37:43 ysph [~user@75-143-70-52.dhcp.aubn.al.charter.com] has joined #scheme 01:38:37 -!- emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:39:31 emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has joined #scheme 01:43:02 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-87.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 01:43:34 -!- proq [~user@unaffiliated/proqesi] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:48:45 -!- winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: lua] 01:50:01 winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 02:06:38 -!- ws [wswieb@akson.sgh.waw.pl] has quit [Quit: ...] 02:08:30 -!- askhader [~askhader@taurine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:08:35 askhader [~askhader@taurine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca] has joined #scheme 02:10:12 ccl-logbot [~ccl-logbo@setf.clozure.com] has joined #scheme 02:10:12 02:10:12 -!- names: ccl-logbot askhader winxordie emma ysph hohoho Poeir hadronzoo rbarraud Paraselene_ ToxicFrog virl cpr420 saccade curi_ jmcphers MichaelRaskin Nshag xwl jao ski_ copec melba copumpkin Checkie sjamaan eli Zarutian futilius moell xwl_ leppie edw` gnomon toxygen timj_ bipt Mohamdu sladegen lisppaste yosafbridge rapacity eno drhodes ve mbishop WormDrink cky mornfall FareWell aehrisch weinholt eldragon franki^ hse-hoens dlouhy fda314925 C-Keen jyujin sloyd 02:10:12 -!- names: saccade__ offby1 acarrico clog zbigniew dfeuer metasyntax Pepe_ Sergio` alaricsp rmrfchik gabot nowhereman rudybot ri4a rotty tizoc erg bzzbzz incubot mario-goulart alexsuraci pjb`` araujo klutometis Intensity Reisen ineiros_ zeroish REPLeffect Leonidas Khisanth felipe kencausey qebab bburhans z0d jay-mccarthy tltstc pchrist Kusanagi joast aoh stepnem Quadrescence chandler ecraven tessier sepisultrum XTL strobedream bgs100 Obfuscate bremner elf Adrinael 02:10:12 -!- names: rrm3 inhortte elly shardz duncanm twobitsprite destructure Axioplase_ underdev ski mhoye nasloc__ bunzz 02:13:09 Michael_Mohamed [~Mohamdu@CPE0013f7bc6820-CM0013f7bc681c.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 02:13:34 -!- curi_ [~curi@adsl-99-114-139-86.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:16:11 -!- Mohamdu [~Mohamdu@CPE0013f7bc6820-CM0013f7bc681c.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 02:22:30 brandelune [~suzume@pl571.nas982.takamatsu.nttpc.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 02:24:01 _danb_ [~user@124-171-25-183.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #scheme 02:24:40 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 02:35:22 asarch [~asarch@189.188.152.191] has joined #scheme 02:35:25 -!- eli [~eli@winooski.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 02:38:53 mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has joined #scheme 02:39:12 parolang [~user@8e4a01246100775874c4f448e9887093.oregonrd-wifi-1261.amplex.net] has joined #scheme 02:40:08 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:42:04 -!- ski_ [~md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 02:42:49 arthur` [~arthur@ppp-71-139-5-141.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net] has joined #scheme 02:43:11 -!- arthur` [~arthur@ppp-71-139-5-141.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net] has left #scheme 02:45:23 -!- Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has quit [Quit: Zarutian] 02:58:30 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 03:10:06 adu [~ajr@pool-71-191-173-118.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:18:23 -!- asarch [~asarch@189.188.152.191] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:20:54 eli [~eli@winooski.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 03:22:39 MononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 03:26:11 -!- jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:27:56 jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has joined #scheme 03:30:42 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 03:32:45 -!- jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:34:53 It seems to me like there are no arrays in scheme, only vectors. Is this the case? 03:37:01 jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has joined #scheme 03:39:00 -!- offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 03:42:39 askhader: oh 03:43:06 askhader: are you talking about multidimensional arrays? 03:43:23 askhader: i think you need a library for that 03:44:42 -!- ysph [~user@75-143-70-52.dhcp.aubn.al.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 03:48:18 adu: No. 03:48:19 I'm not. 03:48:37 foof [~user@lain.inunome.com] has joined #scheme 03:52:14 askhader: are you talking about mutable arrays? 03:52:26 askhader: are you talking about fixed-size arrays? 03:52:45 askhader: are you talking about homogeneous arrays? 03:56:37 I see no difference between what you might call an array in c and what is caled a vector in plt-scheme 03:57:08 yes, scheme vectors are like C arrays 03:57:29 scheme lists are like Python arrays 03:58:41 if you want fixed-size arrays use vectors, and if you want mutable arrays use lists 03:59:13 and if the fixed-size array you want is of length 2, then use a cons 04:01:20 adu: No, I will make my vector implementation mutable. 04:01:39 As to take advantage of binary searching and sorting 04:02:44 wouldn't that require non-standard "method"s? 04:08:56 -!- parolang [~user@8e4a01246100775874c4f448e9887093.oregonrd-wifi-1261.amplex.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:13:29 adu: Only one 04:13:48 To resize the vector 04:13:57 This would invole three seperate vector-copy 04:14:07 but there exists vector-sort and vector-binary-search 04:20:02 proq [~user@unaffiliated/proqesi] has joined #scheme 04:30:57 -!- melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 04:34:24 arcfide [~arcfide@adsl-99-75-51-152.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 04:37:28 melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has joined #scheme 04:48:00 -!- hadronzoo [~hadronzoo@64.134.146.151] has quit [Quit: hadronzoo] 04:52:04 offby1 [~user@q-static-138-125.avvanta.com] has joined #scheme 04:52:09 -!- offby1 [~user@q-static-138-125.avvanta.com] has quit [Changing host] 04:52:09 offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has joined #scheme 04:57:03 If anyone is up for helping me test some teleconferencing solutions right now.... 04:57:33 You could log onto your nearest SIP phone (Ekiga) and go to sip:5011123@ekiga.net. :-) 04:57:59 you're showing up as busy 04:58:10 foof: I'm in the conference room right now. 04:58:18 foof: You're around. Do you want to try to call me directly? 04:58:38 Right now I'm seeing whether the conference rooms work at all. 04:59:27 hmmm... couldn't access the conference addr either 04:59:36 foof: I've been trying your sip2sip.info address, but there's something wrong with my system and while I can call out to sip2sip.info addresses through Blink on my Mac, I can't do so on my Linux box. 04:59:38 i actually have to run now 04:59:43 Alright. 05:00:13 i'll be back this evening (now+8hours) but am pretty busy all weekend 05:00:19 just moved and still in boxes 05:00:20 However, conferencing on my Linux box seems to work fine. 05:00:27 Yeah, no worries. 05:00:58 If you want I'll leave Ekiga on when I'm around and you can ping me on arcfide@sacrideo.us (XMPP) when you're around. 05:01:22 [BTW, if anyone else is awake and wants to give it a go...that's fine too. ] 05:06:07 -!- drhodes [~none@209-20-72-61.slicehost.net] has left #scheme 05:08:17 -!- bgs100 is now known as bgs000 05:12:45 JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-72-95-204-229.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 05:15:52 kuitang [~kuitang@173-30-14-191.client.mchsi.com] has joined #scheme 05:16:14 Why is continuation passing style tail recursive? Doesn't the call stack just get transferred to the call stack of the continuation(s)? 05:18:33 kuitang: You don't want to introduce implicit call stacks. 05:19:07 kuitang: You want to reveal the entire flow explicitly in the code, rather than hiding parts of it in the call stack. 05:19:16 Since tail-recursion does not increase the stack depth, you're fine. 05:19:55 Or at least, that's how I have always through of it. There may be a more technically correct description from someone else around here. 05:24:00 -!- MononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 05:25:33 Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has joined #scheme 05:29:20 -!- rbarraud [~rbarraud@118-93-90-205.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:30:43 module: no #%module-begin binding in the module's language 05:30:52 i'm a bit confused as to what this even means 05:31:10 This is PLT Scheme? 05:31:15 yep 05:31:21 Are you using the module language? 05:31:34 Or, rather, did you remember to put a #lang at the top of you rfile? 05:31:37 yep 05:31:39 I don't use PLT, so I'm just guessing here. 05:31:47 #lang scheme 05:31:48 ah k 05:32:18 thanks, i'm guessing what my real troubles are have something to do with plt specific stuff 05:33:32 -!- arcfide [~arcfide@adsl-99-75-51-152.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 05:52:01 HG` [~HG@xdslfc064.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 05:53:40 -!- kuitang [~kuitang@173-30-14-191.client.mchsi.com] has quit [Quit: leaving] 05:54:16 JoelMcCracken: You've probably used some "non-language" module. 05:55:16 JoelMcCracken: For example: (module foo scheme/list) leads to this error because scheme/list doesn't know how to deal with a module body (=> it is not a language module). 05:55:57 roderic [~roderic@zerowing.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 06:07:59 toekutr [~toekutr@adsl-69-107-113-17.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has joined #scheme 06:07:59 -!- toekutr [~toekutr@adsl-69-107-113-17.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net] has quit [Client Quit] 06:11:53 -!- emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 06:13:03 WLen [~Len@77.126.226.170] has joined #scheme 06:14:12 -!- WLen [~Len@77.126.226.170] has quit [Client Quit] 06:14:42 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 06:22:43 ah yes, i'd say you're right 06:23:17 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 06:26:42 ski_ [~md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has joined #scheme 06:29:36 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-71-191-173-118.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu] 06:42:05 edw`` [~user@71.23.225.183] has joined #scheme 06:45:47 -!- edw` [~user@71.23.225.183] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 06:46:01 jewel [~jewel@196-210-187-124-tbnb-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 06:47:26 -!- JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-72-95-204-229.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 06:56:24 rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 06:58:59 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-210-146-237-tvwt-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:05:43 leppie [~lolcow@196-210-146-237-tvwt-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 07:29:15 -!- mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:42:15 mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has joined #scheme 07:42:22 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 07:55:32 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 08:03:45 -!- Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 08:05:03 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 08:08:09 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 08:09:00 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 08:09:45 masm [~masm@bl19-128-235.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 08:10:14 Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has joined #scheme 08:21:02 Blkt [~user@93-33-134-113.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has joined #scheme 08:25:16 schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 08:30:51 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-33-57.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 08:36:55 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-210-146-237-tvwt-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 08:37:19 mmc [~michal@cs181176076.pp.htv.fi] has joined #scheme 08:50:20 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 08:57:40 -!- xwl [~user@123.115.120.38] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:06:50 ejs [~eugen@nat.ironport.com] has joined #scheme 09:09:37 -!- schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 09:15:57 -!- ejs [~eugen@nat.ironport.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 09:37:45 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5e02b45e.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 09:38:20 -!- fradgers- [~fradgers-@5e02b45e.bb.sky.com] has left #scheme 09:38:42 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5e02b45e.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 09:42:53 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-210-187-124-tbnb-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 09:45:02 ejs [~eugen@85-238-113-109.wifi.tenet.od.ua] has joined #scheme 10:01:56 ktzqbp [~ktzqbp@unaffiliated/ktzqbp] has joined #scheme 10:03:28 -!- proq [~user@unaffiliated/proqesi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 10:04:13 -!- HG` [~HG@xdslfc064.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: HG`] 10:10:01 -!- jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:10:19 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 10:12:24 -!- Paraselene_ [~Not@81-178-167-119.dsl.pipex.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 10:14:46 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-136-216.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 10:23:01 -!- ejs [~eugen@85-238-113-109.wifi.tenet.od.ua] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 10:23:30 ejs [~eugen@nat.ironport.com] has joined #scheme 10:25:17 copumpkin_ [~copumpkin@94.165.65.37] has joined #scheme 10:27:01 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 10:27:24 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@94.164.96.7] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 10:27:25 -!- copumpkin_ is now known as copumpkin 10:32:00 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:32:25 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 10:37:13 HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-55-139.dip.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 10:41:18 imran_sr [~imran@dsl081-056-239.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #scheme 10:45:58 reified [~reified@usr018.bb160-01.udk.im.wakwak.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 10:47:16 hi. plodding my way through scheme (gauche), and I have a real newbie question here. Any takers? 10:47:44 imran_sr: Rule #1 of IRC: Don't ask to ask, just ask 10:47:48 :) 10:47:53 If there are any takers, you'll see 10:47:57 If not, well then not :) 10:48:21 We can't tell in advance whether we'll be able or willing to answer your question because we don't know what the question will be 10:48:28 asarch [~asarch@187.132.137.165] has joined #scheme 10:48:30 ok, how do I maintain local state within a function, that persists across different invocations of that function? 10:48:54 You can do that by putting the lambda form inside a let form 10:48:59 -!- Blkt [~user@93-33-134-113.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:49:38 but would that lambda form be visible as a top-level definition? 10:49:42 (define foo (let ((counter 0)) (lambda () (print "counter was: " counter) (set! counter (add1 counter)) (print "counter is now: " counter) counter))) 10:50:45 sjamaan: thanks, trying it out now :) 10:50:45 Sorry, gauche has no add1. Make that (+ 1 counter) 10:51:53 whoa, played around too much with haskell lately 10:51:58 I was about to suggest that it wasn't possible 10:51:59 ): 10:52:07 ha! 10:53:05 (define foo-not-so-hidden-state 0) (define (foo) (set! foo-not-so-hidden-state (+ 1 foo-not-so-hidden-state)) foo-not-so-hidden-state) 10:55:57 -!- ejs [~eugen@nat.ironport.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 10:58:42 sjamaan: ok, I'm still screwing this up 10:59:50 sjamaan: how would you define foo, so that it could accept a paramater, and use that in conjunction with counter? 11:00:07 Put something between the () after "lambda" 11:00:23 Just like any other procedure would, if the let wasn't there around it 11:00:50 the inner lambda needs it? Ah, I was adding it to the outer define 11:00:51 You're binding foo to whatever the LET returns 11:01:11 In this case, it returns a closure 11:01:14 peddie [~peddie@adsl-99-38-150-228.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 11:01:16 -!- peddie [~peddie@adsl-99-38-150-228.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Client Quit] 11:01:23 The lambda with its visible environment established by the LET 11:01:27 xwl [~user@123.115.120.38] has joined #scheme 11:02:14 mind if I paste a 5 liner here? 11:02:21 or should I pastebin it? 11:02:23 lisppaste: url? 11:02:23 To use the lisppaste bot, visit http://paste.lisp.org/new/scheme and enter your paste. 11:02:26 ^ use that 11:02:28 ok 11:04:21 imran_sr pasted "closure" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/111172 11:05:25 imran_sr: You're defining a procedure named pp4, which accepts zero arguments and returns a lambda which accepts one argument and has a closure containing the 'counter' variable 11:06:04 how do I get the output 1a 2b 3c etc? 11:07:03 (define (foo) bar) is equivalent to (define foo (lambda () bar)) 11:07:38 So (define (pp4) (let ((counter 0)) (lambda (x) ...))) is equivalent to (define pp4 (lambda () (let ((counter 0)) (lambda (x) ...)))) 11:09:54 sorry mate, its 4am here, and I am feeling really thickheaded right now. Let me quickly summarise where I'm at 11:10:25 You should probably let it rest until you've had some sleep :) 11:10:40 writing a script which returns a list of prime numbers, starting from 2 to whatever is requested 11:12:49 already got everything done. a lazy stream generator which spits out all odd numbers. stream-filter'ed to just pick out the prime numbers. Then I stream-take the required number of primes. Then I stream-for-each each prime to a pp function 11:13:17 Just want to get a pp function which, upon every 10th invocation, spits out a newline 11:13:26 and now my feeble brain has imploded 11:14:05 imran_sr: You need to remove the parens around pp4 in your definition 11:14:44 sjamaan: thanks :) 11:16:52 ohhhh, the lambda (wrapped by counter) is now assigned to pp4. What was happening before? (define (pp4) ... ? 11:17:51 You created pp4, which was a procedure accepting zero arguments which, when called, returned what you have now 11:18:12 |13:08| ( sjamaan) (define (foo) bar) is equivalent to (define foo (lambda () bar)) 11:18:56 So, before I was creating a function, pp4, which just returned the wrapped lambda ? 11:19:15 yes 11:19:41 aha, whereas now, the wrapped lambda is executing, and its return value is returned 11:20:05 "executing"? 11:20:15 evaluated :) 11:20:35 I'm not sure I understand the question but that's okay 11:20:40 I think you understand what's happening 11:21:03 just trying to work this out. Explaining it badly (I *think* I get it) 11:22:17 really appreciate your help (and patience) :) 11:22:23 thanks 11:22:50 np 11:27:19 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:27:37 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 11:27:38 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-136-216.netcologne.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:31:18 -!- ktzqbp [~ktzqbp@unaffiliated/ktzqbp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 11:34:53 a 11:52:29 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-136-216.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 11:54:11 -!- bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:01:48 emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has joined #scheme 12:09:03 has anyone thought of putting together a combinatorics SRFI? 12:09:18 seems like a glaring defect that none seem to exist. 12:15:23 -!- imran_sr [~imran@dsl081-056-239.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 12:16:07 sepult` [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 12:16:49 -!- sepult` [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:17:58 sepult` [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 12:18:16 -!- sepisultrum [~sepiultru@hcl-club.lu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:18:58 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-136-216.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 12:19:31 -!- sepult` [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Client Quit] 12:20:48 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 12:24:17 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Client Quit] 12:26:02 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 12:28:47 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Client Quit] 12:31:09 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 12:44:53 ws [wswieb@akson.sgh.waw.pl] has joined #scheme 12:51:23 -!- winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 12:57:55 -!- reified [~reified@usr018.bb160-01.udk.im.wakwak.ne.jp] has quit [Quit: reified] 12:59:34 -!- Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:03:09 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:06:52 -!- ws [wswieb@akson.sgh.waw.pl] has quit [Quit: ...] 13:08:23 winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:12:15 bipt [~bpt@cl-851.chi-02.us.sixxs.net] has joined #scheme 13:12:45 -!- xwl [~user@123.115.120.38] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:21:15 xwl [~user@123.115.120.38] has joined #scheme 13:41:33 h'lo schemers. I have a question if some one is up for it: what exactly is multiple dispatch in object oriented programming? Common Lisp seems to have it. 13:42:39 -!- asarch [~asarch@187.132.137.165] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:42:44 davazp [~user@83.55.178.113] has joined #scheme 13:42:51 Zarutian: Multiple dispatch chooses what function/method to apply based on more than one argument 13:43:08 alvatar [~alvatar@63.149.220.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 13:43:18 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@63.149.220.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Client Quit] 13:43:22 In "regular" OO languages you do obj.method(arg1, arg2, arg3) and you can only have one method per class type 13:44:12 But with multiple dispatch you do proc(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4) and have several procedures for different combinations of argument types, based on all 4 arguments 13:46:41 that part I get but why doesnt this violate object-encapsulation? (Make sure that the objects fields/properties/etc is only accessable to code that upholds the objects invariants) 13:48:02 I'm not sure, but I think that's achieved by not exporting those procedures to code that's not supposed to touch them 13:48:20 You might want to see how smalltalk does it. 13:48:24 (so the module system rather than the object system handles the encapsulation) 13:48:26 Actually I think smalltalk doesn't do it 13:48:56 Jafet: Smalltalk (at least Squeak and variants) use single dispatch, iirc 13:49:13 http://paulgraham.com/reesoo.html 13:49:53 Jafet: I am familiar with that post. It is pretty handy for classifing o-o systems 13:50:09 Multiple dispatch is generally an overload resolution thing, so I don't know why you're relating it to encapsulation. 13:51:03 sjamaan: what I meant is: what is stopping me from defining such an procedure that accesses arg1 fields/properties/etc directly? 13:51:38 Zarutian: You can only access those through procedures, I think. So by not exporting those procedures you simply cannot access them 13:51:45 That depends on the encapsulation rules of your programming language -- so ask the channel for whichever language you're talking about. 13:51:50 Zarutian: I'm not a CLOS expert though 13:53:52 Jafet: I have no spefic programming language in mind but I am thinking about object-capabilities based security which requires: 1. inforgable references 2. hard encapsulated objects. 13:54:45 People who invent those things invent them because they're stuck with crazy languages like C 13:54:52 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-55-139.dip.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 13:55:11 The trivial way to guarantee security is to build it into the environment. 13:55:37 Well, there is the issue of IPC/callbacks, but there are also theoretical frameworks for them 13:57:49 Jafet: could you clarify by what you mean by building security into the encironment, please? 13:58:28 I presume you are talking about mechanisms such as cryptographic capabilities 13:58:40 s/encironment/environment/ 13:59:25 But if all your programs run in a safe environment, where the representation of these tokens is hidden, then there is no problem to be solved 14:00:21 In C, you can pretend any bunch of bytes is a pointer, or a file handle, etc. So protected mode was invented 14:01:04 aah, I see what you are getting at. What I am trying to ask about is what code, written in the language meant for the environment, can access an object tokens/references. 14:01:23 So, which language are you talking about? 14:02:14 any memory safe language that meats my 2nd criterion 14:02:35 Zarutian: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_thread/thread/ef10af7738a3ce05/917737b7cc8510e3 14:02:36 -rudybot:#scheme- http://tinyurl.com/24ngvzq 14:03:07 I am trying to determine if multiple dispatch violates object-encapsulation like say, Rubys open classes do 14:03:11 What do you mean by "access", then? 14:03:23 Quoth Kent Pitman: "Common Lisp objects really have no private data" 14:03:40 Again, multiple dispatch doesn't have anything at all to do with encapsulation. 14:03:41 Apparently, neither do C++ objects 14:04:49 Zarutian: I don't think Rubys open classes has anything to do with encapsulation, necessarily. Even without that, you'd still have #instance_eval and #send (which ignores private/protected) 14:05:58 sjamaan: C++ objects are often just very intresting structs ;) 14:06:05 open classes is more like AOP, if I understand AOP correctly 14:07:22 Jafet: access as in get/set of object fields/properties/data members 14:08:08 Local buzz level increasing, see you later 14:08:12 I agree with Jafet though 14:08:35 You can access all fields in objects, always in CLOS, period 14:08:49 Even without multiple dispatch 14:09:25 Sometimes it's more fun to imagine your language is missing the loopholes that let you break abstractions 14:09:26 then CLOS objects arent encapsulated and no better than structs as far as I gather 14:09:51 s/structs/C structs/ 14:10:02 I suppose not 14:10:33 92AAAJHTS [~phao@189.107.186.51] has joined #scheme 14:10:54 You measure the quality of language features by their inflexibility? 14:11:09 -!- 92AAAJHTS [~phao@189.107.186.51] has quit [Client Quit] 14:11:51 Jafet: I am mesuring how close a language can get to ocaps by checking if they have spefic inflexibilties 14:12:07 What on earth is ocaps 14:12:18 I think that thread points out the more important point: you can still clearly indicate you're not supposed to modify the slots directly 14:12:42 Whether that is ignored or not is up to the discipline of an individual programmer 14:12:54 Jafet: one inflexibility is that only and only the objects code can change or access its fields 14:12:59 But if you ignore it and it breaks, you know who you have to blame :) 14:13:22 sjamaan: object-capabilties 14:13:30 sorry menat Jafet 14:13:36 What on earth is "object-capabilities", then? 14:13:45 Zarutian: You might want to check out the Prometheus object system 14:13:52 Stop making shit up (or using shit other people make up) 14:14:28 Jafet: I am not making anything up. But isnt everything in computers made up by other people? 14:14:36 There everything's truly a message, and anything is allowed as a message. Making "private messages" is simply a matter of creating an object that no other code can access and using that as the message identifier 14:14:39 phao [~phao@189.107.186.51] has joined #scheme 14:14:49 Well then, what is "object-capabilities"? 14:14:55 It's not multiple dispatch though 14:15:01 -!- phao [~phao@189.107.186.51] has left #scheme 14:15:16 Jafet: one moment please 14:16:15 Jafet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-capability_model 14:17:19 That still looks like a term someone just made up 14:19:30 arent all terms made up? anyway object-capabilties are just capabilties renamed to lessen overloading of the original term 14:20:17 Some terms have formal definitions 14:20:43 This one doesn't, at least in the wikipedia article. Bunch of trendy gobbledygook 14:21:08 It's an OO term. What'd you expect? :) 14:21:24 Indeed 14:21:26 wikipedia is getting more and more gobbeldygooky 14:21:56 lesse if I cant find a better intro to this 14:24:56 Dark-Star [~michael@HSI-KBW-109-192-121-077.hsi6.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de] has joined #scheme 14:28:44 Jafet: you linked to that reesoo article so lets use that as a base: An object-system in my mind must full fill (1), (2), (3), (4), (6) and (7) of the criterions of that article 14:29:10 Hold on, I was asking the definition of "object-capabilities". 14:30:50 Jafet: the (2) is particluary important for ocaps. In ocaps all references are opaque to client caller and an object can only affect its enviroment through the references it holds 14:31:15 -!- emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:31:38 RageOfThou [~RageOfTho@users-55-242.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 14:32:08 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-33-57.vinet.ba] has quit [Disconnected by services] 14:32:09 What would be an example of object capability system, by this definition? 14:32:14 -!- RageOfThou is now known as MrFahrenheit 14:32:42 emma [~em@unaffiliated/emma] has joined #scheme 14:32:50 JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-72-95-204-229.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 14:33:12 KeyKos, E vats, possibly Self, java with tamed libraries and banisment of class static fields 14:34:35 -!- brandelune [~suzume@pl571.nas982.takamatsu.nttpc.ne.jp] has quit [Quit: brandelune] 14:36:07 so, my original question boils down to: does multiple dispatch violate criterion (1) and (2) of reesoo classification? 14:36:34 That question doesn't even make sense 14:37:03 Like I said, CLOS's encapsulation is unrelated to multidispatch 14:38:27 And how does 2) have anything to do with multidispatch? 14:38:42 hmm... lets say that CLOS's objects are encapsulated per ressoo (2), would multidispatch be possible or impossible? 14:39:52 That should be possible 14:40:10 Multidispatch doesn't necessarily mean that anyone who wants to can define new methods on a class! 14:40:26 It *just* means that a method can dispatch on several types 14:43:33 so a multidispatch method is like an consequence of (cond) in the dispatch mechanism where the conditional is (&& (is-type? arg1 type1) (is-type? arg2 type2))? 14:44:39 yes 14:44:50 though that (cond) might actualy not be realized in code 14:47:11 thank you. Now I understand multidispatch sufficently to know that it doesnt affect the invariants that the ocap definition relies on 14:47:58 if I have driven anyone up an wall by my questions/vagueness I hereby sincerly apologize 14:51:51 one question closer to scheme: can closure's environment be determined by code external to that closure? something on the line (get-closures-environ closure)? 14:52:24 No 14:52:41 (at least not in standard scheme. I don't know if there are any implementations that do provide such a feature) 14:53:10 h_z12x [~Joseph@cpe-74-70-42-92.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 14:54:21 -!- davazp [~user@83.55.178.113] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 14:55:27 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp85-140-64-185.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 14:55:31 thank you for your time and patience 14:59:03 Blkt [~user@93-33-130-167.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has joined #scheme 15:07:10 alvatar [~alvatar@81.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 15:12:06 -!- masm [~masm@bl19-128-235.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:25:14 I'm writing a function that will on some conditions want to create a list based on removing the last element from an already existing list. Is the most efficient way to do this (drop-right mylist 1) ? 15:30:34 -!- bgs000 is now known as bgs100 15:37:45 merimus [~merimus@c-67-171-83-6.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 15:38:51 askhader: yes, but if you want removing the last element be fast, consider using a different data structure like a deque 15:39:03 -!- mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 15:41:44 -!- merimus [~merimus@c-67-171-83-6.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit] 15:44:11 sloyd: I'm doing string->list 15:44:29 sloyd: So I really don't have a choice. Perhaps I could write a string->deque type thing, if it's MUCH faster? 15:51:23 mbohun [~mbohun@ppp115-156.static.internode.on.net] has joined #scheme 15:56:51 it is much faster 15:58:14 Where can I find runtime analaysis of these functions? 15:58:24 -!- winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:59:40 winxordie [~winxordie@199-49.97-97.tampabay.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 16:13:27 -!- h_z12x [~Joseph@cpe-74-70-42-92.nycap.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 16:14:22 Probably in various algorithm/data structure books. In particular a persistent deque is presented in ``Purely Functional Data Structures''. 16:14:40 The representation of string is not defined, anyway 16:15:05 So ignoring constants, there is no difference 16:15:34 (unless you erase from the end repeatedly) 16:16:37 Okasaki's persistent deque requires some memoization framework, which you don't get for free here 16:22:04 -!- ski_ [~md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 16:32:31 -!- melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:33:48 melba [~blee@unaffiliated/lazz0] has joined #scheme 16:35:06 davids [~davids@189.60.69.82] has joined #scheme 16:35:36 -!- ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@76-10-139-177.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 16:39:36 -!- alvatar [~alvatar@81.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Quit: leaving] 16:42:01 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 16:48:48 ToxicFrog [~ToxicFrog@76-10-139-177.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 16:54:49 toast` [~toast`@c-71-227-233-160.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:09:51 -!- toast` [~toast`@c-71-227-233-160.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: toast`] 17:21:14 Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:24:42 Removing the last element is amortized O(1) with a deque but O(n) with a list. 17:24:52 sloyd pasted "remove-last plt benchmark" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/111177 17:28:45 toast` [~toast`@c-71-227-233-160.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 17:29:17 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 17:35:26 -!- Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 17:39:20 jewel [~jewel@196-210-187-124-tbnb-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 17:44:33 h_z12x [~Joseph@cpe-74-70-42-92.nycap.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 17:50:07 -!- _danb_ [~user@124-171-25-183.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 17:58:24 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-242.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 18:05:43 -!- Blkt [~user@93-33-130-167.ip44.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 18:11:00 smtlaissezfaire_ [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 18:35:34 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 18:37:28 wingo-pi [~wingo-pi@74.Red-80-24-4.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 18:37:34 sup schemers 18:38:26 schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 18:38:54 'allo, wingo. 18:41:01 r2q2 [~motodroid@241.sub-70-221-149.myvzw.com] has joined #scheme 18:41:38 -!- Kusanagi is now known as Hal9k 18:41:48 -!- r2q2 [~motodroid@241.sub-70-221-149.myvzw.com] has quit [Client Quit] 18:42:10 szgyg [~chatzilla@dsl51B6AA17.pool.t-online.hu] has joined #scheme 18:46:43 -!- Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 18:52:06 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 18:52:47 Zarutian [~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is] has joined #scheme 18:57:04 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 18:57:55 -!- schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 19:15:43 -!- szgyg [~chatzilla@dsl51B6AA17.pool.t-online.hu] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:17:03 -!- mbishop [~martin@adsl-150-25-32.aby.bellsouth.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 19:17:08 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-210-187-124-tbnb-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 19:20:51 -!- xwl [~user@123.115.120.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 19:23:54 -!- toast` [~toast`@c-71-227-233-160.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: toast`] 19:28:56 mbishop [~martin@adsl-156-76-113.msy.bellsouth.net] has joined #scheme 19:29:41 alvatar [~alvatar@81.126.222.87.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #scheme 19:30:38 MononcQc [~Ferd@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 19:49:13 Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 19:58:39 -!- Poeir [~Poeir@c-98-228-60-162.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20:22:22 parolang [~user@8e4a01246100775874c4f448e9887093.oregonrd-wifi-1261.amplex.net] has joined #scheme 20:29:53 I keep on getting an "unbound identifier" when trying to load another file in mzscheme. The specific error is: " compile: unbound identifier (and no #%app syntax transformer is bound) at: #%top-interaction in:..." 20:30:39 even (eq? #t #t) seems to be raising an error. Using (load "my_scheme.scm") isn't raising an error from the repl, but it is from another file. Why would that be the case? 20:34:20 ws [wswieb@akson.sgh.waw.pl] has joined #scheme 20:38:40 `load' is typically a bad idea. What are you trying to do? 20:39:17 If you're just looking to structure your program across multiple files, use either `include' or `require'. 20:40:52 chandler: What would be a good place to look for the difference between those three loading functions? 20:41:15 For documentation? I'm assuming all three of those, and the module loading system with require are part of the latest scheme spec, right? 20:43:03 smtlaissezfaire_: Well, are you using one of the standard Scheme languages (R5RS or R6RS), or the "scheme" language? 20:43:30 smtlaissezfaire_: All the documentation is at http://doc.plt-scheme.org/ for the latest version, or in an installation-specific location for whatever version you have installed. 20:44:06 I'm alternating between the mzscheme command line and the drscheme, and using #lang scheme/base at the top of my files. 20:45:10 The problem with `load' is that it tells the implementation to load the file at run-time, instead of when the file containing the `load' expression is compiled. Thus, the tricky part is in figuring out what environment the loaded file should use. 20:45:40 What does the "scheme language" refer to? 20:45:54 The language you're using. 20:46:19 And is that a subset of R5RS? 20:47:04 No. It's a language different from either R5RS or R6RS, which is why it's going to be renamed in the next version. 20:48:51 A non-standard language? The one developed for the PLT author's book? 20:49:02 masm [~masm@bl19-128-235.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 20:50:24 Yes, it is "non-standard". No, it's not developed for a book. 20:53:02 chandler: What I had meant by "non-standard" was that it wouldn't work in any other implementation aside from dr.scheme/mzscheme 20:53:10 chandler: Thanks for the help. I hadn't noticed the search bar on the plt-scheme.org site. 21:00:48 jmcphers [~jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has joined #scheme 21:04:02 Kibane [Kibane@83.231.63.80] has joined #scheme 21:11:58 schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 21:23:01 -!- bgs100 is now known as bgs000 21:40:23 -!- masm [~masm@bl19-128-235.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 21:43:24 -!- sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:45:25 sepult [~user@xdsl-87-79-169-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 21:52:56 -!- edw`` is now known as edw 22:10:19 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-189.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 22:14:07 -!- schmir [~schmir@p548DACDF.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:15:55 jcowan [~jcowan@taconic-aa-p443.taconic.net] has joined #scheme 22:17:27 *jcowan* unvanishes. 22:17:55 -!- bgs000 is now known as bgs100 22:20:01 hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 22:24:14 offby1` [~user@q-static-138-125.avvanta.com] has joined #scheme 22:25:06 -!- offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has quit [Disconnected by services] 22:25:08 -!- offby1` is now known as offby1 22:25:11 -!- offby1 [~user@q-static-138-125.avvanta.com] has quit [Changing host] 22:25:11 offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has joined #scheme 22:40:05 reified [~reified@usr018.bb160-01.udk.im.wakwak.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 22:44:09 hotblack23 [~jh@p4FC5BB7D.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 22:44:32 i can't believe i laboured under CASE-LAMBDA all this time, when andrew wright's pattern matching macros exist. 22:46:06 There's also DSSSL's #!optional 22:47:46 let-optional* from scsh 22:47:48 foof: just curious, why didn't you bother with match-define? 22:49:16 I've also written a partial implementation of Riastradh's proposal (http://mumble.net/~campbell/proposals/optional.text) using syntax-case which expands to case-lambda 22:49:37 sjamaan: does #!optional apply to all parameters until the next #!rest, #!key or und? 22:49:47 s/und/end/ 22:49:58 yes 22:50:25 rotty: oh, nice; did you release it? 22:52:03 klutometis: just pushed: http://github.com/rotty/spells/blob/master/spells/opt-args.sls (it's lambda* and define*) 22:53:06 There's also SRFI-89 22:54:20 -!- fradgers- [~fradgers-@5e02b45e.bb.sky.com] has left #scheme 22:55:48 case-lambda has the virtue of simplicity, unlike linear (much less generalized) pattern matching. 22:55:48 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:56:50 jcowan: indeed; that was it's appeal for a time. it may be that generalized pattern-matching is, in most cases, superfluous. 22:56:57 klutometis: it doesn't support the "presence variables" 22:57:23 haesbaert [~haesbaert@c9155a20.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 22:57:32 -!- rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-182.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [] 22:57:37 Are Wright's macros linear or generalized? 22:58:05 rotty: i see; the presence variables are predicates determining whether the parameter was specified? 22:58:23 klutometis: yep 22:58:50 I might add them at some point, if I have a need for them 23:07:15 -!- sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has quit [Disconnected by services] 23:07:24 sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has joined #scheme 23:07:28 jcowan: generalized in the sense that they allow self-reference like letrec? 23:09:52 In the sense that a variable may appear more than once in the pattern. Perhaps I should just say "nonlinear". 23:10:05 s/the pattern/a particular pattern 23:15:24 -!- JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-72-95-204-229.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 23:23:21 mbishop_ [~martin@adsl-150-28-104.aby.bellsouth.net] has joined #scheme 23:26:31 -!- mbishop [~martin@adsl-156-76-113.msy.bellsouth.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 23:26:49 arcfide [~arcfide@adsl-99-75-51-152.dsl.bltnin.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 23:32:17 jcowan: foof's implementation apparently supports non-linear patterns and non-final ellipses. 23:35:36 JoelMcCracken [~joelmccra@pool-72-95-204-229.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 23:38:00 karme [~user@static.180.75.40.188.clients.your-server.de] has joined #scheme 23:40:00 The latter isn't too surprising; the former is. 23:40:19 I suppose the next issue is whetherr it does circularity checks. 23:49:57 -!- hohoho [~hohoho@ntkngw227224.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:50:27 -!- smtlaissezfaire_ [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire_] 23:52:26 R3cur51v3 [~Recursive@173-29-151-107.client.mchsi.com] has joined #scheme 23:52:52 jonrafkind [~jon@c-67-172-254-235.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 23:53:23 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@208.120.172.212] has joined #scheme 23:54:53 -!- sladegen [~nemo@unaffiliated/sladegen] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 23:58:46 -!- mmc [~michal@cs181176076.pp.htv.fi] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]