00:00:47 jcowan [~John@cpe-98-14-172-212.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 00:03:12 hoi 00:05:25 -!- bombshelter13b [~bombshelt@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Quit: If only your veins were filled with oil, the world would rush to your rescue!] 00:06:21 -!- tupi [~david@139.82.89.24] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:07:26 -!- Kajtek [~nope@nat4-230.ghnet.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:14:50 -!- grglr [~grglr@2620:0:1cfe:61:129a:ddff:fe54:2c1e] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:14:50 -!- daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:20:32 grglr [~grglr@2620:0:1cfe:61:129a:ddff:fe54:2c1e] has joined #scheme 00:20:32 daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has joined #scheme 00:21:30 -!- pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:21:34 pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #scheme 00:22:01 -!- pjb is now known as Guest1061 00:23:50 -!- grglr [~grglr@2620:0:1cfe:61:129a:ddff:fe54:2c1e] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:23:50 -!- daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:26:08 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 00:33:25 -!- dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 00:34:20 grglr [~grglr@2620:0:1cfe:61:129a:ddff:fe54:2c1e] has joined #scheme 00:34:20 daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has joined #scheme 00:35:58 dsmith [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 00:36:34 Well, I was just saying that the R7RS-small fifth ballot can probably wait for the formal-comment phase, and now I go and add eight new tickets. 00:36:36 -!- jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:37:03 -!- copumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 00:43:24 -!- grglr [~grglr@2620:0:1cfe:61:129a:ddff:fe54:2c1e] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:43:24 -!- daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has quit [*.net *.split] 00:46:35 -!- blackened [~blackened@ip-89-102-29-120.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:48:08 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-18.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 00:52:32 -!- levi [~user@c-174-52-219-147.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:53:00 levi [~user@c-174-52-219-147.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 00:53:40 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 01:01:29 copumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has joined #scheme 01:06:11 smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has joined #scheme 01:09:40 wisey [~Steven@host86-164-93-171.range86-164.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 01:13:23 -!- frhodes [~frhodes@168-103-96-233.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 01:13:30 frhodes [~frhodes@168-103-96-233.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 01:28:39 JoelMcCracken [~user@pool-72-95-210-36.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 01:32:31 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:33:28 -!- wisey [~Steven@host86-164-93-171.range86-164.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 01:34:23 -!- rff [~rff@ip72-207-241-136.br.br.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:34:44 rff [~rff@ip72-207-241-136.br.br.cox.net] has joined #scheme 01:34:45 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 01:35:43 -!- wingo [~wingo@90.164.198.39] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 01:40:44 jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has joined #scheme 01:49:23 -!- arcfide [1000@c-69-136-7-94.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has left #scheme 01:50:54 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 01:51:44 realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.196.96] has joined #scheme 01:52:59 preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme 02:22:22 -!- pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-4dbec745.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services] 02:22:32 pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-5f768218.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 02:38:31 -!- JoelMcCracken [~user@pool-72-95-210-36.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 02:40:43 woonie [~woonie@s90143.pc.nus.edu.sg] has joined #scheme 02:43:09 bloop [b84ebad6@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.78.186.214] has joined #scheme 02:44:55 -!- bloop [b84ebad6@gateway/web/freenode/ip.184.78.186.214] has quit [Client Quit] 02:47:52 Guest20636 [~user@1.23.211.37] has joined #scheme 02:47:56 DrDetroit [~nana@pool-72-95-244-163.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 02:48:52 {c,y} 02:51:22 -!- jrapdx [~jra@74-95-41-205-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:51:59 -!- turbofail [~user@c-107-3-149-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 02:55:22 -!- Guest20636 [~user@1.23.211.37] has left #scheme 03:08:10 -!- gffa [~gffa@unaffiliated/gffa] has quit [Quit: sleep] 03:29:47 ampersandbox [~chatzilla@adsl-99-35-224-5.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 03:37:54 mithos28 [~eric@99-113-32-54.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 03:47:25 ampersandbox_ [~chatzilla@adsl-99-35-224-5.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 03:47:25 -!- ampersandbox [~chatzilla@adsl-99-35-224-5.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:47:27 -!- ampersandbox_ is now known as ampersandbox 03:49:29 -!- frhodes [~frhodes@168-103-96-233.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 03:50:14 *ski* idly wonders how `scheme-report-environment' will work in R7RS 03:53:25 It will provide the names bound in all standard modules that the implementation provides. 03:55:47 but what arguments will be accepted ? 03:55:58 will `7' get you small or large ? 03:56:13 Large is just small with more modules. 03:56:21 ok 03:57:01 At least that's the way it looks now. There may be some mandatory parts to deal with interdependencies, but in general no Scheme has to implement anything beyond the base (which is smaller than R5RS). 03:57:02 `7.5' gets you to Hogwarts. 03:57:08 *jcowan* chuckles. 03:57:24 foof: I've written a bunch of editorial stuff, as you may have noticed. 03:57:27 does ANYONE HERE 03:57:29 USE SCHEME ? 03:57:34 for ANY PRACTICAL PURPOSE ? 03:57:40 I'd just like to know ? 03:57:55 What the HELL are you people YANKING ? 03:58:04 It's 2011 03:58:08 Scheme ? 03:58:17 ARE YOU F'ING KIDDING ME ? 03:58:27 HAVE YOU NOT MOVED ON ? 03:58:38 BASIC PRINCIPLES 03:58:39 No, we haven't. Why should we? 03:58:39 MY ASS 03:58:50 What do you use Scheme for jcowan ? 03:58:58 PRACTICLY ? 03:59:04 -!- ampersandbox [~chatzilla@adsl-99-35-224-5.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 03:59:15 WHAT REAL WORLD SCENARIO do you USE Scheme for ? 03:59:21 I can't feel this way much longer 03:59:27 expecting to survive 03:59:31 Good. Cut it short and move on, then. 03:59:40 sure - but you didn't answer 03:59:53 SHORT OF ACADMIC 03:59:57 when do you USE it for ? 04:00:01 jcowan ? 04:00:06 DrDetroit: All of my personal software including my webserver is written in Scheme. There are a number of companies which make money writing Scheme, one of which I previously worked for. 04:00:08 Show me an app 04:00:29 show me an example 04:00:31 and why - ? 04:00:35 Whatever answer we give will just trigger more abuse, so I'm not gonna reply to this. 04:00:41 oh 04:00:46 nice response there 04:00:47 'whatever' 04:00:56 damned intellectual complacency 04:01:03 SHOW ME 04:01:05 URL ? 04:01:08 LINK ? 04:01:16 or ? what USE is Scheme ? 04:01:29 Substitution - mass confusion - rails inside your head 04:01:38 A MODEL 04:01:41 'A' model 04:01:47 you call yourself intense 04:01:48 DrDetroit: Obviously the people on this channel use Scheme, and we don't care what you think. 04:01:49 MIT ? 04:01:51 eh ? 04:01:54 Please stop trolling. 04:02:03 SPECIAL intellectual pursuits - I see 04:02:07 trolling -eh ? 04:02:10 Lurk if you want to learn, no one here has patience to answer your stupid questions. 04:02:20 SHOW ME 04:02:28 SHOW ME THE GLORY of Scheme 04:02:38 or - show yourself your fate 04:03:00 what GREAT GATEWAY ? 04:03:03 of intellect ? 04:03:37 will Scheme STRECH ACROSS ? 04:03:46 to reveal to me 04:03:53 the IDEAL ways to 'think' ? 04:04:17 WHO OWNS MANISFESTATES on thinking ? 04:04:45 WHO SAYS - JAva - Scheme- WHATEVER - is THE MODEL ? 04:05:03 Given choice - say- Fortress or Scheme ? 04:05:16 WHICH has a future ? 04:05:19 I just don't get it 04:05:45 smart to not respond 04:05:56 smarter to respond 04:06:00 time is limited 04:06:10 Scheme apps - hmm 04:06:16 how many to count 04:06:17 -!- ChanServ has set mode +q *!*@pool-72-95-244-163.pitbpa.east.verizon.net 04:06:42 -!- DrDetroit [~nana@pool-72-95-244-163.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has left #scheme 04:07:11 Whew. 04:07:32 I have to use the ops commands so rarely in this channel I forget what they are. 04:08:00 Ah, I didn't know you had them. 04:08:10 *offby1* keeps his in his erc config 04:08:12 *offby1* nods gravely 04:08:42 14 tickets still to write 04:08:44 DrDetroit [~nana@pool-72-95-244-163.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 04:09:42 Lulz. 04:10:04 Not that I have a good answer. I'm a lightweight Scheme programmer at best, though I hope to fix that. 04:10:21 Several of the projects on my "FOSS bucket list" will be in Scheme. 04:10:45 So far, I've just been reimplementing other people's code in Scheme. :-P 04:10:55 Cool. 04:12:14 DrDetroit: ask in here 04:12:19 nooooo 04:12:26 oh 04:12:31 copumpkin: DrDetroit has been quieted here. 04:12:51 I'll remove it tomorrow. 04:12:57 <_danb_> he's asking me why scheme is 04:12:57 can't we just ban him? 04:13:07 <_danb_> I have no answer 04:13:09 <_danb_> it just is 04:13:11 copumpkin: Quiets are more useful, in my experience. 04:13:21 he doesn't seem like a recoverable case 04:13:24 Yeah. Let 'em blab where nobody can hear. 04:13:33 copumpkin: The only effect a ban has above a quiet is that they can't join the channel any more. But they can always read the logs anyway. 04:14:03 *copumpkin* shrugs 04:14:15 copumpkin: All the other effects of a ban remain in place with a quiet, including a prohibition on renaming while you're in a channel you're banned/quieted from. 04:14:16 who? i can't hear trolls over my /ignore :) 04:14:20 aoh: ;-) 04:18:17 So apparently it's now spamming privately? 04:18:38 Note DrDetroit seems to be spamming private members. I recommend everyone /ignore him. 04:18:43 Or is it just me who gets the honor of being asked "why scheme is?". 04:18:58 <_danb_> so I just type /ignore ... ? 04:19:11 _danb_: Yes "/igore DrDetroit". 04:19:24 <_danb_> thanks 04:19:29 Xchat's /ignore wants a host mask 04:20:12 Unfortunately, that's a pool IP address, so the next time his lease runs out .... 04:20:27 jcowan: Get a real client :P 04:20:37 *jcowan* laughs. 04:20:44 <_danb_> like erc :D 04:20:45 One written in Scheme, I suppose you mean? 04:20:51 yeah, he is 04:21:06 I don't do Emacs, remember. 04:21:09 *jcowan* is an "ex" troglodyte 04:21:29 irssi works for me 04:21:49 -!- woonie [~woonie@s90143.pc.nus.edu.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 04:22:27 -!- DrDetroit [~nana@pool-72-95-244-163.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has left #scheme 04:22:47 *jcowan* grabs irssi for Windows to see. 04:24:03 oh noes 04:24:11 It's installing its own private cygwin and putty. 04:24:13 That's bad. 04:24:18 *offby1* 's ex is a troglodyte 04:24:21 *shudder* 04:24:25 jcowan: :-( 04:24:44 Really? Where is her cave? 04:25:11 jcowan: Yes you can use IronScheme on Mono, simply copy the Window install directory. 04:25:12 There are five million troglodytes in China, some of whom now have running water and electricity (maybe one day the Internet, who knows, though not wireless obviously) 04:25:24 Ta. 04:25:50 jcowan: it did work a few months back anyways 04:26:03 jcowan, here's a nickel, kid. go buy yourself a .. :) 04:27:55 A what? 04:28:04 I *like* being an "ex" troglodyte. 04:28:16 Just like we like being Scheme troglodytes. 04:29:33 jcowan, http://farm1.static.flickr.com/87/240803829_9212773615_o.png 04:29:50 Ah. 04:30:11 I quit reading Dilbert yeeeeeaaaars ago. 04:30:35 has Dilbert really been running for 15 years?! 04:31:02 that one has been cited fairly widely, due to being cited in "In the Beginning was 04:31:06 the Command Line" 04:31:44 leppie: Seems to work. Is there some way to turn off the colors? Against a white background they are almost imperceptible. 04:32:54 isn't "In the Beginning was the Command Line" about 10 years old itself? 04:33:53 leppie: Setting TERM to vt100 causes this: 04:33:54 Unhandled Exception: System.ArgumentNullException: Argument cannot be null. 04:33:54 Parameter name: format 04:33:54 at System.String.FormatHelper (System.Text.StringBuilder result, IFormatProvider provider, System.String format, System.Object[] args) [0x00000] 04:34:53 kellar, that sounds a lot worse than 'released somewhere in 2000' does 04:35:24 1999, actually,how dramatic. 04:35:38 Almost a tenth of a century ago! 04:35:56 was 2000 pentium3's ? we should get suspenders I guess. 04:36:33 so who's working on a scheme for parrot? or have I found a niche to occupy in the jungle of implementations? 04:36:56 somehow in academic papers anything released after 1990 feels fresh... 04:37:06 kellar: You can implement in for Parrot if you like. I think I'll target Dalvik. :-P 04:37:09 *it 04:38:14 cky: bah. crowd-pleaser. 04:38:19 Do Sisc and Kawa run on Android? 04:39:12 aoh: I only run Windows because it's not my computer and I have to. But with Cygwin and CoLinux, my computer ends up being quite real. I do typically run GUI programs directly in Windows, though. 04:39:13 kellar, you could also target js or play with native client 04:39:16 -!- lusory [~bart@bb219-75-123-46.singnet.com.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 04:40:42 jcowan, emulators like qemu work surprisingly well also. you can get a fullscreen os of choice running at close to native speed on just about any host os. 04:41:16 aoh: yeah, it could run over node. good. 04:43:33 *ski* checks to see whether qemu supports 6510 04:43:39 jcowan: add -emacs , should kill all terminal fanciness 04:44:05 Nope, still color 04:44:30 weird, I will test today 04:45:13 -!- rff [~rff@ip72-207-241-136.br.br.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 04:45:47 did you add that to the command line for ironscheme? (works here on windows) 04:47:31 mono /opt/IronScheme/IronScheme.Console.exe -emacs 04:47:40 Seems to be ignore. 04:47:42 ignored, even 04:47:44 jcowan: i will verify behavior tonite 04:47:49 thanks :) 04:48:17 Thanks. Hopefully I won't go blind before then. 04:48:23 lol 04:48:31 sorry 04:49:19 try a dark background instead :) 04:49:34 bye, off to work 04:52:51 Catchyalater. 04:54:33 soveran [~soveran@dan75-2-87-91-33-52.dsl.sta.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #scheme 04:57:58 oh, chicken was a parrot in 2005. 04:57:59 -!- jcowan [~John@cpe-98-14-172-212.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 04:59:46 -!- jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 05:00:01 Grey is the new black 05:01:54 I heard. it won't last. 05:05:55 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 05:06:08 jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has joined #scheme 05:09:35 realitygrill_ [~realitygr@76.226.196.254] has joined #scheme 05:10:07 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.196.96] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 05:10:09 -!- realitygrill_ is now known as realitygrill 05:19:29 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 05:26:13 -!- djcb` [~user@a88-114-88-233.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:29:30 [1]confab [~confab@c-24-10-60-185.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 05:31:38 -!- confab [~confab@c-24-10-60-185.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:34:15 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.196.254] has quit [Quit: realitygrill] 05:35:46 only half of benchmark finised, but have to reboot and get to work -> http://pastebin.com/ktgSewrs in case anyone is interested 05:36:16 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 05:38:33 might actually be useful to make that one portable and put to google code or somewhere in case others would like to improve it or add benchmarks. 05:39:38 and make something like arewefastyet.com using it :) 05:45:27 HG` [~HG@p579F72E6.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 05:49:20 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 05:54:05 -!- HG` [~HG@p579F72E6.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: HG`] 05:54:54 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 05:58:01 -!- zmv [~daniel@c953332e.virtua.com.br] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 06:04:31 mmc [~michal@sams-office-nat.tomtomgroup.com] has joined #scheme 06:06:02 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 06:06:38 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 06:06:47 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 06:20:16 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 06:26:55 -!- pchrist_ [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 06:35:32 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 06:42:10 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 06:43:47 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.178.216.22] has joined #scheme 06:44:31 -!- _danb_ [~user@203.38.189.126] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 06:44:46 -!- jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 06:51:11 jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has joined #scheme 07:08:35 -!- smtlaissezfaire [~smtlaisse@76.15.192.54] has quit [Quit: smtlaissezfaire] 07:12:33 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:13:03 preflex_ [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme 07:13:43 -!- preflex_ is now known as preflex 07:20:40 ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 07:23:28 pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has joined #scheme 07:26:32 masm [~masm@2.80.138.34] has joined #scheme 07:27:57 woonie [~woonie@nusnet-223-31.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has joined #scheme 07:29:11 -!- soveran [~soveran@dan75-2-87-91-33-52.dsl.sta.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:41:35 -!- mithos28 [~eric@99-113-32-54.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: mithos28] 07:44:15 ccorn_ [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 07:44:36 -!- ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 07:46:10 -!- ccorn_ [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:46:40 ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 07:48:35 hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has joined #scheme 07:50:27 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-syxlggucxzhzfeoa] has joined #scheme 07:52:25 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:52:56 wingo [~wingo@90.164.198.39] has joined #scheme 07:55:59 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-syxlggucxzhzfeoa] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:56:12 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-zawjgiyinhntjawj] has joined #scheme 08:02:08 -!- ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 08:03:27 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 08:04:45 ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 08:05:22 ahinki [~chatzilla@212.99.10.150] has joined #scheme 08:12:13 daedric [~daedric@2a01:e0b:1:124:ca0a:a9ff:fe03:3b99] has joined #scheme 08:12:34 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 08:17:26 -!- ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 08:17:37 ccorn [~ccorn@84-53-64-50.adsl.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 08:19:51 -!- levi [~user@c-174-52-219-147.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 08:20:21 levi [~user@c-174-52-219-147.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 08:23:03 Burlingk [~burlingk@softbank221067045171.bbtec.net] has joined #scheme 08:24:46 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 08:33:19 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 08:43:55 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 08:44:26 arcfide [1000@c-69-136-7-94.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 08:45:04 -!- dfeuer [~dfeuer@wikimedia/Dfeuer] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 08:45:37 dfeuer [~dfeuer@96.241.126.56] has joined #scheme 08:45:37 -!- dfeuer [~dfeuer@96.241.126.56] has quit [Changing host] 08:45:37 dfeuer [~dfeuer@wikimedia/Dfeuer] has joined #scheme 08:46:37 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-213-161.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 08:58:54 -!- woonie [~woonie@nusnet-223-31.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 08:58:57 scheme standard should be given, nicknames like debian releases. r6rs (ponzi), r7rs (pyramid), etc 09:01:14 haha 09:02:46 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-zawjgiyinhntjawj] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:03:01 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ukqdjmulexbbyxes] has joined #scheme 09:03:16 -!- jao [~user@pdpc/supporter/professional/jao] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 09:14:31 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 09:20:16 Is r7rs a thing?. 09:20:39 It's two things 09:20:51 Thing One, and Thing Two 09:21:00 I mean, is it ongoing and happening? 09:21:10 yes, for a long time 09:22:10 i'm doing chapter 3 of SICP, about the environment model and yesterday I was asking for help about inspecting procedure objects from within the interpreter, which didn't quite pan out. 09:22:45 today, I'm fiddling with the mit-scheme debugger to inspect frams and environments, for examples like: http://paste.lisp.org/display/124801 09:22:56 -!- arcfide [1000@c-69-136-7-94.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has left #scheme 09:22:58 woonie [~woonie@137.132.254.75] has joined #scheme 09:22:59 and I've hit on something I don't quite understand 09:23:48 if I inspect the env at bkpt #1, all the name of the internal definitions appears, but as unassigned 09:24:25 at bkpt #2 , I get what i would expect, with all the symbols appearing and binded to procedure objects 09:24:56 the question is, how at the first breakpoint, the environment contains the symbols, before the define clauses have been processed? 09:25:10 pardon the longish prelude. 09:27:16 -!- woonie [~woonie@137.132.254.75] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 09:28:07 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 09:32:08 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ukqdjmulexbbyxes] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:32:28 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-fqtvhydeqtsxqcih] has joined #scheme 09:33:08 kellar, it's likely related to internal defines being converted to a letrec 09:33:32 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-fqtvhydeqtsxqcih] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:34:03 which first has to make an environment with the necessary variables, and only then assigns them 09:34:36 -!- masm [~masm@2.80.138.34] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 09:34:57 is a letrec equivalent to some sort of lambda expression like a normal let? 09:36:30 kellar, in a sense, it usually makes a let to bind all the needed variables to some unbound value, and then uses set! to assign each of them to to the given functions in order to make recursion possible 09:36:30 at that point in the code, none of the define forms have been evaluated, I would still expect the environment to have the symbols added one by one after each invocation of a define 09:36:57 they all have to be there because the functions can have mutual recursion 09:38:02 can you elaborate? isn't it just an error to do mutual recursion if one of the participants hasn't been defined yet? 09:38:31 kellar, that is the tricky part :) 09:39:01 but since nothing is evaluated below the lambda, the definition is safe as long as nothing is done before all of the functions have been set! 09:39:10 zmv [~daniel@c953332e.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 09:39:26 but if one is used and it still has some values with an undefined value, you have trouble 09:39:41 s/values/variables/ 09:40:31 well, that makes sense, and so I don't understand why AND how the unassigned symbols end up in the environment before the defines for them are evaluated 09:40:51 how can can a define become involved in a mutual-recursion? like you said, doesn't it just create an object without evaluating the body? 09:41:49 i dont't know if internal defines are required by any spec. to my knowledge everyone translates them to letrecs, because they might be functions which might require (mutual) recursion 09:42:40 woonie [~woonie@nusnet-228-5.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has joined #scheme 09:42:54 something like (begin (define (name . vars) . body) ... . stuff) -> (letrec ((name (lambda vars . body))) . stuff) 09:43:18 plus ellipsis 09:43:42 why would 'name' appear in the environment before the letrec is evaluated? 09:43:53 unassigned or otherwise 09:44:55 if you have (define (a) ;#1\n (begin (define b) (define c)) 09:45:14 shouldn't the environment be empty (of symbols b and c) at point #!? 09:45:31 #1 rather 09:46:18 it likely would, i'm not sure how exactly mit-scheme handles the internal defines 09:47:11 but having the environment with unbound values strongly suggests that the breakpoint ends up being before the defined values are being set! to variables 09:51:59 I tried this too: http://paste.lisp.org/+2OAP/2 09:52:41 but why do all the symbols appear at once instead of incrementally after each define? 09:52:49 or letrec for that matter 09:56:08 -!- woonie [~woonie@nusnet-228-5.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 09:58:12 kellar, letrec* is the version of letrec that would add the symbols one at a time, and it would allow recursion via the current and previously defined variables 10:00:06 masm [~masm@2.80.138.34] has joined #scheme 10:01:39 this is weird. if I enter a REPL at the point in the code, I can detect if there's an internal function in my environment before it's been defined 10:02:02 I though you had to travel faster then light for that to happened 10:04:33 kellar, my guess is that it ends up being treated like http://paste.lisp.org/display/124802 10:05:33 which would be valid because the value isn't referencing any of the unassigned values, but you see the not-yet-ready environment in the debugger 10:08:53 you're right, it fits the symptoms 10:10:26 and it converts all internal defines to one letrec clause ,as soon as it encounters the first one? even if the defines are interspersed with actual code? strange. 10:11:09 http://paste.lisp.org/+2OAP/2 , even after puttin a (display) between the defines, I still get all four unassigned symbols in the environment at bkpt #1 10:14:34 that would be the conservative thing to do. i don't really like the semantics of defines and letrecs. i just compute fixed points when necessary :) 10:15:31 since any of the internal non-defines might rely on the values being added by letrec, it makes sense to tuck them all below the assignments 10:16:21 I'm used to debuggin imperative programs, if you disable compiler optimization, you can expect statements to be executed in the order they're written. 10:16:32 -!- zmv [~daniel@c953332e.virtua.com.br] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 10:17:01 Kajtek [~nope@nat4-230.ghnet.pl] has joined #scheme 10:17:50 at the point between two define, i can distinguish unassigned variables from unbound variables as a result of expressions which will only be evaluated in the future. 10:18:24 that has to be some sort of technical misdamenor 10:19:38 rather, future symbols are distinguiishable as unassigned rather unbound variables. 10:19:39 all order except argument evaluation is also well specified in scheme, but in cases like letrec there are a few layers between that and the code you type in 10:20:07 i guess that is why many like the intuitively simpler letrec* 10:20:45 thanks for the help aoh. I appreciate it. 10:21:32 no problem, trying to procrastinate here anyway :) 10:21:50 glad to be of service :) 10:24:25 -!- Guest1061 [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has left #scheme 10:25:01 pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #scheme 10:32:59 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.178.216.22] has left #scheme 10:42:13 nowhereman [~pierre@AStrasbourg-551-1-79-206.w81-51.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 10:42:53 -!- nowhere_man [~pierre@AStrasbourg-551-1-47-207.w92-148.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 10:57:31 woonie [~woonie@nusnet-199-177.dynip.nus.edu.sg] has joined #scheme 11:07:36 soveran [~soveran@46.255.176.153] has joined #scheme 11:14:03 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-36-200.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 11:16:54 kellar: functions defined in the top-level can refer to other functions defined there, right? It works the same way for internal defines. You don't need forward declarations like you do in C. 11:18:15 -!- pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-5f768218.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 11:18:27 did I claim I did? 11:18:33 pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-d9bfca78.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 11:20:06 kellar: no, I just thought it might help you if *I* claimed you don't... 11:21:25 thanks, that's mighty supportive. 11:22:14 kellar: you cannot evaluate the defines one-by-one, because you would get errors about not-yet-defined functions, like what happens in a REPL. 11:22:40 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-36-200.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 11:23:17 ahh, that IS helpful. 11:24:02 rudybot: (define (a) (p "test")) 11:24:02 kellar: your sandbox is ready 11:24:02 kellar: Done. 11:24:09 rudybot: p 11:24:09 kellar: error: reference to an identifier before its definition: p in module: 'program 11:24:46 aoh: internal defines are required by r5rs at least: http://www.cims.nyu.edu/cgi-systems/info2html?%28r5rs.info%29Internal%2520definitions 11:24:46 http://tinyurl.com/3sagdh4 11:24:50 I don't see it. it's not until I try to invoke a a symbol that I get the error, not from the define 11:25:25 or is the behaviour different if the define is internal? 11:25:45 rudybot: (define (a) (define (p) noSuchProc)) 11:25:45 kellar: error: eval:1:0: begin (possibly implicit): no expression after a sequence of internal definitions in: ((define (p) noSuchProc)) 11:26:58 rudybot: (define (a x) (define (p x) (noSuchProc x))) 11:26:58 kellar: error: eval:1:0: begin (possibly implicit): no expression after a sequence of internal definitions in: ((define (p x) (noSuchProc x))) 11:27:25 hmm. why is is different for internal defines vs. the global environment? 11:27:38 hkBst, cool, i seem to have overlooked that part 11:29:49 so in fact you do need forward declaration, but you avoid that by using a letrec and defining them all as unassigned variables beforehand 11:30:44 kellar, yes, letrec does that implicitly 11:32:15 http://tinyurl.com/3sagdh4 is concerned with internal define which are situated at the beginning of the body. what about having some code, then a define, then some more code? neither racket nor mit-scheme spew any warning about something like that 11:32:18 kellar: I guess some REPLs allow it, but not all AFAIK. The errors above are because you didn't put anything after your internal define, (like #f)... 11:32:56 rudybot: (define (a x) (define (p x) (noSuchProc x)) #f) 11:32:56 kellar: Done. 11:33:31 aoh: if you look at http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-faq-macros and search for "internal def" then you see that there they claim that letrec is a derived form of internal define. 11:33:37 hmm, r5rs doesn,t handle internal defines in the begin macro, even though that would be the natural thing to do... 11:33:45 both racket and mit-scheme allow it. so again, I don't see the problem. why is a letrec necessary? 11:34:21 kellar: letrec is just sugar over internal define 11:34:36 hkBst: is this a grey area, or are these implementation non-compliant? 11:35:13 hkBst: well and good, but using it seems to shuffle the order of execution from what the programmer intends. if there's no issue with forward-declaration, why use it? 11:35:14 hkBst, you can define either with either. in the end it's just lambdas and set!s 11:35:54 aoh: no, you cannot define internal define as a macro accroding to that schemewiki page. 11:37:29 hkBst, why? that's what i use. 11:38:33 gffa [~gffa@unaffiliated/gffa] has joined #scheme 11:39:00 aoh: I think because you would have to transform all the defines together into a letrec and none of the macro-systems let you do that. 11:39:26 aoh: it is possible to go from 1 to many, but not from many to 1. 11:41:41 kellar: there is no set order unless you use something like letrec* 11:41:48 hkBst, my version is at http://paste.lisp.org/display/124803 11:41:52 kellar: or unless you use the REPL 11:42:02 would you explain the difference between being bound vs it being assigned? 11:42:30 aoh: sure, if you wrap the internal defines into something (like begin) then it is possible. 11:42:35 hkBst: If you have a module wrapping all your defines I do not see why not 11:42:41 Right :) 11:42:52 I thought r6rs had modules 11:43:13 hkBstL: doesn't a "begin" block guarantee sequential execution? 11:43:34 hkBst, which you need anyway, because (lambda (x) a b ...) = (lambda (x) (begin (a b ...))) 11:44:28 and all the contexts where you can get internal defines after macro expansion are to my knowledge within lambdas or begins to start with 11:45:39 aoh: Can't the same trick be used in non-internal defines, because everything has a module now? 11:46:17 poucet, i'm not sure what you mean by modules 11:47:10 Sorry library 11:47:30 pandeiro [~pandeiro@bd21c148.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 11:47:33 kellar: begin is overloaded to mean two things, sequential evaluation and also to splice definitions into its surrounding context. 11:50:22 poucet, you probably want to also be able to export macros from libraries and modules, so that alone won't do 11:50:31 since macros aren't typically first class 11:51:33 hkBst: since I don't get errors about undefined functions, why can't the defines be evaluated one-by-one? the page you posted says the scope of internal defines is the *entire* body, is that meant to be interpreted to include other internal defines which precede a given internal define? 11:52:01 kellar: yes, indeed 11:52:45 hkBst: well, "the spec demands that behaviour" is a sort of answer I suppose. can you comment on why the demand exists? 11:55:11 kellar: http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/R6RS-Incompatibilities.html has an exmaple of what happens when you evaluate things sequentially... 11:55:11 http://tinyurl.com/3wqy9z2 12:02:00 hkBst: i'm new to scheme, havn't touched on macros yet. the example on that page seems to be specific to the use of define-syntax (I'm guessing that's a macro thing?). the same problem doesn't exists for procedures because of late-binding, am I wrong? so is this behaviour meant to plug a hole specific to the use of macros? 12:05:58 -!- soveran [~soveran@46.255.176.153] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:06:47 kellar: the error I spoke of sloppily before that you searched for in vain is what is shown there. There is no error whne everything is a procedure, but the forward reference is assumed to be a procedure binding and not a syntax binding, to accomodate mutually recursive functions on the REPL. But outside the REPL there is no need to be restricted to sequential evaluation, so the spec says to ``look at everything together''. 12:07:20 kellar: and yes, define-syntax is how macro's are introduced 12:09:55 good answer. thank you. 12:12:00 rff [~rff@ip72-207-241-136.br.br.cox.net] has joined #scheme 12:24:25 tupi [~david@139.82.89.24] has joined #scheme 12:34:21 -!- Brendan_T [~brendan@static.112.22.47.78.clients.your-server.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 12:36:58 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ipjphaqfslbucjck] has joined #scheme 12:41:09 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-54-74.gmavt.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 12:47:58 xissburg [~xissburg@187.50.13.57] has joined #scheme 12:50:08 soveran [~soveran@46.255.176.153] has joined #scheme 12:59:19 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-54-74.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme 13:04:29 -!- ijp [~user@host86-182-155-90.range86-182.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 13:04:29 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ipjphaqfslbucjck] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:04:40 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-bpnhupczmgskzdka] has joined #scheme 13:07:51 dnolen [~davidnole@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:13:47 metasyntax|work [~taylor@fw-its-kt209a-2.dyn.ipfw.edu] has joined #scheme 13:14:17 misterncw [~misterncw@82.71.241.25] has joined #scheme 13:16:07 -!- soveran [~soveran@46.255.176.153] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 13:30:47 kuribas [~user@d54C4359B.access.telenet.be] has joined #scheme 13:32:33 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-bpnhupczmgskzdka] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:32:34 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-54-74.gmavt.net] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 13:32:55 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-fmmkxxsydewdjoyn] has joined #scheme 13:39:44 -!- kellar [~kellar4@94.230.84.190] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:40:22 kellar [~kellar4@94.230.82.214] has joined #scheme 13:41:54 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-fmmkxxsydewdjoyn] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:42:15 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ivkkllynxiczpawd] has joined #scheme 13:42:38 just curious, which VCS do schemers prefer? 13:43:46 anything, as long as it's Git. 13:44:32 anything, as long as it isn't Git. 13:46:32 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-54-74.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme 13:49:17 -!- Burlingk [~burlingk@softbank221067045171.bbtec.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:49:41 Burlingk [~burlingk@softbank221067045171.bbtec.net] has joined #scheme 13:49:51 mercurial++! 13:50:18 zvrba: does that clause refer to C++ in any way?.. 13:50:34 no 13:50:58 whitequark: schemers can't even decide on language implementations. Now you ask about freaking VCSs! 13:51:01 hahahaha 13:51:37 :) 13:54:02 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-18.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 13:54:12 what's schemeish name for `reduce'? 13:54:24 foldr or foldl 13:54:50 whitequark: SRFI-1 has `reduce' 13:54:50 whois mario-goulart 13:54:56 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has quit [Quit: Reconnecting] 13:55:07 sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has joined #scheme 13:55:07 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has quit [Changing host] 13:55:07 sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has joined #scheme 13:55:29 just discovered you can do (help foldr) in racket 13:55:34 it's freaking awesome. 13:55:37 it even has search. 13:56:22 that highly praised python documentation sucks, compared to this. 13:57:00 :) 13:57:13 whitequark: that is very nice. 13:57:24 *qu1j0t3* is a chikn user but should play with racket some time 13:57:31 maybe chikn can learn from that one 13:57:48 really, I'd say that racket docs are the best of all programming language docs I've ever seen 13:58:14 qu1j0t3: I guess you aren't aware of chicken-doc 13:58:28 http://wiki.call-cc.org/eggref/4/chicken-doc 13:58:34 sjamaan: no, i wasn't 13:58:47 api reference can be compared to rdoc.info, but the latter does not have anything close to The Racket Guide 13:59:20 sjamaan: hm, thanks for the tip 13:59:21 qu1j0t3: It's the same docs as on api.call-cc.org, but from the repl and Unix commandline 13:59:37 sjamaan: i'll try and remember to use this. i refer to the www pages a lot. 13:59:50 api.call-cc.org is indeed awesome. 14:00:10 qu1j0t3: I think if you use chicken-slime this doc is available as popup buffer in emacs too 14:00:24 sjamaan: i'm not yet an emacser 14:00:32 sjamaan: though certain people would liek to convert me 14:00:39 -!- djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-ivkkllynxiczpawd] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:00:44 You can probably wire that into vim too 14:00:53 djcb [djcb@nat/nokia/x-uqlgqcpkquxqviwp] has joined #scheme 14:01:12 Alternatively, you can wire emacs into vim. 14:01:16 heh 14:01:19 Or vice-versa. 14:01:30 Just run the chicken-doc command with the text under the cursor as an argument 14:02:25 Or ,doc or ,wtf on the repl. 14:02:53 LOL 14:03:05 He's not kidding 14:03:08 i know 14:03:10 that's why i laughed 14:03:24 What's so funny about that? 14:03:27 ,wtf 14:03:36 sorry, cheap laugh 14:03:37 Where To Find, silly 14:03:49 haha 14:03:52 LOL again 14:03:55 mario-goulart++ 14:04:04 What else could that be? :-) 14:04:20 hm. (remq #f '(1 2 #f #f)) removes only one #f. how to make it remove all instances? 14:04:27 remq* does something different. 14:04:42 whitequark: filter? 14:04:44 whitequark: srfi-1's filter or remove do that 14:04:56 I mean, I can (remq* '(#f) '(1 2 #f #f)), but that's ugly 14:04:58 hm. 14:04:58 -!- pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-d9bfca78.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services] 14:05:10 pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-d9bfca26.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 14:05:22 mario-goulart: I notice that you and I are fellow PowerPC users. 14:05:51 sjamaan: remove also removes only one #f 14:06:10 qu1j0t3: I used to be. My PPC is too old and unusable for today's standards. 14:06:16 whitequark: No, it doesn't 14:06:26 whitequark: Not that I explicitly said "SRFI-1's remove" 14:06:31 sjamaan: ah. 14:06:36 Note* 14:06:47 this is quite stupid. 14:07:15 library routines really should not behave in different ways depending on standard (or what SRFI is) variant. 14:07:33 I guess you just got bitten by one of R6RS's gratuitous incompatibilities 14:07:48 SRFI-1 predates R6RS by many years 14:09:04 *whitequark* has found his first ever reason to dislike Scheme. 14:10:02 -!- stepnem [~stepnem@176.119.broadband10.iol.cz] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net] 14:10:10 is there a way to ensure consistent behavior through all implementations? 14:10:22 No 14:10:44 If you use r6rs, you can still import remove from srfi-1 under a different name 14:11:14 consistent behavior in a single implementation is a challenge already. 14:11:31 darn. 14:12:16 I use Racket. also, someone has said that it does not implement any of the Scheme standards around. 14:12:54 whitequark: what does its doc say? 14:13:07 stepnem [~stepnem@176.119.broadband10.iol.cz] has joined #scheme 14:13:28 whitequark: python's docs suck. perl has nice docs. racket's.. i like it. 14:13:58 whitequark: That's nonsense. Racket implements several standards, in fact 14:14:09 whitequark: see http://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/standards.html 14:14:12 You can get a pure r5 or r6 mode 14:14:26 But the "Racket" language is not a Scheme standard 14:14:30 (confused yet?) 14:15:20 *whitequark* whispers quietly: "I am just a small programmer. I want to code a bit." 14:15:34 -!- copumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 14:15:36 :-) 14:15:50 whitequark: common lisp! :P 14:16:11 whitequark: that's what I did when I got overwhelmed by a myriad of incompatible scheme implementations. 14:16:41 Just stick to a single implementation. 14:17:07 ya, but i want something that runs under windows and interfaces with emacs. 14:17:15 Just don't ask wich one. 14:17:21 which* 14:17:21 :) 14:17:39 zvrba: I'm a Rubyist. When I've looked at CL I have seen a huge bloated something. On the other side, Scheme is minimalistic and shares a lot of ideas with Ruby. 14:17:57 -!- hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:18:15 whitequark: i'm a perlist. that may explain my preference for CL ;) 14:18:23 (though I code in C and C++ for living) 14:18:39 though I got intrigued by racket 14:19:22 whitequark: just pick an implementation and stick to it. If you want it for practical application, you won't have many options. 14:19:31 zvrba: I've looked at Perl several times. It tends to tangle convolutions of my brain with its insane syntax. 14:19:48 (Not that I don't like a language without any real specification whatsoever.) 14:20:42 is there a predicate which is opposite to `not'? 14:20:58 to do something line (filter true? l) 14:21:01 *like 14:21:10 Some implementations provide `identity' 14:21:34 whitequark: what would be the point? 14:21:48 Maybe it's a case for `filter-map' from SRFI-1. 14:21:54 you can use `values' 14:22:08 zvrba: okay, actually I want something like Ruby's compact. you know, [1, 2, nil, 3].compact # => [1,2,3] 14:22:36 or like this: [1, 2, false, 3].select { |el| el } # => [1, 2, 3] 14:22:46 mario-goulart: what would be the point? just use map 14:23:07 wingo, `values'? 14:23:36 ah yes, I see how it will work here. 14:23:48