00:09:39 -!- samth is now known as samth_away 00:16:08 -!- jcowan [~John@cpe-66-108-19-185.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:16:39 jcowan [~John@cpe-66-108-19-185.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 00:21:44 -!- albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 00:22:30 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 00:23:38 -!- dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:24:27 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 00:26:48 ijp` [~user@host86-174-98-247.range86-174.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 00:27:34 dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has joined #scheme 00:27:55 -!- tessier [~treed@216.105.40.125] has quit [Changing host] 00:27:55 tessier [~treed@kernel-panic/copilotco] has joined #scheme 00:29:23 does scheme have a notequal? function? 00:30:07 -!- ijp [~user@host86-174-97-40.range86-174.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 00:30:08 No. 00:30:19 But it's a one-liner to write one. 00:30:29 -!- snizzo [~Claudio@host78-238-dynamic.31-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 00:30:34 In general Scheme has very few negative predicates. 00:30:47 we are nice positive people 00:30:51 -!- ijp` is now known as ijp 00:31:03 jcowan: With the exception of `not', I suppose. 00:31:15 Thank the Olympians for that one. 00:31:17 or a not? 00:31:19 Right. 00:31:42 coolcusty: `not?' is `not'. 00:32:00 suppose we did have a notequal, should (notequal a b c) return true if just one was different, or if they were all different? 00:32:08 -!- bitonic [~Francesco@dyn1213-56.wlan.ic.ac.uk] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.5] 00:32:28 Common Lisp requires them to be all different, which is an O(n log n) algorithm. 00:32:42 interesting 00:32:52 rudybot: (define notequal (compose not equal?)) 00:32:53 offby1: your sandbox is ready 00:32:53 offby1: Done. 00:32:58 rudybot: (3 notequal 4) 00:32:58 offby1: error: procedure application: expected procedure, given: 3; arguments were: # 4 00:33:02 heh 00:33:09 rudybot: (notequal 3 4) 00:33:09 offby1: ; Value: #t 00:33:12 rudybot: (notequal 3 3) 00:33:13 offby1: ; Value: #f 00:33:19 good question ijp 00:33:22 must be thinking in Python or something 00:33:38 n would usually be small, so this wouldn't be much of a problem in practice 00:33:52 that is, I'm speaking of CL /=, which is not the negation of =. 00:34:03 right 00:36:26 But it's annoying that it's so expensive to compute. 00:37:58 -!- dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 00:39:09 what's the best way to access the elements of a list one at a time? 00:39:27 or incrementaly 00:39:39 dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has joined #scheme 00:41:15 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:42:12 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 00:43:11 map? 00:43:12 for-each? 00:43:34 fold, unfold, pair-fold, refold, ...depends... 00:43:52 Or list-ref, if you want to do it slow and simpleminded. 00:44:08 -!- dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 00:44:38 coolcust1 [~kcenac@pool-108-46-109-39.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 00:45:38 I've been referring to () recently as "null"; is this bad form? Is it really "nil"? Are they synonymous? 00:45:58 dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has joined #scheme 00:46:07 () isn't the same as what CLers would call nil 00:46:20 ok 00:47:07 ijp: Since there's this ()-#f pun in CL? 00:47:08 -!- coolcusty [~kcenac@pool-108-46-109-39.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:48:05 ijp` [~user@host86-162-111-119.range86-162.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 00:48:49 klutometis: yes 00:49:19 null makes sense, since we have a null? predicate, but I've always preferred 'empty' 00:49:37 -!- ijp [~user@host86-174-98-247.range86-174.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Disconnected by services] 00:49:43 -!- ijp` is now known as ijp 00:50:27 I call it nil myself. 00:50:35 "the empty list" is rather verbose. 00:51:10 rudybot, '() 00:51:10 AR_: ; Value: () 00:51:45 In Owl Lisp (which is a Scheme, despite its name), Null (with cap N) is another way of writing '(). 00:52:13 rudybot, null 00:52:13 AR_: ; Value: () 00:52:16 -!- sporous [~sporous@antispammeta/bot/irssi/sporous] has quit [Disconnected by services] 00:52:17 Actually, so is N. I think that's an accident. 00:52:20 rudybot, Null 00:52:20 AR_: error: reference to an identifier before its definition: Null in module: 'program 00:52:25 sporous [~sporous@antispammeta/bot/irssi/sporous] has joined #scheme 00:53:58 -!- dnolen [~user@p72-0-226-118-static.acedsl.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 00:54:34 rudybot, Jethro Tull 00:54:34 offby1: eh? Try "rudybot: help". 00:54:41 rudybot, Martin Mull 00:54:41 offby1: eh? Try "rudybot: help". 00:54:45 rudybot, seagull 00:54:45 offby1: error: reference to an identifier before its definition: seagull in module: 'program 00:54:56 offby1: Why isn't the incubot mode kicking in? :-P 00:55:00 single words 00:55:11 they can be "read" so he thinks they're lisp to be eval'd. 00:55:16 rudybot, eat flaming death 00:55:17 offby1: An annoying, trolling, flaming person ... from another planet. 00:55:17 rudybot: zombie apocalypse 00:55:18 ijp: stop perpetuating that "mayan apocalypse" nonsense 00:56:17 offby1: I see. 00:58:08 rudybot: eat-flaming-death 00:58:08 offby1: ; Value: ow-it-burrnnnnnz 01:00:02 rudybot, (define Omega (let ([om (lambda (f) (f f))]) (om om))) 01:00:12 AR_: error: with-limit: out of time 01:00:18 hm :) 01:00:39 klutometis: https://twitter.com/#!/AmberCadabra/status/182628382062809088 01:00:59 bfgun [~b_fin_g@r186-52-131-77.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #scheme 01:04:16 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme 01:04:23 -!- bfig [~b_fin_g@r190-135-8-129.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:07:16 xwl_ [user@nat/nokia/x-spcrtexsabfvrnnp] has joined #scheme 01:07:20 AR_: everyone tries that, more or less. 01:11:41 if you really want to crash it, I know a way... 01:11:52 *ijp* laughs maniacally 01:13:19 *sigh* 01:14:30 I don't suppose that got fixed did it? 01:15:17 probably not 01:15:56 -!- langmartin [~user@host-68-169-155-216.WISOLT2.epbfi.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 01:25:50 is the "for-each" function purely functional or are they side effects 01:26:32 it, itself shouldn't have side effects 01:26:43 but without side-effects, it wouldn't be much use 01:26:54 let's retry that answer, shall we? 01:27:06 for-each _never_ returns an interesting value; the _only_ reason to use it is for side-effects 01:27:25 rudybot: (for-each (list 1 2 3) "look ma, no hands") 01:27:28 offby1: M-a jumps to begining of the sentence. M-k kills the sentence. 01:27:32 *sigh* 01:27:34 rudybot: eval (for-each (list 1 2 3) "look ma, no hands") 01:27:34 offby1: error: for-each: expects type as 1st argument, given: '(1 2 3); other arguments were: "look ma, no hands" 01:27:48 rudybot: eval (for-each (thunk "look ma, no hands") (list 1 2 3)) 01:27:49 offby1: error: for-each: arity mismatch for #: expects no arguments, given 1 01:27:53 gaaah 01:28:01 rudybot: eval (for-each (lambda ignored "look ma, no hands") (list 1 2 3)) 01:28:01 offby1: Done. 01:28:05 there. 01:28:07 no return value. 01:28:20 rudybot: eval (for-each (lambda ignored (displayln "whatever")) (list 1 2 3)) 01:28:21 offby1: ; stdout: "whatever\nwhatever\nwhatever\n" 01:28:24 o rly? 01:28:28 ya, rly 01:28:34 rudybot: eval (list (for-each (lambda ignored "look ma, no hands") (list 1 2 3))) 01:28:35 ijp: your sandbox is ready 01:28:36 ijp: ; Value: (#) 01:28:38 no wai! 01:28:43 wai! 01:29:30 dunno why you really _need_ for-each, since you could just ignore the return value from "map". Maybe they make different promises about evaluation order or something. 01:29:46 indeed 01:32:15 offby1: Many reasons why for-each is useful. 01:32:19 1. evaluation order, as you said. 01:32:37 2. map collects results, so if your input list has many elements, then that has memory usage implications. 01:32:44 ah, true 01:33:04 like the man says: a scheme programmer knows the value of everything but the cost of nothing 01:33:08 ;-) 01:34:16 Perlis misquoting Wilde if I recall correctly. 01:34:28 imagine I said that in an upper-class English accent. 01:34:31 ;-) 01:35:09 now a _really clever_ compiler might notice that you're ignoring the return from "map", and not bother accumulating the result. 01:35:10 but. 01:35:24 Yes, but it's still not optimal for human readers. 01:35:37 oh pff. 01:35:45 (I'm joking.) 01:35:48 ;-) 01:36:26 For example, a really clever compiler can tell when certain list operations are linear-update and automatically use non-copying mode. But meh. ;-) 01:36:27 i think it's awfully anthropocentric to optimize your programs for human readers 01:36:38 bipt: Lol. 01:36:57 I ain't letting no dolphin read my code 01:39:50 (if offby1 can have a british accent, I can have this one) 01:41:46 -!- confab [~win7@public-nat2.arc.losrios.edu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:45:54 Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 01:51:00 arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 01:52:34 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-123-195.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 01:57:35 tuubow [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:01:15 samth_ [~samth@c-66-31-201-165.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:01:25 -!- masm [~masm@bl18-37-48.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 02:01:41 -!- bill_h [~bill_h@wwh.xen.prgmr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:10:52 -!- _schulte_ [~eschulte@c-174-56-50-60.hsd1.nm.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:11:16 -!- CampinSam [~CampinSam@24-176-98-217.dhcp.jcsn.tn.charter.com] has quit [Quit: leaving] 02:12:08 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 02:28:01 confab [~confab@c-71-193-9-153.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:36:28 -!- pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-5f769265.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services] 02:36:41 pygospa [~Pygosceli@kiel-4dbec25b.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 02:39:17 -!- turbofail [~user@c-107-3-149-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 02:46:17 nalaginrut [~nalaginru@14.154.250.3] has joined #scheme 02:51:15 annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 02:51:16 -!- annodomini [~lambda@c-76-23-156-75.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host] 02:51:16 annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has joined #scheme 02:53:58 -!- jlongster [~user@pool-173-53-25-16.rcmdva.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 03:01:44 -!- tuubow [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 03:03:45 tuubow [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 03:11:41 what's wrong with my functions? i'm trying to create a function that would split a list into sublist on every two in the list http://paste.lisp.org/display/128486 03:12:25 jlongster [~user@pool-173-53-25-16.rcmdva.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:12:34 what's wrong with it is that you didn't write any unit tests. 03:12:40 I'm only 50% being snarkyl 03:13:03 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 03:13:13 the first is returning "mcar: expects argument of type ; given ()" 03:13:25 -!- RageOfThou [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:13:29 the second is returning the entire inputed list 03:13:52 the first problem suggests that you didn't handle the () case specially 03:13:56 which you probably ought to have 03:15:33 not sure what that means "handling the () case specially" i thought i did on the last line 03:15:41 -!- kniu [~kniu@pool-173-75-156-3.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:16:01 -!- GoKhlaYeh [~GoKhlaYeh@117.31.80.79.rev.sfr.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:18:04 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 03:25:55 -!- bfgun is now known as bfig 03:26:04 got what you meant now fixed it 03:26:29 but it's just returning one list without the 2's 03:30:20 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has left #scheme 03:30:30 lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has joined #scheme 03:33:11 -!- jlongster [~user@pool-173-53-25-16.rcmdva.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:48:32 cdidd [~cdidd@95-27-138-19.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 03:56:17 -!- samth_ [~samth@c-66-31-201-165.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 03:56:30 adu [~ajr@pool-72-83-26-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:56:37 yey 03:58:15 -!- jrslepak [~jrslepak@c-71-233-148-123.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 04:02:19 is it an error to allow (set! (f x) (* x x))? 04:03:02 jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has joined #scheme 04:03:17 -!- forcer [~forcer@hmbg-5f760b28.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 04:04:51 adu: It would directly conflict with SRFI 17. 04:05:14 oh 04:05:15 adu: Also, it's very unusual to want to set! a lambda. 04:05:21 adu: So that shorthand isn't very useful. 04:05:22 it is 04:05:35 i forgot about lisp setters 04:05:40 Yep. 04:05:42 thought that was cl-only 04:05:51 Now you know otherwise. 04:05:54 ;-) 04:05:54 i do 04:05:56 :) 04:06:19 cky: I regained ownership of my scheme today 04:06:28 You mean you didn't own it previously? 04:06:50 it was lost in a card game 04:06:53 correct, https://github.com/andydude/droscheme 04:07:15 it started as a toy, then evolved into something with lambdas 04:07:25 and once it had lambdas, I wanted it 04:07:37 ijp: Is that card game Sabacc? ;-) 04:08:24 I was thinking more like baccarat, but that works 04:09:07 :-) 04:09:16 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.178.216.22] has joined #scheme 04:11:35 -!- rudybot [~luser@ec2-50-18-138-42.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:13:45 rudybot [~luser@ec2-50-18-138-42.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #scheme 04:16:00 -!- araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:22:09 kniu [~kniu@pool-173-75-156-3.pitbpa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 04:26:07 -!- annodomini [~lambda@wikipedia/lambda] has quit [Quit: annodomini] 04:40:41 adu: It's written in Issue 9?! Wow. 04:41:09 Interesting choice of implementation language. 04:41:20 -!- AR_ [~AR_@24.238.76.196] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 04:42:47 I should try to write one in D. 04:45:02 issue 9? 04:45:20 do you mean plan9? 04:45:27 No. Google it up. :-) 04:46:15 cky: did you write Go!? 04:46:22 "Go!" that is 04:46:35 No, not me. 04:46:52 However, that topic has received _so_ much feedback asking for people to call it Issue 9, that I could not resist. 04:47:08 Ever since then, I have always referred to the Google-sponsored language as Issue 9. 04:48:14 ok 04:48:26 anyways, it's freed me from a lot of concerns 04:48:47 namely, I don't have to implement a GC or exception system 04:49:29 One could say the same of Java, Ruby, JS, etc. ;-) 04:49:36 Or even D! :-P 04:49:44 so where has issue9 gotten a lot of attention? 04:50:06 Well, I can't remember now, but that issue generated a lot of buzz around the time Go was first unveiled. 04:50:57 the primary reason why I'm writing a Scheme in Go is to learn languages 04:51:08 and I get to learn 2 at the same time by doing so 04:51:16 ;-) 04:51:20 it's pretty cool 04:51:49 I might have to check it out sometime. But I have so many languages to learn! :-O 04:52:05 I'm not trying to break benchmarks or anything, but I think since I'm using an immutable model, the GC should work out pretty well 04:52:07 Like I said, C++11 and D are two languages I want to try implementing a Scheme in. :-) 04:52:18 so I'm probably not going to have set-car! anything soon 04:52:23 Good idea. :-) 04:52:53 s/anything/anytime/ 04:53:19 why C++11? because it kind of has lambdas? 04:53:49 I've learned that you really don't need lambdas to implement Scheme 04:53:59 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 04:54:09 No, because C++11 has lots of cool features that makes C++ a much nicer experience. 04:54:26 like composite literals? 04:54:48 Also, because I want to use silly puns for the implementation name, like 7/11 (R7RS implementation in C++11). 04:54:51 or what does C++ call them, list constructors? 04:55:09 lolololol 04:55:28 does R7RS really require set-car? 04:55:34 s/?/!/ 04:55:37 I need to reread the draft. 04:55:54 it says a "consistent subset" is ok, but I think that's kind of vauge 04:56:25 I hope my name is in the final draft, I helped fix a typo :) 04:56:54 ;-) 04:57:37 something like "string library procedure" when it should have been "char library procedure" 04:59:04 anyways, I have mad respect for Scheme (well more than I had before) 04:59:29 because of going from half-baked idea to lambdas in 2 weeks 04:59:58 and (+) still isn't working right 05:00:51 (+ 1/2 1/3) gives 5/6, but (+ 0.5 1/2) gives 0 05:01:33 I'm pretty sure it should give 1 or 1.0 05:01:53 -!- soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:02:21 where is jcowan when you need his hundreds of schemes 05:02:26 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 05:03:34 pjb- [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #scheme 05:03:39 You can use Racket on rudybot. 05:03:44 That's one other implementation, at least. 05:03:48 rudybot: (+ 0.5 1/2) 05:03:59 cky: error: with-limit: out of time 05:04:03 >> (+ 0.5 1/2) 05:04:05 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 05:04:19 hmm 05:04:32 racket gives 1.0 05:05:05 anyways, I think the convention is exactness is only kept if both arguments are exact 05:05:36 adu: It's not a convention, it's a requirement. 05:05:48 adu: Inexactness is contagious. 05:06:01 so is complexness 05:06:27 jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has joined #scheme 05:06:33 Well, sort of. If the imaginary part is 0, I think it is allowed to be collapsed, but don't quote me on that. 05:06:44 rudybot: 1+0i 05:06:45 cky: your sandbox is ready 05:06:45 cky: ; Value: 1 05:07:01 interesting 05:07:02 pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #scheme 05:07:28 -!- pjb is now known as Guest12060 05:08:27 adu: Implementations _are_ allowed to make an inexact number exact if multiplying by exact 0. 05:08:30 rudybot: (* 1.0 0) 05:08:31 cky: ; Value: 0 05:08:31 maybe I should see if I can find the section on numerical types and promotions 05:09:22 -!- Guest12060 is now known as pjb 05:10:12 adu: The rationale for all that is pretty straightforward. 0.5 could be the same as 0.49999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 for all you know. 05:10:25 adu: So, thus, (+ 0.5 1/2) cannot necessarily mean 1 exactly. 05:10:32 It could instead mean 0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999. 05:11:05 obviously 05:11:06 which is exactly 1. 05:11:11 lol 05:11:20 (almost). 05:11:23 pjb: I didn't say it's an infinite chain of 9s. 05:11:28 pjb: If it were, then it would be 1 indeed. 05:12:24 adu: Just trying to explain why that's a requirement and not merely a convention. :-) 05:12:58 pl 05:13:03 s/pl/ok/ 05:13:23 :-) 05:13:31 it's a nice requirement 05:13:34 Yep. 05:13:49 I guess I just used that word to describe how I can see doing it a stupider way 05:15:23 found it "must generally return inexact results when given any inexact arguments." 05:19:24 Yep. 05:20:21 araujo [~araujo@190.38.61.1] has joined #scheme 05:20:22 -!- araujo [~araujo@190.38.61.1] has quit [Changing host] 05:20:22 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme 05:34:11 adu: I'd be actually keen to create an interval-arithmetic-based notion of inexactness. 05:34:54 adu: And when it's provable that the interval is a single point, then it can revert back to exact. 05:35:48 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 05:36:01 The overhead is obviously significantly more than floating-point, but I think it's interesting to do. 05:37:34 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 05:40:52 I might do that 05:42:50 tom_i [~thomasing@ingserv.demon.co.uk] has joined #scheme 05:43:03 cky: have you ever used Sage? 05:43:07 Nope. 05:44:20 http://www.sagemath.org 05:44:34 anyways, it has interval arithmetic 05:44:38 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 05:44:46 but it's also a big mess 05:45:02 the internals of sage are a nightmare 05:45:07 -!- pranq [pranq@unaffiliated/contempt] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 05:46:17 it should have been written in Scheme 05:46:39 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 05:47:04 or Issue9 05:47:22 realitygrill_ [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-113-241.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 05:47:35 -!- sharkbird [~sharkbird@67-220-6-139.usiwireless.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:48:06 -!- realitygrill_ [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-113-241.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Client Quit] 05:48:13 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-189-72.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 05:48:38 *nods* 05:49:14 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-123-195.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 05:55:17 -!- djcb` [~user@a88-114-95-13.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:57:58 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 05:59:46 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 06:00:33 choas [~lars@p4FDC5D51.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 06:00:39 skld [~skld@unaffiliated/skld] has joined #scheme 06:00:54 -!- skld [~skld@unaffiliated/skld] has left #scheme 06:03:09 tuubow_ [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 06:03:26 -!- tuubow [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 06:05:51 adu: Here I am, but briefly 06:06:09 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 06:06:10 oh, I was jk 06:06:29 talking about your hundreds of installed schemes 06:07:49 eno [~eno@adsl-70-137-133-209.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 06:07:53 -!- eno [~eno@adsl-70-137-133-209.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Changing host] 06:07:54 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 06:08:38 Do you want me to run something against them? 06:09:17 well, when I said it I was interested in (+ 1/2 0.5) 06:09:32 but my first question is probably more interesting 06:10:02 what happens with (set! (f x) (* x x)) on most schemes? 06:10:16 Any Scheme not giving exactly 1.0 for (+ 1/2 0.5) is pretty silly. 06:10:32 (set! (f x) (* x x)) is a syntax error. 06:10:44 on everything? 06:11:17 Some Schemes may extend the interpretation of SET! to give meaning to that term, in which case the meaning depends on what F is and perhaps what X is. 06:11:37 -!- ubii [~ubii@unaffiliated/ubii] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:12:20 Quite so. 06:13:06 so it would have to be something from SRFI 17 in order to really test 06:14:12 jcowan: thanks 06:14:42 I ran the (+ 1/2 0.5) and the answer is always 1.0, except: 06:14:49 -!- choas [~lars@p4FDC5D51.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:15:47 some Schemes can't handle 1/2 and report a syntax error, some Schemes don't have inexact numbers and report an exact 1, VX reports 1.5 (probably because it reads 1/2 as 1). 06:16:41 wow 06:17:10 (There are only 39 Schemes in the test rig, not actually hundreds) 06:17:24 -!- jcowan [~John@cpe-66-108-19-185.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:17:35 well, I like to exaggerate 06:21:53 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-189-72.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 06:23:51 kreol [~quassel@85.198.173.181] has joined #scheme 06:32:31 -!- kreol [~quassel@85.198.173.181] has quit [Quit: http://quassel-irc.org - ????????????? ??????. ?????.] 06:36:14 -!- xwl_ [user@nat/nokia/x-spcrtexsabfvrnnp] has left #scheme 06:38:33 -!- arcfide [~arcfide@c-98-223-204-153.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:40:38 -!- tom_i [~thomasing@ingserv.demon.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 06:41:02 -!- Guest14172 [name@89.180.162.197] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:43:58 pranq [pranq@unaffiliated/contempt] has joined #scheme 06:47:22 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 06:50:40 tom_i [~thomasing@ingserv.demon.co.uk] has joined #scheme 07:00:01 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-72-83-26-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu] 07:14:10 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-176-224.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 07:16:44 albacker [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 07:16:44 -!- albacker [~eni@gob75-5-82-230-88-217.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Changing host] 07:16:44 albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has joined #scheme 07:16:50 -!- bipt [~bpt@cpe-071-070-253-241.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 07:17:49 -!- tom_i [~thomasing@ingserv.demon.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:18:38 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-176-224.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 07:25:30 -!- albacker [~eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 07:29:24 forcer [~forcer@hmbg-4d06ee9d.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 07:31:52 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-175-24.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 07:46:57 is it true that syntax-rules does not allow one to create procedures with part of the name derived from the argument like (define make-,foo) or something? 07:50:45 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 07:52:28 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 08:18:57 pumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme 08:19:01 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:19:06 -!- pumpkin is now known as copumpkin 08:22:08 bas_ [~bas@89.184.179.185] has joined #scheme 08:22:08 -!- bas_ is now known as Skola 08:32:47 what's wrong wih my function http://paste.lisp.org/display/128486#1. its supposed to split a list on the number 2 but the returned list is just excluding 2 08:35:45 qu1j0t3: Sweet; they busted out Musikalisches Opfer! It's a little disconcerting, though, that they merely reversed the recording. 08:36:05 There is some subtletly involved in playing the thing forward and backward (phrasing, &c.). 08:36:29 -!- rixed [~rixed@extranet.securactive.org] has quit [Quit: "box crashed"] 08:37:47 Ah, I now see that the genius is in the visualization; not the performance. Moebius strip was a nice touch. 08:37:50 Thanks! 08:39:55 coolcust1: what's list2? 08:45:19 oh that's suppose to be split2 08:45:34 the function itself 08:48:15 tom_i [~thomasing@cmc.beaming.biz] has joined #scheme 08:50:45 keenbug [~daniel@p4FDB6016.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 08:51:07 xwl_ [user@nat/nokia/x-umewtiagopjksqub] has joined #scheme 08:52:29 coolcust1: what is the result of split2 supposed to be? 08:53:07 coolcust1: notice that you say it's supposed to split a list. Ie. it's supposed to do something. That's not how one define functions. Functions are defined by what they return, not what they "do". Functions should not do anything. 08:53:17 "doing" is having side effects. 08:53:33 Furthermore, splitting a list sounds like you're modifying the list. 08:54:08 While you could write a procedure that has such a side effect, in general it's not a good idea to modify data structures, since that prevent sharing them. 08:54:44 Notice that in scheme, you can write a function that returns several results, with the (values ) operator. 08:55:18 it's suppose to return a new list between every 2 on the existing list. so input -> ( 1 3 2 4 5 2 3 7 8 2) output-> (1 3) (4 5) (3 7 8) 08:55:23 But to call such functions you must use the call-with-value function. 08:55:54 coolcust1: do you mean that output should be multiple values? 08:56:30 You could return a variable number of values with (apply values results). 08:56:31 yes 08:57:05 kpal [~kpal@janus-nat-128-240-225-120.ncl.ac.uk] has joined #scheme 08:57:13 But usually, we don't use values to return variable (and possibly large) number of results. It would be better to return just a list with all the resulting lists. 08:57:59 Anyways, assuming split2 returns its results as multiple values you must call it with call-with-values. 08:58:44 ok 08:58:47 (call-with-value (lambda results (cons (car lst) results)) (split2 (cdr lst))) 08:59:09 And of course since you wnat to return multiple values: 08:59:14 (apply values (call-with-value (lambda results (cons (car lst) results)) (split2 (cdr lst)))) 08:59:34 it's call-with-valueS <-- 09:02:21 There's a difficulty, values takes at least one value! 09:02:34 You cannot return zero value, so your specification cannot work for the base case. 09:02:53 You can either introduce a guard value, or use a list of lists. 09:04:01 Oh, and I mixed the producer and consumer in call-with-values: (call-with-values (split2 (cdr lst)) (lambda results (cons (car lst) results))) 09:04:10 -!- nalaginrut [~nalaginru@14.154.250.3] has quit [Quit: ] 09:05:18 ijp` [~user@host31-53-17-138.range31-53.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 09:06:44 -!- ijp [~user@host86-162-111-119.range86-162.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:06:57 It must be: (call-with-values (lambda () (split2 (cdr lst))) (lambda results (cons (car lst) results))) 09:08:49 Then you must call it with: (call-with-values (lambda () (split2 '(1 2 3 4))) (lambda results (butlast results))) --> (1 3 4) 09:09:17 Using values is quite convoluted in scheme 09:09:28 -!- cmatei [~cmatei@95.76.22.68] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:11:20 thanks 09:11:25 cmatei [~cmatei@95.76.22.68] has joined #scheme 09:14:23 -!- cmatei [~cmatei@95.76.22.68] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:15:01 ijp`` [~user@host31-53-111-21.range31-53.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 09:15:04 cmatei [~cmatei@95.76.22.68] has joined #scheme 09:16:28 kuribas [~user@d54C43316.access.telenet.be] has joined #scheme 09:16:32 -!- ijp` [~user@host31-53-17-138.range31-53.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:18:14 ijp``` [~user@host81-159-28-138.range81-159.btcentralplus.com] has joined #scheme 09:19:02 coolcust1: http://paste.lisp.org/+2R52/2 09:19:41 -!- ijp`` [~user@host31-53-111-21.range31-53.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:21:07 -!- virl [~virl__@85-127-248-189.dynamic.xdsl-line.inode.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:24:43 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 09:24:54 preflex_ [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme 09:25:41 -!- preflex_ is now known as preflex 09:29:09 ahinki [~chatzilla@212.99.10.150] has joined #scheme 09:29:33 pjb: thanks works wonders 09:30:21 pjb: wonder if i can improve it by making it tail recursive? i'll look inhto it 09:34:36 dostoyevsky [sck@oemcomputer.oerks.de] has joined #scheme 09:35:48 kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has joined #scheme 09:42:03 -!- kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7] 09:48:05 -!- wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 09:49:19 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-113-241.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 09:49:27 kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has joined #scheme 09:51:31 -!- kk` [~kk@unaffiliated/kk/x-5380134] has quit [Client Quit] 10:02:28 coolcust1: there's a theorem that says that all recursive function can be made iterative, therefore tail-recursive. 10:02:42 coolcust1: use an accumulator. 10:08:09 bitonic [~Francesco@5add3a82.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 10:10:33 lcc` [~user@71-222-134-92.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 10:12:31 -!- lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 10:14:41 lcc`` [~user@75-173-84-235.albq.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 10:15:54 -!- lcc`` [~user@75-173-84-235.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Client Quit] 10:16:21 -!- lcc` [~user@71-222-134-92.albq.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 10:19:02 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:19:12 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:21:32 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:22:04 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Client Quit] 10:24:06 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-113-241.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: realitygrill] 10:40:04 cozmic\ [cozmic@89-160-133-29.du.xdsl.is] has joined #scheme 10:40:04 -!- cozmic [cozmic@89-160-133-29.du.xdsl.is] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:41:14 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:41:53 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:45:40 masm [~masm@bl18-37-48.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 10:46:29 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:47:29 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:47:39 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:47:58 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Client Quit] 10:48:07 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:52:11 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:52:24 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 10:53:20 -!- tessier [~treed@kernel-panic/copilotco] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 10:53:27 tessier [~treed@216.105.40.125] has joined #scheme 10:53:56 -!- gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable034.210-160-184.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:08:57 lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has joined #scheme 11:21:04 -!- lcc [~user@unaffiliated/lcc] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 11:23:18 Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has joined #scheme 11:40:20 -!- bitonic [~Francesco@5add3a82.bb.sky.com] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.5] 11:48:38 samth_ [~samth@c-66-31-201-165.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 11:51:42 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 11:53:22 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 12:00:21 tomodo [~tomodo@gateway/tor-sasl/tomodo] has joined #scheme 12:06:26 -!- mmc [~michal@sams-office-nat.tomtomgroup.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:07:59 mmc [~michal@sams-office-nat.tomtomgroup.com] has joined #scheme 12:11:53 _schulte_ [~eschulte@c-174-56-50-60.hsd1.nm.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 12:12:39 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:13:07 copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #scheme 12:20:18 bitonic [~Francesco@dyn1192-212.wlan.ic.ac.uk] has joined #scheme 12:24:21 gcartier [~gcartier@modemcable026.84-70-69.static.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 12:30:03 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 12:30:22 airolson [~airolson@CPE00222d55a738-CM00222d55a735.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 12:30:30 -!- _schulte_ [~eschulte@c-174-56-50-60.hsd1.nm.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:31:56 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 12:36:44 -!- samth_ [~samth@c-66-31-201-165.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:39:59 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 12:42:00 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 12:42:36 -!- airolson [~airolson@CPE00222d55a738-CM00222d55a735.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [] 12:48:00 icrazyhack [horieyui@115.173.249.104] has joined #scheme 12:48:23 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-233.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 12:49:19 jrslepak [~jrslepak@c-71-233-148-123.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 12:50:09 chupish [182c5af4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.44.90.244] has joined #scheme 12:51:07 sharkbird [~sharkbird@67-220-6-139.usiwireless.com] has joined #scheme 12:52:03 wingo [~wingo@90.164.198.39] has joined #scheme 12:52:46 -!- confab [~confab@c-71-193-9-153.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 12:53:08 wollw [~davidsher@75-101-85-170.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined #scheme 12:59:14 dnolen [~user@cpe-98-14-92-234.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:03:03 bfgun [~b_fin_g@r190-135-28-2.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #scheme 13:05:30 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 13:06:27 -!- bfig [~b_fin_g@r186-52-131-77.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 13:07:19 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 13:10:04 -!- samth_away is now known as samth 13:14:29 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 13:14:46 -!- xwl [~user@123.108.223.27] has quit [Write error: Connection reset by peer] 13:15:12 xwl [~user@123.108.223.27] has joined #scheme 13:16:23 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 13:16:31 adu [~ajr@pool-72-83-26-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 13:17:35 -!- xwl_ [user@nat/nokia/x-umewtiagopjksqub] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 13:19:20 langmartin [~user@host-68-169-155-216.WISOLT2.epbfi.com] has joined #scheme 13:27:23 airolson [~airolson@CPE00222d55a738-CM00222d55a735.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #scheme 13:27:54 -!- pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:29:34 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.178.216.22] has left #scheme 13:31:07 leo2007 [~leo@123.123.255.238] has joined #scheme 13:33:00 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@3ad50e34.broker.freenet6.net] has joined #scheme 13:33:47 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 13:35:40 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 13:41:07 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 13:43:04 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:44:31 pjb [~t@81.202.16.46.dyn.user.ono.com] has joined #scheme 13:44:35 add^_ [~add^_^@m212-152-15-182.cust.tele2.se] has joined #scheme 13:44:45 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 13:44:58 -!- pjb is now known as Guest1861 13:47:10 -!- Arafangion [~Arafangio@220-244-108-23.static.tpgi.com.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:47:28 -!- Guest1861 is now known as pjb` 13:48:15 -!- pjb` is now known as pjb 13:57:14 -!- tuubow_ [~adityavit@c-24-0-148-151.hsd1.nj.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 13:58:55 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 14:00:14 X-Scale [name@2001:470:1f14:135b::2] has joined #scheme 14:00:56 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 14:06:35 -!- ijp``` is now known as ijp 14:09:34 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-72-83-26-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:10:06 adu [~ajr@pool-72-83-26-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 14:14:17 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 14:14:45 -!- bweaver [~weaver@unaffiliated/bweaver] has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught me] 14:16:08 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 14:17:04 bweaver [~weaver@108-166-124-151.static.cloud-ips.com] has joined #scheme 14:17:04 -!- bweaver [~weaver@108-166-124-151.static.cloud-ips.com] has quit [Changing host] 14:17:04 bweaver [~weaver@unaffiliated/bweaver] has joined #scheme 14:26:13 xpololz [~xpololz@80.203.124.203] has joined #scheme 14:26:35 Do you guys know of any haml parser in scheme? 14:27:04 -!- xpololz [~xpololz@80.203.124.203] has left #scheme 14:29:47 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 14:31:19 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 14:33:39 mario-goulart: http://planet.plt-scheme.org/display.ss?package=html-parsing.plt&owner=neil 14:33:39 http://tinyurl.com/85j5gto 14:34:25 adu: that's for hTml, no? 14:35:45 I don't know of anything for h*a*ml 14:35:49 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 14:36:33 mario-goulart: I suspect not 14:38:23 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 14:39:15 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-113-241.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 14:39:38 chupish: is haml one of those billions of html shortcut languages? 14:39:57 adu: kind of, yes 14:40:25 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 14:40:26 I don't see the point 14:40:36 should an XML parser not work then? 14:40:42 it has additional features 14:40:52 oh, it isn't based on XML/HTML syntax though 14:40:56 leppie: it's not exactly xml 14:40:59 http://haml-lang.com/ 14:41:10 I don't see the point 14:41:28 adu: the point is people hate html 14:41:29 adu: I don't see the point either, but my boss does. 14:41:30 chupish: the simplest converter would be haml->html->sexp 14:41:47 haml->sxml 14:41:49 adu: I suspect that loses information 14:41:56 ijp: which is why you don't create your own html with different syntax! 14:42:06 don't blame me, I didn't do it! 14:42:35 ah, impedance mismatch 14:42:35 well, HAML is meant to simplify writing HTML whilst still minimize the need to have closing tags & the like 14:42:35 I small yacc parser spitting out sexpr will do just fine IMO :) 14:43:35 right but all that does is reduce the typists' big-O from O(n) to O(n/2) 14:43:44 the shortcuts like #profile ->
or #foo= bar ->
<%= bar =>
are supposedly worth it 14:43:53 if you have the right macro and runtime, you can get that to O(log(n)) 14:44:44 oh sure, but this ostensibly maps to what a designer or the like would think of HTML as well 14:44:57 -!- karswell [~coat@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:45:51 chupish: html5 already includes
,
,