For instance, in ruby (irb) this is quite smooth:
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4].map{|x|x+1}.reduce{|x,y|x+y}
14
And in scala (shell):
scala> List(1,2,3,4).map{ _+1 }.reduce{_+_}
res1: Int = 14
In perl there is no interactive shell, and the block statement seems
strange:
$ perl -le '@x=(1,2,3,4); $sum+=$_ for( map {$_+1} @x );print $sum'
14
14
For instance, in ruby (irb) this is quite smooth:
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4].map{|x|x+1}.reduce{|x,y|x+y}
14
And in scala (shell):
scala> List(1,2,3,4).map{ _+1 }.reduce{_+_}
res1: Int = 14
In perl there is no interactive shell [...]
In perl [...] the block statement seems strange:
$ perl -le '@x=(1,2,3,4); $sum+=$_ for( map {$_+1} @x );print $sum'
14
Hello list,
I am not that familiar with perl (though I like it), but I found it
maybe have two flaws as follows.
1. doesn't have an interactive shell.
2. the block statement (like lambda) is ugly.
For instance, in ruby (irb) this is quite smooth:
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4].map{|x|x+1}.reduce{|x,y|x+y}
14
And in scala (shell):
scala> List(1,2,3,4).map{ _+1 }.reduce{_+_}
res1: Int = 14
In perl there is no interactive shell, and the block statement seems
strange:
$ perl -le '@x=(1,2,3,4); $sum+=$_ for( map {$_+1} @x );print $sum'
14
How do you think of it?
Thanks
Corey
* coreyh@free.fr <coreyh@free.fr> [23-04/04=Tu 10:35 +0800]:
For instance, in ruby (irb) this is quite smooth:
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4].map{|x|x+1}.reduce{|x,y|x+y}
14
And in scala (shell):
scala> List(1,2,3,4).map{ _+1 }.reduce{_+_}
res1: Int = 14
In perl there is no interactive shell [...]
perl -le 'print eval $_ while <>'
In perl [...] the block statement seems strange:
$ perl -le '@x=(1,2,3,4); $sum+=$_ for( map {$_+1} @x );print $sum'
14
perl -le '@x=(1..4); print eval join "+", map $_+1, @x'
Too bad this is two days late, but Perl is an April 1 kind of language.
I heard in perl never 'eval' a string. :)
Hello list,
* coreyh@free.fr <coreyh@free.fr> [23-04/04=Tu 10:35 +0800]:
For instance, in ruby (irb) this is quite smooth:
irb(main):001:0> [1,2,3,4].map{|x|x+1}.reduce{|x,y|x+y}
14
And in scala (shell):
scala> List(1,2,3,4).map{ _+1 }.reduce{_+_}
res1: Int = 14
In perl there is no interactive shell [...]
perl -le 'print eval $_ while <>'
In perl [...] the block statement seems strange:
$ perl -le '@x=(1,2,3,4); $sum+=$_ for( map {$_+1} @x );print $sum'
14
perl -le '@x=(1..4); print eval join "+", map $_+1, @x'
On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 06:50:02AM +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
In Tcl, OTOH, EIAS [...]
The introduction of the {*} operator eliminated a lot of the need for
eval. Instead of
I think watching carefully Tcl's evolution teaches a lot about
languages, the type of design decisions going into them and their
(changing) context.
In Tcl, OTOH, EIAS (Everything Is A String), so you've got
to eval strings (don't take me too seriously: modern Tcl
cheats, and it's more "Everything looks like a string",
but I disgress).
How do you think of it?
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Andy Smith wrote:
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
Andy Smith wrote:
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
On 08/04/2023 03:28, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Andy Smith wrote:
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
The Language Wars Are Over: ChatGPT Won https://bourgoin.dev/posts/programming-languages/
On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 09:28:59PM +0200, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Andy Smith wrote:
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
Every categorical generalisation is wrong. (Even this one :) )
On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 07:06:28AM +0800, coreyh@free.fr wrote:
On 08/04/2023 03:28, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Andy Smith wrote:
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
The Language Wars Are Over: ChatGPT Won
https://bourgoin.dev/posts/programming-languages/
Given the usual quality of Microsoft's output, it won't make
a big difference.
I'm looking forward towards the days that thing feeds back
on itself and its output won't be much different from random
noise (or perhaps from its first few eigenvectors).
Personally, I'm not on speaking terms with that thing.
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best
language. But everything else isn't as good.
Every categorical generalisation is wrong. (Even this one
:) )
I usually taunt people with "All generalizations suck".
I think you should use Ruby if you like Ruby better!
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best language.
But everything else isn't as good.
The Language Wars Are Over: ChatGPT Won https://bourgoin.dev/posts/programming-languages/
That is, why are you asking people to convince you to like
Perl? There are lots of languages and you appear to have
found one you like better.
Ha, but can't we do better, I would like all the properties
(stuff possible to express and do) in a programming
language encoded, and then count them to determine what
language is the most powerful.
We know that except for some particularly limited languages,
they'll all mutually equivalent.
Ha, but can't we do better, I would like all the properties
(stuff possible to express and do) in a programming language
encoded, and then count them to determine what language is the
most powerful.
Ha, but can't we do better, I would like all the
properties (stuff possible to express and do) in
a programming language encoded, and then count them to
determine what language is the most powerful.
We know that except for some particularly limited
languages, they'll all mutually equivalent.
Of course :)
No, I mean on an applied level and readily available so
from/using the language ...
tomas wrote:
Perl is the best language, maybe Lisp is the best
language. But everything else isn't as good.
Every categorical generalisation is wrong. (Even this one
:) )
I usually taunt people with "All generalizations suck".
Can't it be the exception to confirm the rule?
Clippy 2.0 has a hype train, and my BS detector is blazing like a
forest fire.
There is a barber in Crete who shaves all men who don't
shave themselves [1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barber_paradox
There is a barber in Crete who shaves all men who don'tI usually taunt people with "All generalizations suck".Can't it be the exception to confirm the rule?
shave themselves [1].
There is a barber in Crete who shaves all men who don'tI usually taunt people with "All generalizations suck".Can't it be the exception to confirm the rule?
shave themselves [1].
You're just pointing out that *impredicative* generalizations suck even
more than the rest.
Stefan
I usually taunt people with "All generalizations suck".
Can't it be the exception to confirm the rule?
There is a barber in Crete who shaves all men who don't
shave themselves
You're just pointing out that *impredicative*
generalizations suck even more than the rest.
You don't want to believe that - Epimenides the Cretan
asserts that "all Cretans are liars"
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 34:04:49 |
| Calls: | 6,669 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,216 |
| Messages: | 5,338,371 |