Viewing profile — kbp

Er, actually x = 2 x = "foo" [y] = [3] [y] = ["bar"] Sorry, I didn't re-read the code before translating.

I'm not sure what you find incomprehensible about the first example. The syntax is pretty standard. The only exotic thing is `$`, which is basically just like putting brackets arou…

It works the same way in Haskell, eg main = do let x = 2 let x = "foo" y which is really the same as main = let x = 2 in let x = "foo" in pure 3 >>= \y -> pure "bar" >>= \y -> putS…

Surely not in Canada?

I can hear them and tell that they're different accents, but I don't really distinguish them, I would call them both "British" and I wouldn't know which one's more posh.

Usually that effort should go toward naming functions rather than their results, though, and if the functions have good names, the results don't need them. In this example, `other_…

Works in Ruby: irb(main):001:1/ puts(%r irb(main):002:1* a+ irb(main):003:0> .match? %q aaa ) true

You can also ssh in via Emacs with Tramp, and use your highly customised Emacs to edit remotely.

Unsigned integers are still specified to wrap.

> Clojure has cons, car, cdr which you can use in the classic Lisp sense. The only thing you CAN'T do is have a dotted pair or dotted list in the last cons cell. So, it doesn't hav…

Yeah, it's definitely a taste thing, but as the first style isn't used in Lisp, comparing its readability doesn't really make sense. Indentation is important to reading Lisp. Inden…

That isn't how that defun would normally be formatted, though. Lisp knows that the 'body' part starts with the 3rd argument (the same way Clojure knows it starts with the second), …

Could you expand on how Forth differs from Lisp? I don't know Forth.

SICP called it design by wishful thinking; I always liked that.

You're mixing your "playing by JS' rules" point with just general Elm features. Faster compilation speed, faster executables, and smaller executables are not JS' rules, they're jus…