Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I accidentally a scheme

wingolog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 143 posts

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#101

Post by ikurei »

cfiggers wrote: post #18
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #16

Note to self: learn a lisp. Lisp people appear to be having more fun than the rest of us.

There's literally dozens of us! If you're serious about learning a Lisp but motivated more by, as you say, "having more fun" rather than, say, landing a six-figure job writing it professionally... then may I recommend Janet[0] for your consideration. Janet is an embeddably-small, yet surprisingly batteries-included Lisp implemented in pure C. In terms of syntax and core library it borrows more directly from Clojure t…

Since you mentioned this, what would you say would be the right Lisp for more pragmatic, cynical reasons?

What Lisp should we learn if we want to make money from it?

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#102

Post by frognumber »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #62
frognumber wrote: post #2

People accidentally a scheme all the time. I first accidentalled a scheme in high school. I learned about S-types, which were to Lisp what JSON is to JavaScript. I made a language around then. Oops. Some would argue Brendan Eich of Netscape accidentalled a scheme in JavaScript, but others would argue that he didn't. Most accidental schemes are pretty bad, and the original JavaScript fits the bill, or it doesn't, depe…

What is a Scheme and what is not a Scheme is actually pretty well defined in terms of language concepts and features. The JavaScript of back then is not that. Some Scheme may have served as something that Eich took hints from, but he did not create a new Scheme.

FYI: At the time, the creator of Scheme, Jerry Sussman, believed the JavaScript was a Scheme.

I don't say this to claim he was right (I didn't agree with him, at the time), but merely to point out that "what is not a Scheme is actually" NOT "pretty well defined in terms of language concepts and features."

A proper Scheme is as defined in Revised Report on the Algorithmic Language Scheme, but there are many improper half-baked Schemes too.

Reasonable people can and do disagree about which things do and don't qualify.

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#103

Post by m3kw9 »

farmdve wrote: post #42
m3kw9 wrote: post #40

Hurts my head reading the title

I had to login to HN which I have not done in many months just to say this to the young generation. The title is from a meme. Like before the memes of today, when a meme was an image around a black frame with white text. It usually goes "I accidentally a ".

Thanks uncle!

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#106

Post by dleslie »

cnity wrote: post #50
dleslie wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I like Janet, and find it to be a lovely little language; I think it's important to note that it lacks lists and cons cells, and so as a result some people don't label it a lisp, and programming in it is unlike other lisp languages. It's similar, because the syntax is similar and the macros and various forms are lifted straight from lisps; but the feel of programming in it is very much like programming in C, an…

> Neither is conducive to efficiently removing elements mid-set, or composing two sets, or interleaving two sets, or other operations that require reordering, replacing, adding or removing elements in the set Read this: https://isocpp.org/blog/2014/06/stroustrup-lists

That's based around a contrived problem that was posed to him:

> Insert a sequence of random integers into a sorted sequence, then remove those elements one by one as determined by a random sequece of positions: Do you use a vector (a contiguously allocated sequence of elements) or a linked list?

The key is that the sequence is sorted; and is kept sorted throughout the insertion process.

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#107

Post by sparrish »

vidarh wrote: post #33
lkuty wrote: post #21

Is the title grammatically correct ? A verb is missing, don't you think... My mother tongue is french, thus I may be missing some pun.

It was originally a meta-joke way of pointing out you'd left something out by intentionally leaving out the verb in the sentence where you pointed out you'd left something out. It's since become a meme of sort as a more general way to flag as a joke that you've done something "accidentally" where a fully formed sentence would be more ambiguous. E.g. "I accidentally created a scheme" might still not be entirely seriou…

> "I accidentally a scheme" clearly signposts the title is at least in part a joke.

Not if you're unfamiliar with the joke. And with the lack of capitalization, the bad grammar had me figuring this was an ESL author.

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#109

Post by vidarh »

sparrish wrote: post #107
vidarh wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was originally a meta-joke way of pointing out you'd left something out by intentionally leaving out the verb in the sentence where you pointed out you'd left something out. It's since become a meme of sort as a more general way to flag as a joke that you've done something "accidentally" where a fully formed sentence would be more ambiguous. E.g. "I accidentally created a scheme" might still not be entirely seriou…

> "I accidentally a scheme" clearly signposts the title is at least in part a joke. Not if you're unfamiliar with the joke. And with the lack of capitalization, the bad grammar had me figuring this was an ESL author.

That's true for most language changes, but this is not particularly new at this point, though still new enough that it's understandable that it'll be misunderstood.

Re: I accidentally a scheme

#110

Post by dahart »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #62
frognumber wrote: post #2

People accidentally a scheme all the time. I first accidentalled a scheme in high school. I learned about S-types, which were to Lisp what JSON is to JavaScript. I made a language around then. Oops. Some would argue Brendan Eich of Netscape accidentalled a scheme in JavaScript, but others would argue that he didn't. Most accidental schemes are pretty bad, and the original JavaScript fits the bill, or it doesn't, depe…

What is a Scheme and what is not a Scheme is actually pretty well defined in terms of language concepts and features. The JavaScript of back then is not that. Some Scheme may have served as something that Eich took hints from, but he did not create a new Scheme.

The story goes Eich was hired to embed Scheme in a browser, and hung on to lambdas and functional concepts but lost homoiconicity by management fiat; they didn’t like the weird way it looked. He tried to intentionally a Scheme and ended up accidentally a Scheme step-cousin. It’s fair to say some argue it is a Scheme dialect, because some people do, and they’re not wrong, JS does share aspects. It’s also fair to say JS is not a Scheme, also true.

I googled and found someone’s blog post with a fun description: “JS is stupid Lisp in Java’s ill-fitting clothing. It’s Alonzo Church going to a Halloween party as Alan Turing. It’s the lambda calculus in Turing-machine drag. It’s a quirky nerd with a cynical marketing department. (The syntax and the name of the language — JavaScript—were determined by Netscape’s desire to ride the coattails of Java’s popularity in the early 1990s.) It’s multiparadigm salad.” https://medium.com/thinking-with-computers/javascript-is-not...

Post reply on HN