bOR_


10 points by bOR_ about 1 year ago | link
cached 13 days ago

7 points by bOR_ about 1 year ago | link | parent | top
cached 12 days ago
Just in general - is there anything in arc which gives it a big edge to programmers when compared to clojure?

Here are some of the differences, but I can't tell if one of them is crucial. I listed three below for which I've no clue what the impact is.

  http://clojure.org/lisps
  * The read table is currently not accessible to user programs
  * Keywords are not Symbols
  * Symbols are not storage locations (see Var)
  * immutable data and first-class functions
  * *first* is clojure's *car* ;)

7 points by bOR_ about 1 year ago | link | parent | top
cached 12 days ago
PG won't be alive in a 100 years.. and there's a difference between slowly searching for an optimal language and not working at arc at all.

It is a bit sour for the community if their effort are not affecting the progress of the language towards its goal.

To be fair, PG has a point though that n months isn't that much if Arc is supposed to be 'finished' in about 30 years from now. We might just have wrongly expected things to move at a somewhat faster pace.


6 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link | parent | top
cached about 6 hours ago
also noticed that the difference isn't that large as the racing car seemed to suggest. Chrome's javascript has about the same performance as Opera's right now. We'll see how it develops.

Hah. someome made ruby run on v8 and made a small benchmark of it. Interesting:

http://macournoyer.wordpress.com/2008/09/02/ruby-on-v8/


5 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link
cached 6 days ago

5 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link | top
cached 6 days ago
Try arc, and if the languages confuses you, step down a bit to a language which is easier but somewhat less powerfull.

To me, that was ruby (I tried lisp about 4 years ago, but found it confusing still, and then went ruby, and now am back in a lisp), which is nearly a written language and might be one of the easiest ways to learn programming.

http://poignantguide.net/ruby/chapter-3.html

As to your question on popularity.. maybe only those people take up lisp (and the odd syntax) if they run into the limitations of less powerful programming languages. Most people might never run into the limitations or realize that they're limited, and keep on using whatever popular computer language they were using.


5 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link
cached about 6 hours ago

4 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link | top
cached 13 days ago
use rlwrap

  rlwrap mzscheme -m -f as.scm

4 points by bOR_ about 1 year ago | link
cached 13 days ago

4 points by bOR_ over 2 years ago | link | parent | top
cached 9 days ago
Thanks! This now works, and I'm learning :)

  ; makes a world matrix
  (def makeworld (x)
    (= world (n-of x (n-of x nil))) ; world of nil
    (= merged (n-of x (n-of x nil))) ; layer of movers
    nil)


  ; print out the world, imposing a list of critters
  ; on top of it. The list itself assumes that its entries
  ; are tables which have a symbol and a position field
  (def show (lst)
    ; copy world into merged
    (for y 0 (- (len world) 1)
      (for x 0 (- (len world) 1)
        (= ((merged y) x) ((world y) x))))
    ; superimpose critters
    (each c lst
      (= ((merged (car (c "pos"))) (cadr (c "pos"))) (c "symbol")))
    ; plot world
    (each row merged
      (each pos row (if (is pos nil) (pr #\. #\space) (pr pos #\space)))
      (prn)))

  (= creature (table))
  (= creature2 (table))
  (= creature3 (table))
  (= (creature "pos") '(1 3))
  (= (creature2 "pos") '(10 3))
  (= (creature3 "pos") '(8 8))
  (= (creature "symbol") #\$)
  (= (creature2 "symbol") #\@)
  (= (creature3 "symbol") #\#)
  (makeworld 15)

  arc> (show (list creature creature2 creature3))
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . # . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . @ . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
  nil