kunjaan

Aw you missed the best part

"Modern historians suspect the two were dyslexic."

The compiler may not mind, but isn't that what they are actually used for?

>Work with Scheme and Haskell enough and you'll find yourself writing some convoluted things to maintain purity.

I don't think you can lump all the Scheme languages into one umbrella and more importantly lump Scheme and Haskell in that context.

For example, Racket has really good constructs that lets me "drop 'purity'", control side-effects, build sequences, control the flow, build classes, manage complexity while at the same time giving me the power to build higher levels of abstractions, express my thoughts and reason with my program.

Reference:

0. Racket Guide: http://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/index.html

1. System Programming with Racket : http://docs.racket-lang.org/more/

I thought () was used for function applications and [] for those that weren't. For example (let [x 3] ... )

>Thus, you could have "XSLT macros" that work in the same way Lisp macros do.

Yes of course. How could I not see the power of XSLT macros?

The article starts with a grand puprose namely "In which the truth about lisp is revealed, and some alternatives are enumerated."

But it ends up being one big collection of headlines and popular opinions people have about the language. This has to be the worst article on Lisp I have ever read.

Why would anyone without any amount of research choose to write on a subject?

I have to ask this : How can XSLT be a substitute for Lisp?

I agree. I never worked overtime in my internship but was extended an offer. My review doesn't say how much I worked but what I accomplished and delivered.

It still is.

>And "the Haskell movement" certainly has a different kind of manpower behind it.

Can you clarify what you mean by the words "movement" and "different kind of manpower"?

How is progress in languages like Racket different from Haskell?

Why do you think that adding "interesting" type systems in Lisp would be "heroic" and less "fruitful"?

If he favors type safety and switching between modules of different type systems, Racket already has that, doesn't it?

I loved his Macro Talk. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBpfOpk-ZBU

Racket is decades ahead of other languages in terms of their macro facility.

The macro stepper and the syntax-parse framework presented by Ryan Culpepper this year is something that would make any macro writers jaw drop.

Reference:

http://docs.racket-lang.org/syntax/stxparse.html?q=syntax-pa...

http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/dissertation-culpepper.pd... [PDF]

>car and cdr must have something going for them

In most implementations , I can do

(cadar (list (list 1 2 3))) -> 2

vs

(first (rest (first (list (list 1 2 3))))) -> 2

I find the car and cdrs in Racket very very convenient.

Reference:

http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/pairs.html?q=pair%20ac...

When I glanced over the schedule he had at Harvard, I thought it was from PHDComics.

> D) lack of well written textbooks

1. How do I program? I dont know how to build abstractions. I dont know how to write correct, modular and reliable codes. I'll start with "How to Design Programs"

2. I want to learn more about recursion. I want to master thinking recursively because I have found that they solve a lot of my problems. Let me see "Little Schemer".

3. I want to learn more powerful constructs like continuations, tail calls and what not. I want to learn to solve harder problems in Scheme. Let me pick up "Seasoned Schemer".

4. Wow macros are pretty nice. I want to learn more about them. Let me first see how to write unhygenic ones. Paul Graham's "On Lisp" is amazing!

5. Constructing higher levels of abstraction is something that I really want to master. What kinds of abstractions can I build? What are the ways to construct large programs? What is the way to organize programs? What is programming? Let me read SICP

6. What is a loop? Why doesn't scheme have it? How can I build it? How do I build these kinds of abstractions? Wand's EOPL is my bible at this stage.

7. Let me do something useful in Scheme. How do I write much more powerful macros? I love my types. I love my modules. I love my libraries. Racket, I think you are the most powerful thing out there.

>basics of the tech side

This is a very vague target.

Do you want basics on web development? networking? computer science? programming language? managing softwares? databases description? survey of computer science?

I was annoyed by all the previous Kinect games that would make me get up or do things. This on the other hand is a physical activity that I wouldnt mind performing.

>There's a place for reddit-like posts (reddit) and there's a place for news related to hackers (HN).

Those are very vague classification metrics.

>trying to move away from the community

What does this mean? You simply delete your account and not login.

No.

That is the weirdest logo I have seen in a while.

Of course people hire foreign students as interns. As long as you are on your F1 status,you can easily find jobs.

Why hold these polls if you are going to discredit it yourself and put such snide remarks?

But anyway does anyone even read Time here in US?

My Zipcode is in there but I live near a University.

Kudos to the director as well. The video wowed me as much as the machine it self.

You are tarnishing the MS reputation by being so pushy.

Exactly. The OP thinks that when I ask her to reverse a linked list, I expect her to whip out the perfect code from memory on the fly. I would be even more suspicious if you did that actually. I want you to structure the data. I want you to try out variants of reversing. It is ok if you can't give me the optimal solution in 5 minutes, as long as you demonstrate the capability to reason with data structures and pointers and tools at hand.

tl;dr http://images.fastcompany.com/upload/benclipsmall.jpg

It may be too early to complain about the recommendation system, but I think you should invest some more time on a good one.

Which framework was that you created?