Johnny_Brahms

5 ms·

1.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Transmission comes to mind. It as a gtk, osx and Qt GUI
2.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I don't happen to agree with you on eliminating NIL. I don't understand what the royal pain is. And dynamic-wind is the price you have to pay for call/cc. UNWIND-PROTECT is not the same thing. Multi-shot continuations is he r
3.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I am still waiting for all my favourite applications to be extendable in GNU Guile. On a more general note, I am still waiting for the world to fall for lisp in general.
4.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
This was in a small valley near insbruck, Austria in the early nineties. It got some media attention due to some controversy regarding irresponsible tourists. I had however done my research and picked a slope that was regarded as low risk,
5.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
This depends on the type of avalanche. I know,because I was caught in one. The one I was in was relatively minor and made up of a large part newly fallen snow. I had stopped for a break and managed to get my skis back on, but the thing over
6.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
To anyone who was as confused as I, it is not the linked comment that is what OP is referencing, but a reply.
7.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I think that the best way to go about it (at least if you want to be successful) would be to write a SRFI that could easily be impkemented using the FFIs that are already out there. Managing that, but still being flexible enough to be usefu
8.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I have found that you fairly easily can write portable r6rs code, but whenever you step outside r6rs (for stuff that isn't standard, like networking) it becomes an exhibition of cond-expand abuse.
9.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Because r7rs large is an effort that probably is bigger than common lisp. It is very much not a toy language.
10.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I feel that not standardising a low level FFI for r7rs large is a mistake. They should at least recommend some reasonably low level stuff that can be used to build abstractions.
11.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
The simplest way would probably be to implement explicit and implicit renaming macro transformers. They are found in many schemes and are quite a bit simpler than the syntax case you linked to. Then you can just glue parts of ashinn's
12.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I think immer is brilliant. I just saw that you have guile bindings, which makes it even more exciting! I like that they are lgpl as well. I am a believer in that kind of freedom definition, and I hope you can dual-license it successfully.
13.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
(define-syntax nest (syntax-rules () ((nest x) x) ((nest x ... (y ...) z) (nest x ... (y ... z))))) That one is quadratic according to the author, but for 1050 expands of a nest with 6 levels it is less than
14.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Y'all should have a look at ewig which uses Immer - really fast persistent data structures for c++. Ewig is just a proof of concept, but the code is really nice. I have thought about taking that and building something bigger. The upsid
15.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
It is already in use in a bunch of smaller editors like Vis (iirc)
16.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Wow. I really thought there would be more energy in an earthquake. That's just like a smallish nuke.
17.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
It's not in r7rs small, but t will probably find it's way into r7rs large: http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/YellowDocket
18.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
R7rs small is a language in the spirit of r5rs. R5rs large will have a specified low level macro facility, probably syntax-case in one form or the other. The smaller standard does not specify a low level macro facility. That doesn't me
19.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I don't get the obsession with defmacro vs syntax case. Defmacro can be implemented in syntax case in about 10 lines, whereas the power of syntax-case is very much non-trivial to implement in CL.
20.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
As an Emacs enthusiast I agree with that (GP's) statement. VScode is usable for everyone from the start yet is capable to grow just like vim and in most meaningful ways just like Emacs. I have a feeling that this approachability is wha
21.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
It surprises me to no end that programming languages that promote a functional style with higher order functions do not support partial application as a part of the standard library. It covers 95% of the uses of curried procedures and gives
22.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
A question about urbit: whenever I read anything concerning it, all I see is a weird programming language and warning signs of esoteric technocratic fascism. What is it that people find fascinating?
23.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Some People use evil, which is hands down the best vim emulation out there. I myself started with evil after a long time with vi(m) and then made the switch to a more "pure" (for the lack of a better word) Emacs experience. I am s
24.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Wiuldnt implementing those be trivial? They are hardly going to be "too slow" like file copy might be, and with the JS love of small packages this should already be a solved problem.
25.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
I wouldn't compare them. I would say most people know about what the US did in Chile (and over most of south america), whereas the russian involvement in US domestic politics is still rather opaque. And even if they were comparable, on
26.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Maybe not hero, but I thoroughly enjoy Andy Wingo's writings and talks. Every time I forget that programming is fun, I go to his blog. He really likes what he does and is a very inspiring individual, and does a lot to bridge the gap be
27.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
> A different programming paradigm, for instance, would be the use of delimited continuations such that the API you invoke suspends the current call stack, executes the I/O operation, then resume the call stack with the result of th
28.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
wingolog.org Andy Wingo's texts about compilers and optimisation. Very nice, especially if you like scheme.
29.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Whatever implementation you have access to that is considered safe. That probably means AES-GCM or chacha20+poly1305.
30.
by Johnny_Brahms 9y ago
Use whatever vetted AEAD mode that is available to you. That probably means AES-GCM or Chacha20 + Poly1305). If you don't have any very good reasons to use CTR (encrypting lots of data with the same key) you.probably shouldn't.

More ›