dogfishbar

7 ms·

1.
by dogfishbar 2y ago
Retired CS prof here (from a below (ok way-below) top-4 program). There is no longer a job market for CS grads outside of top-4? Is this true? I had no idea, as I understood it, CS major numbers are still rising.
2.
by dogfishbar 4y ago
Sure, OCaml is great as are the other dialects of ML. I'm hoping that someone will weigh in with a compelling case for laziness everywhere or dynamic dispatch everywhere, other than pre-existing infrastructure, libraries, etc.
3.
by dogfishbar 4y ago
Thanks for letting us tag along. What I'd like to hear are your thoughts on the Groucho Marx cigar question: laziness is useful every now and then, but in lazy languages like Haskell you pay for it everywhere. The same is true for dyn
4.
Elmish/MVU Library for Python?
1 points by dogfishbar 5y ago|0 comments
5.
by dogfishbar 6y ago
Life goal: outlive dynamic type checking.
6.
by dogfishbar 6y ago
Lyn T. is one of a small handful of the best CS educators on the planet. Good job HN!
7.
by dogfishbar 7y ago
I spent a lot of time on this. See M-LISP: a representation-independent dialect of LISP with reduction semantics, TOPLAS, 1992, the relevant bit is in section 2. It's true that J. McCarthy had only a passing familiarity with LC. M-expr
8.
by dogfishbar 8y ago
Robert Heinlein's nephew Terrance Heinlein (Terry) is a brilliant architect. Bob Muller
9.
by dogfishbar 9y ago
M-LISP: a representation-independent dialect of LISP with reduction semantics In this paper we introduce M-LISP, a dialect of LISP designed with an eye toward reconciling LISP's metalinguistic power with the structural style of operati
10.
The Genealogy of Programming Languages – 30K ft edition(github.com)
1 points by dogfishbar 9y ago|0 comments
11.
The Genealogy of Programming Languages – 30K ft edition(github.com)
2 points by dogfishbar 9y ago|0 comments
12.
Comcast alternatives in Greater Boston?
1 points by dogfishbar 9y ago|1 comments
13.
by dogfishbar 9y ago
I have been teaching OCaml in CS1 at Boston College for 4 years now. Of hundreds of students who went on to learn Java in our CS2 course (joining Python-trained students from other sections of CS1), nearly unanimous happy campers. When OCam
14.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
Nice article! But you have a typo. (λx.x y) does not return y, though (\x.x) y does.
15.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
I'm teaching a sophomore level web apps course in the spring semester. I'm torn between doing what I think will help them land an internship this summer or land a real job and on the other hand, teaching them something like Elm wh
16.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
Akkartik: the paper of mine that you cited has a bunch of theorems following the program laid out by Gordon Plotkin in the single best paper I ever read: "Call-by-Name, Call-by-Value and the Lambda Calculus" - a truly profound pie
17.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
Thank you for reminding me, McCarthy also invented COND which eventually led to the great modern pattern matching forms. An ironic side-story of this that may or may not be of interest: Because QUOTE was mis-defined, McCarthy had to hack hi
18.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
Fair enough, I felt I was droning on but it's true that I didn't show the key mistake. Here it is. If you want to represent an arbitrary M-expression as an M-expression, it's most natural to use S-expressions for the represen
19.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
I published a paper on this in the ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) back in 1992. The title was "M-LISP: A Representation-independent Dialect of LISP with Reduction Semantics". No need to read it, the
20.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
OK, you asked! LISP was originally developed as a language for writing recursive functions of symbolic expressions (S-expressions). It was roughly based on lambda calculus, the language developed by Alonzo Church. But roughly is the key wor
21.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
The definition of quote is broken. I personally explained it to John McCarthy. He agreed.
22.
by dogfishbar 10y ago
Ha! LISP macros and read both work because of a very simple bug in the original definition of LISP. Don't even bother with it or Scheme or Racket --- they're all utterly broken and needlessly confusing!