I know that you guys might sage the piss out of this but, this is my new scheme blog. I am doing this to get pointers from others who have read sicp. I like scheme so far. It is pretty much the first programming language that I like. I tried python and I can program stuff in it (pretty basic shit) but I like scheme because it makes more sense to me since it reads more like English does.
Here is one item from the end of SICP chapter 1L
(define (sumsq-big-two x y z)
(cond ((and (> x z) (> y z)) (sum-of-squares x y))
((and (> y x) (> z x)) (sum-of-squares y z))
((and (> z y) (> x y)) (sum-of-squares x z))
(else "fail")))> I know that you guys might sage the piss out of this but
How do you know? How is this your scheme blog?
1) You're not allowed to use this website in ways other than intended, and a "blog" is out of question.
2) The code posted is from a textbook. If we wanted that particular code bit, we'd be looking at the textbook (which is freely available too), instead of coming to this "blog".
3) There's zero original content in your post.
4) The code is incomplete.
> since it reads more like English does.
What bollocks. That's awful programming language criteria.
I'd bet my money that you're a troll. Try HtDP, Learn Scheme in fixnum days, and other textbooks listed here, http://schemers.org/Documents/#all-texts before you read SICP. (SICP is not supposed to teach scheme)
Oh no, I guess I was caught by the /prog/ police.
And yes, I like Scheme so far because it reads similar to English.
If you do not like what I posted or disagree with it then go to a different thread.
This remains the Scheme learning log thread. Get over it.
> Oh no, I guess I was caught by the /prog/ police.
Proof this is a 4chan troll; he didn't even realize this is /code/, not 4chans /prog/.
Python is surely more English-like than Scheme's ass-backwards prefix notation. Think "and is greater than y x is greater than z x" versus "y is greater than x and z is greater than x". Which of those is more normal sounding to you?
>>3
We're certainly allowed to disagree with a post. Suck it up.
Wait, someone wanted to post something potentially interesting on this board, and people are flaming him? Yet other people occasionally gripe that the board is too dead?
What the hell is wrong with some of you?
Whatever. I guess I am breaking the mores of this board. I called it /prog/ big deal.
Anyhow, I am working through HTDP after some recommendations from other people that are more experienced. One gripe I have with HTDP is the examples. They are retarded but the book teaches well. I skipped the theater ticket profit calculator because the way the author calculates the number of attendees for the theater based on ticket price is stupid. I would calculate the attendees in the following toy example:
(define (attendees nightly-revenue ticket-cost)
(/ nightly-revenue ticket-cost))
The author has a bunch of hard coded values and bases his calculation on the assumption that a price of $5.00 will always net 120 people and that a decrease of .10 will always increase that number by $15. My understanding of software development is that we should make things as general as possible so we can reuse our code. The author will have to edit his code when he finds that there is a change in the market trend (economy or otherwise). I will not, I will always be able to get the number of customers I had no matter how the market changes.
I also went and bought The Little Schemer so I can read it on the subway.
I know that this thread is pissing people off but I am here looking for feedback. Well, when I actually get passed these "hello world!" type of exercises. Unless I get banned I am not going to stop posting in this log so get over it.
> Anyhow, I am working through HTDP after some recommendations from other people that are more experienced.
>>2 recommended HtDP, but if these people are more experienced, why do you still hang around with us?
> My understanding of software development is that we should make things as general as possible so we can reuse our code.
The examples of HtDP are not supposed to meet such expectations. I've not read the book, if you provide chapter/page that you're saying this for, I will read it and let you know my opinion of it. The author didn't abstract likely because that was not the point of the example (which, then, we should assume that you missed). Your understanding of software development is incorrect. Abstraction is not used whenever possible, but whenever desirable. You should ask yourself, "what features does this abstraction provide and does my program need them?", before you abstract away something.
> I know that this thread is pissing people off but I am here looking for feedback.
How do you know figure out feelings just by reading posts? You got some feedback - your impression of 'software development' is faulty. >>2 also commented on what you said, telling you that "Reads like English" is poor language criteria. Anything else?
> Unless I get banned I am not going to stop posting in this log so get over it.
This can be arranged. Keep this attitude and you won't stay for long. Take a look at the rules, in case you haven't done so already, especially item #2. http://4-ch.net/view/rules
It is abuse if other members are disatisfied with your attitude and even worse if you ignore them.
I concur with >>10 regarding:
> My understanding of software development is that we should make things as general as possible so we can reuse our code.
The problem with making something as general as possible is that it becomes difficult to do anything with it. Your code should be as simple as is reasonable -- do not generalize until you have a real need for it.
The current codebase I'm working with was originally put together by a Java architectural astronaut, and it is quite flexible. The problem is that we don't need that flexibility. As we slowly chop out those parts the code is becoming both smaller and much easier to understand.
Also, reuse of code is a tad overrated. I've seen little reuse of code outside of libraries.
>>9
Stop taking the piss out of things that people even have positive opinions of.
>>13
back to bed, ham hen.
>>14
LOL SO RANDUM XD
Fuck you and fuck your fucking asshole
STOP!
[spoiler]ANUS TIME![/spoiler]
>>15
my asshole is incapable of fucking.
> You're not allowed to use this website in ways other than intended, and a "blog" is out of question
WTF?
Okay. Time for another blog post.
I have the following [spoiler][b]niggercock[/b][/spoiler]
;; Compiler procedures
(define-signature compiler^
(compile-extensions
compile-extensions-to-c
compile-c-extensions
compile-zos
compile-collection-zos
compile-directory-zos
current-compiler-dynamic-require-wrapper
compile-notify-handler))
;; Low-level extension compiler interface
(define-signature compiler:inner^
(compile-extension
compile-extension-to-c
compile-c-extension
eval-compile-prefix))
[spoiler]is it true that my anus has been haxed[/spoiler]