On 2007-10-15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok writes:
On 11 Oct 2007, at 1:00 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An anonymous called ok writes:
I am not anonymous. That is my login and has been since 1979.
Oh, bother...
According to my imperfect knowledge of English, an anonymous is
On 11 Oct 2007, at 1:00 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An anonymous called ok writes:
I am not anonymous. That is my login and has been since 1979.
jerzy.karczmarczuk wrote [about R]:
... This is not a functional language.
There is some laziness (which looks a bit like macro-
processing),
ok writes:
On 11 Oct 2007, at 1:00 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An anonymous called ok writes:
I am not anonymous. That is my login and has been since 1979.
Oh, bother...
According to my imperfect knowledge of English, an anonymous is somebody
who doesn't sign his/her letters. And
ok wrote:
If one wants a lazy dynamically typed programming language that
lets you construct infinite lists by using the basic language
mechanisms in a simple and direct way, there's always Recanati's
Lambdix, which is a lazy Lisp. I don't know whether that ever saw
serious use, but it does
G'day all.
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Or perhaps I am again completely wrong, as in the case of R not being
something I ever wanted?
This is off-topic, but the email address r at google.com is Rob Pike.
Only someone a similar stature (e.g. Richard O'Keefe) could get away
with that.
Cheers,
On 10 Oct 2007, at 12:49 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I am sorry, I know a little bit R. This is not a functional
language.
There is some laziness (which looks a bit like macro-processing),
sure.
There is no macro processing in R (or S).
The manual speaks about promises and about
An anonymous called ok writes:
jerzy.karczmarczuk wrote [about R]:
... This is not a functional language.
There is some laziness (which looks a bit like macro-processing), sure.
There is no macro processing in R (or S).
I know I've been superficial, but, please, *try* to understand my
On 9 Oct 2007, at 9:10 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Scheme is very different from what we practice (C++, Fortran,
etc., you
know the song...) It may slow down the *adaptation* of students. They
*will need* all that imperative stuff you hate. But, as a first
language,
the FLs condition the
ok writes:
On 9 Oct 2007, at 9:10 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
/ I cited some arguments of our neighbours promoting imperative languages /
the FLs condition the young minds in a way we do not appreciate.
The only empirical evidence I'm aware of about this comes from
Monash University ...
Thomas Conway writes:
I was observing that Melbourne Uni (my old school), is switching in
the new year from teaching Haskell as a first language, to teaching
Python. I was dismayed, but not surprised.
...
This was commented already, but perhaps a few words from a different
perspective.
10 matches
Mail list logo
