is that for Scala or Perl? :)
On Oct 24, 4:49 pm, Randinn wrote:
> This may not be it, but you can at least print out this list :)
>
> http://jim-mcbeath.blogspot.com/2008/12/scala-operator-cheat-sheet.html
>
> On Oct 24, 6:47 am, bob wrote:
>
>
>
> > >I'll repeat: there are no operators in sca
seriously, if you're suggesting that since function/method names don't
have to have any relationship to the algorithm therein, so using
punctuation should be fine, then why not just use single letters,
followed by an optional digit, and be done.
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather
This may not be it, but you can at least print out this list :)
http://jim-mcbeath.blogspot.com/2008/12/scala-operator-cheat-sheet.html
On Oct 24, 6:47 am, bob wrote:
> >I'll repeat: there are no operators in scala
>
> s/operators/methods-with-operator-like-names/
>
> anywhere, here's a typical
>
> Scala is not like, for example, BASIC, where you can look up FOR, IF/
> THEN/ELSE. there's lots of individual and compound punctuation marks
> that are very difficult to search for online and in PDFs (try
> searching for "!").
>
This is where I am coming from, coding after a 16 or so year h
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 8:18 PM, bob wrote:
>
> why, it reformats your hard drive
>
oh snap
>
> On Oct 23, 6:17 pm, Viktor Klang wrote:
> > But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM, bob wrote:
> >
> > > >I'll rep
why, it reformats your hard drive
On Oct 23, 6:17 pm, Viktor Klang wrote:
> But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM, bob wrote:
>
> > >I'll repeat: there are no operators in scala
>
> > s/operators/methods-with-operator-like-n
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Viktor Klang wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Jim Barrows wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Viktor Klang wrote:
>>
>>> But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
>>>
>>
>> Oh Bloddy Ell... that caused Cthulu to appear on m
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Jim Barrows wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Viktor Klang wrote:
>
>> But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
>>
>
> Oh Bloddy Ell... that caused Cthulu to appear on my keyboard when I read
> it
>
Chtuluh ftagn! ;D
>
>
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Viktor Klang wrote:
> But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
>
Oh Bloddy Ell... that caused Cthulu to appear on my keyboard when I read
it
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM, bob wrote:
>
>>
>> >I'll repeat: there are no operators
But if you name your method: "ashiuahsdyasdasd" what does it do?
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:47 PM, bob wrote:
>
> >I'll repeat: there are no operators in scala
>
> s/operators/methods-with-operator-like-names/
>
> anywhere, here's a typical case:
>
> import some.library.package.foo._
>
> val a =
>I'll repeat: there are no operators in scala
s/operators/methods-with-operator-like-names/
anywhere, here's a typical case:
import some.library.package.foo._
val a = bar 42
val b = a ~!~ 3.14159
you can't easily tell that bar is being imported via foo._ .
what is bar's return type?
what does
jlist9 wrote:
> It's often hard to describe some (I'd say most) of the Scala syntax
> if you want to search for an answer online.
I can't relate with that. I've been coding scala for 3-4 months, and
I've never had any problem finding method definitions. Most of this
probably had to do with th
It's often hard to describe some (I'd say most) of the Scala syntax
if you want to search for an answer online.
It would be great if the eclipse plugin can tell you what the code is
trying to do and what kind of syntax is that, for example, linking
an operator back to a method name.
On Fri, Oct
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Jim Barrows wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Chris Lewis wrote:
>
>>
>> My head just exploded. Twice.
>>
>
> That explains the wet face this morning when I woke up... thought it was
> the dog licking it... :)
>
>
>>
>> ngocdaothanh wrote:
>> > Because L
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Chris Lewis wrote:
>
> My head just exploded. Twice.
>
That explains the wet face this morning when I woke up... thought it was the
dog licking it... :)
>
> ngocdaothanh wrote:
> > Because Lift's ad is so good.
>
> *boom*
>
It was good. My first thought was "Y
My head just exploded. Twice.
ngocdaothanh wrote:
> Because Lift's ad is so good.
*boom*
For example:
>
> "Lift is the only new framework in the last four years to offer fresh
> and innovative approaches to web development. It's not just some
> incremental improvements over the status quo, i
bob wrote:
> i believe that one of the best ways to learn a new programming
> language is to read software written in it
>
> when reading Scala code, I rarely say "i don't understand how that
> works" and when I do, there's usually a good explanation of it
> somewhere on the web.
>
> usually I
i believe that one of the best ways to learn a new programming
language is to read software written in it
when reading Scala code, I rarely say "i don't understand how that
works" and when I do, there's usually a good explanation of it
somewhere on the web.
usually I find myself asking "where is
All,
the _ "name" is also used frequently in C++ for template-based lambdas. At
least it is in many of the Boost libraries.
Jeremy
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 2:37 AM, Viktor Klang wrote:
> My personal interpretation is "sh!t I don't know here or don't care what it
> is"
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009
I *think* you're referring to a thread I started some time ago:
http://www.nabble.com/functional-newbie,-domain-entities-td22957479.html
It turned out to be a lively discussion. On a related note, Jonas Boner
gisted this in August:
http://gist.github.com/173921
It's not full code, but it gi
My personal interpretation is "sh!t I don't know here or don't care what it
is"
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Joni Freeman wrote:
>
> I love it too. While it is used in many different places it always
> means "stuff that I do not care to name".
>
> BTW. "high priest of the lambda calculus" lov
I love it too. While it is used in many different places it always
means "stuff that I do not care to name".
BTW. "high priest of the lambda calculus" loves it too :) It has its
roots in Haskell...
http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going+Deep/C9-Lectures-Dr-Erik-Meijer-Functional-Programming-Fundam
I love the _ operator.
2009/10/22 Timothy Perrett :
>
> I think this is a bit of a running joke in the scala comunity right
> now - your right, underscore really does have a number of meanings; I
> think this will be changed in some future Scala release.
>
> Your also forgetting:
>
> import some.
On Oct 23, 2009, at 2:31 AM, jlist9 wrote:
>> Regarding () and {} BTW, you can replace a single-argument argument
>> list with {}, e.g.
>>
>> def myFunction(a: String): Unit = println(a)
>>
>> myFunction("foobar")
>> myFunction { "foobar" }
>
> I find the following three lines of code do the same t
Ross,
> Personally I think that Python is great for small simple things, but
> as soon as you start to scale the lack of statically checked
> guarantees starts to bite you.
What you said about the problems with dynamically typed
scripting language is very true. Python is so powerful but the
code
The last use of _, as in empty_?, is not a special scala meaning. As on Java,
underscores can be part of an identifier. Scala takes advantage of this to
combine letters and symbols in one name. These names, like empty_?, are a Lift
convention, as well as ..._! for use-with-care methods. The sca
How hard can automatic save be?
But how would immutable DAOs work? There was a thread, I think on scala-user, a
long time ago discussing it, that pretty much concluded it would be very
problematic. David weighed in and said after a long time he concluded that
databases represent state.
--
I know this is not the programming languages weblog but I'll still
like to chip in a bit..
I love Scala. I know it's confusing, sometimes (more often than not)
it makes my head hurts. But the language itself is so expressive. I
think it's kinda, well, maybe I'm machoistic, but there's often
insta
Personally I think that Python is great for small simple things, but
as soon as you start to scale the lack of statically checked
guarantees starts to bite you. The larger and larger you get the more
often and more subtle the bites get. Conversely, with a rigorous
statically checked langua
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:27 PM, jlist9 wrote:
>
> > Perl's motto is "There is more then one way to do it."
>
> I remember reading somewhere that part of the the design goal
> of Perl 6 was to make the language "more sane". That says
> it all. For scripting language, I'd stick to Python, whose sy
Just want to add to this. web.py is a Python web development framework
that I like a lot, for its simplicity. In about 10 lines of code you can have
a complete, albeit simple, web application. No XML whatsoever.
http://webpy.org/
Hope no one is offended by my mentioning a Python web framework on
> Perl's motto is "There is more then one way to do it."
I remember reading somewhere that part of the the design goal
of Perl 6 was to make the language "more sane". That says
it all. For scripting language, I'd stick to Python, whose syntax
feels natural to me, and to stay sane as much as I can
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:29 PM, jlist9 wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Appreciate your reply. It's definitely helpful in clearing some of my
> thoughts,
> as well as in my process of learning Scala down the road. I also think your
> book is very well paced and organization of the content is well though
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 1:29 PM, jlist9 wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Appreciate your reply. It's definitely helpful in clearing some of my
> thoughts,
> as well as in my process of learning Scala down the road. I also think your
> book is very well paced and organization of the content is well though
Hi David,
Appreciate your reply. It's definitely helpful in clearing some of my thoughts,
as well as in my process of learning Scala down the road. I also think your
book is very well paced and organization of the content is well thought out.
Great job!
I'd like to explain a little bit where my
hi,
i take issue with the following:
> misunderstood. They are NOT "controllers" .. they are simple
> constructs to allow dynamic markup to be injected in the template. Of
> course one can abuse anything in any framework but this is besides the
> point.
my personal take is that if you are a res
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:22 AM, David Pollak wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Timothy Perrett
> wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> I think your response was well measured and appropriate. The analogy of
>> linguistics is a good one :-)
>>
>> Without wanting to diverge this thread, can I ask
Right, no one likes mutable anything :-)
I kinda wondered why you haven't pushed forward any more with the
current record implementation... can one assume that is why - because
it didn't feel right?
Some of this stuff is going to be fundamental to how we move forward -
id love to perhaps d
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Timothy Perrett wrote:
> David,
>
> I think your response was well measured and appropriate. The analogy of
> linguistics is a good one :-)
>
> Without wanting to diverge this thread, can I ask why it is your unhappy
> with Record? Its been fairly fun to use so far
David,
I think your response was well measured and appropriate. The analogy
of linguistics is a good one :-)
Without wanting to diverge this thread, can I ask why it is your
unhappy with Record? Its been fairly fun to use so far and appears to
work well.
Cheers, Tim
On 22 Oct 2009, at 17:
I've drafted a couple of different versions of a response to this message
and they all seem somewhat mean and/or condescending... that is not at all
my intent... here's another draft and please read it as acknowledging the
challenges you are articulating, but suggesting a different perspective on
t
Yes. Typically one will only see a couple of Java-y Scala samples in
the tutorials to show that you can write Scala the Java way
to encourage Java developers to pick up Scala. However, in any
real world applications and libraries you'll only see Scala-y Scala
and that's where the disconnect is.
I
I think this is a bit of a running joke in the scala comunity right
now - your right, underscore really does have a number of meanings; I
think this will be changed in some future Scala release.
Your also forgetting:
import some.package._
Cheers, Tim
On 22 Oct 2009, at 12:57, tiro wrote:
> override def validations = validPriority _ :: super.validations
funny, I had stumbled on exactly the same line of code when beginning.
Took me more than a day to understand what's going on. Especially
because when you copied code from the PDF version of the Liftbook/Lift
getting started guide, i
Well said that man! Couldn't agree more with this statement.
Cheers, Tim
On Oct 22, 9:43 am, Marius wrote:
> I accept
> that many people think that MVC is the Holly Grail, but I don't
> believe that ... and I think most people really using Lift don't
> believe that either.
--~--~-~--~-
+1 Tim & Viktor.
Many people with this sort of background and Java web frameworks too
find difficult to accept that we don't do MVC. Also they find
difficult to accepts XML in Scala Snippets. When I presented Scala &
Lift at Transylvania JUG I got the same concerns ... "What? ... markup
in Scala
Because Lift's ad is so good. For example:
"Lift is the only new framework in the last four years to offer fresh
and innovative approaches to web development. It's not just some
incremental improvements over the status quo, it redefines the state
of the art. If you are a web developer, you should
Guys,
Im confused - Scala is not Java. This my friends, is a very good
thing. You cant expect to start a language and be able to use all the
advanced features right away I doubt you were a meta-programming
ninja when learning ruby!
Getting back on topic, I read the original link and I
Programming is not a simple task, that's why we haven't been replaced by
machines.
Scala is a _very_ powerful language, and it _is_ a challenge to harness that
power in addition to other languagues you have harnessed.
However, I do not feel that Scala has much non-explainable complexity, as is
th
On Oct 22, 2:02 am, ngocdaothanh wrote:
> jlist9,
> This is a Lift group, but I have to say I feel the same about Scala.
>
> I had to ask for advice
> here:http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/a588f997a...
>
> Scala may help me to get my work done for the day. But I don'
jlist9,
This is a Lift group, but I have to say I feel the same about Scala.
I had to ask for advice here:
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/a588f997af842f93/60c378bb36d26030
Scala may help me to get my work done for the day. But I don't feel
happy with Scala. Scala mak
override def validations = validPriority _ :: super.validations
This is a more of a comment about Scala than one about Lift - this does
look cryptic to me. And this is just one of the simpler syntax that confuses
people, who are new to the language. And I'm one of them.
I understand that you don
52 matches
Mail list logo