main = putStrLn "Ruby or C++ I doubt, but I could see Scala or Clojure.\nDisclaimer: I am in no way affiliated with the NOVA team, and do not know what their plans are."
Forge and Nova
- Thread starter Strikingwolf
- Start date
Okay, here's the issue here. If their goal is to be compatible with every (major) block-based game, they're going to need to have a lot more language support than just Java. Also, there's a Ruby interpreter that runs on the JVM.
main = putStrLn "Did not know that. Is it just a Java-based program that interprets Ruby code on the fly, or does it actually compile a Ruby sourcecode into Java bytecodes? In the former case, I'm not sure there's much you can do; but in the latter, I see no reason why it couldn't work. However, my disclaimer still stands: Neither do I know the NOVA team's plans, nor do I know what, exactly, allows Scala-based mods to run in Minecraft, or if that could be extended to Clojure or other languages that compile to Java bytecode."
Interprets on the fly IIRC, I don't know much about JRuby, I always used the C-based version.
Someone needs to start a dedicated programing gibberish thread. 
Agree with this guy 100%.Someone needs to start a dedicated programing gibberish thread.
Scala is, if memory serves, a Java derivative, hence why its useable for Minecraft modding. Theoretically, you could use most any language, so long as you had something that could compile it into JVM bytecode. If you've got either the tools or the time, you might could write mods in C++, C#, Pascal, Ruvy, Clean, or even Brainfuck, if you just wanted to. Again, just need to compile it into something the JVM can understand.
(Or, alternatively, make a hackpack that'd allow the JVM to run the code, anyway, even if its actually compiled. Though, you may need to release 3 versions of your mod for the 3 main operating systems. Or just do like I'd do and release for Windows anyway because the rest don't matter.)
(Or, alternatively, make a hackpack that'd allow the JVM to run the code, anyway, even if its actually compiled. Though, you may need to release 3 versions of your mod for the 3 main operating systems. Or just do like I'd do and release for Windows anyway because the rest don't matter.)
So if I take a block of code, as an object, and pass it to another routine, is that FP for passing code, or OO for passing data?
And, while I can wrap code as an object in OO, is there any way to wrap an object as code in FP?
Passing functions as function arguments or as return values would count as FP. Which doesn't mean that it's not OO. These two are not exclusive.
In the Lambda calculus everything is a function basically, functions are the "building blocks". I'm not familiar with any functional language but I guess it's similar there.
I would recommend watching one or two of these if you want to know stuff about FP
.model large
.data
s1 db "Assembler is life $"
.code
mov ah,09h
mov dx;offset s1
int 21h
BTW I'm starting to get into Clojures lazy eval to much...
Anyway I will be posting me learning clojure here
Code:
(ns general-clojure.math)
(defn natural
[]
(iterate inc 1))
(defn of-natural
[func]
(map func (natural)))
(defn multiples
[num]
(of-natural #(* % num)))
(defn divided-by
[num]
(of-natural #(/ % num)))
(defn under
[num]
(of-natural #(/ num %)))
(def negatives (multiples -1))
(def whole (of-natural #(- % 1)))They never thaught me that D:
Someone should make Minecraft in Assembly :3
Celestialphoenix
Too Much Free Time
Erm... Thread? Topic?
I can't say too much because normally I'm helping drive it off tangent; but I think you're overdoing slightly.
I can't say too much because normally I'm helping drive it off tangent; but I think you're overdoing slightly.
Considering that this was originally a highly inflammable thread I think having it drive off topic into pure un-combustable silliness is a good thing.
I dunno. Honestly, I think people were just being oversensitive for the sake of being oversensitive. Variety is never a bad thing.