The Great Coding Language Thread

[HeilMewTwo]

since

Like English?

 

[psp]

Like English?

Exactly!

 

[Someone Else 37]

(println "I'm" "learning" "Clojure" "now..." "\nBlame" "Strikingwolf")

 

[Strikingwolf]

(println "MWAHAHAHAHAH")

 

[Someone Else 37]

(println "lol")
(println "You forgot a quote.")
(println "The \"official?\" tutorial I find pretty meh... I think the one for Haskell I linked you a while back is much better. More fun to read, at least.")

 

[Strikingwolf]

(println "There is a better one http://www.braveclojure.com/")
(println "And then for when you forget one function http://clojure.org/cheatsheet")

 

[Someone Else 37]

(println "This looks much better, thank you.")
(println "Cheatsheet looks handy, too. Haskell has Hoogle, which lets you search functions by name, package, or type signature.")

 

[Strikingwolf]

(println "Your welcome ")

 

[1SDAN]

So, I need help with some intense Python shiz. Links, AWAY!

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29422776/use-2-strings-to-call-function-x-from-module-y

 

[psp]

So, I need help with some intense Python shiz. Links, AWAY!

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/29422776/use-2-strings-to-call-function-x-from-module-y

Looking at that makes me realize how far I have to go before I fully understand python.

 

[1SDAN]

Well, my problem was fixed. Apparently since functions are also variables, they can be passed as such between functions

 

[Strikingwolf]

Well, my problem was fixed. Apparently since functions are also variables, they can be passed as such between functions

yeah. That is a core concept of FP

 

[trajing]

yeah. That is a core concept of FP

So Ruby isn't a "true" FP language?

 

[Strikingwolf]

So Ruby isn't a "true" FP language?

Wait...ruby has first class functions...right...right?

 

[Strikingwolf]

Oh they're not, bummer

 

[Strikingwolf]

Oh they're not, bummer

Although there are a ton of ways that this is alleviated, like with blocks/lambdas/procs, but still having first-class functions would be really nice

 

[trajing]

Although there are a ton of ways that this is alleviated, like with blocks/lambdas/procs, but still having first-class functions would be really nice

Technically, the order of succession is block/proc/lambda.
Blocks are just that - blocks of code.
Procs are blocks stored in variables. So technically a Proc is a function in a true FP language.
Lambdas are Procs, except with Procs extra arguments are set to nil, with Lambdas the argument count is checked and errors are raised if you call one with the wrong amount. In addition, Lambdas will simply return the object (well, reference) once called, while Procs will also have the parent method return the same thing as the Proc.
Altogether, if you're looking for a method stored in a variable, Lambdas are the way to go in Ruby.
EDIT: Fixed a typo; added a period.

 

[Strikingwolf]

Technically, the order of succession is block/proc/lambda.
Blocks are just that - blocks of code.
Procs are blocks stored in variables. So technically a Proc is a function in a true FP language.
Lambdas are Procs, except with Procs extra arguments are set to nil, with Lambdas the argument count is checked and errors are raised if you call one with the wrong amount. In addition, Lambdas will simply return the object (well, reference) once called, while Procs will also have the parent method return the same thing as the Proc.
Altogether, if you're looking for a method stored in a variable, Lambdas are the way to go in Ruby.
EDIT: Fixed a typo; added a period.

actually method :method_name does it

 

[trajing]

actually method :method_name does it

Defined in same file as a Proc, so you could consider a method a block bound to a name, I guess?
...Ruby takes the principle "code is data" very far.

 

[Strikingwolf]

Defined in same file as a Proc, so you could consider a method a block bound to a name, I guess?
...Ruby takes the principle "code is data" very far.

not as far as LISP Also, no actual first-class functions is bad