Newest at the top
| 2025-03-04 02:12:49 +0100 | <monochrom> | OK yes one version of definition of OOP says that. |
| 2025-03-04 02:12:48 +0100 | <constxd> | With multiple dispatch, who receives the message? All n objects? If so, who produces the response? |
| 2025-03-04 02:12:36 +0100 | yegorc | (~yegorc@user/yegorc) (Leaving) |
| 2025-03-04 02:12:07 +0100 | <constxd> | It's not clear to me how to make multiple dispatch fit into OOP nicely. Like isn't one of the main tenets that calling a method corresponds to sending a message to the object? |
| 2025-03-04 02:09:23 +0100 | <monochrom> | And actually it's what you said that reminds me that Julia does that too. |
| 2025-03-04 02:08:40 +0100 | <monochrom> | Although, I heard that it's very slow when you actually use that in anger. |
| 2025-03-04 02:08:17 +0100 | <monochrom> | Actually, I forgot Julia. It's also multiple dispatch. |
| 2025-03-04 02:07:51 +0100 | <constxd> | Wait actually I guess it has n-ary except only when you have like `fn f(x: A, y: B, z: C) { ... } fn f(x: D, y: E, z: F) { ... }` defined together lexically. Whereas defining a new binary operator somewhere else doesn't shadow anything, it just updates the dispatch rules for that operator |
| 2025-03-04 02:06:10 +0100 | <monochrom> | But I wouldn't say "wrong" I just say "has a limit". |
| 2025-03-04 02:05:38 +0100 | <monochrom> | Well yeah you need multiple dispatch for n-ary operations for all n to claim completeness. :) |
| 2025-03-04 02:05:04 +0100 | <constxd> | My toy language has proper multiple-dispatch for binary operators, glad to know it's only _partially_ wrong :) |
| 2025-03-04 02:02:34 +0100 | Jonno_FTW | (~come@user/jonno-ftw/x-0835346) Jonno_FTW |
| 2025-03-04 02:01:20 +0100 | <monochrom> | I forgot what OCaml does for binary operators like that, but ISTR it is at least decent. |
| 2025-03-04 02:00:46 +0100 | Jonno_FTW | (~come@user/jonno-ftw/x-0835346) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:59:51 +0100 | <monochrom> | This means that with most OOP languages that understand only single dispatch, some of your organization is artificially biased, which means, if you think about it, poor and clumsy organization, worse than FP's free form. |
| 2025-03-04 01:59:07 +0100 | misterfish | (~misterfis@84.53.85.146) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:58:46 +0100 | <monochrom> | Ever heard of mutilple dispatch? Everything is not single dispatch. Only Common Lisp Object System does justice in this regard. C++ comes close, acknowledging that for binary operators such as (+), both a.add(b) and b.add(a) are wrong, you are supposed to have "friend-of-C add(C a, C b)". |
| 2025-03-04 01:56:58 +0100 | <monochrom> | Up to a first-order approximation, OOP is more well-organized than FP, yes. But there is a blindspot in OOP advocacy based on that. |
| 2025-03-04 01:55:35 +0100 | dudek | (~dudek@2a02:a312:c9df:bf80:dd97:ea4a:fd09:4598) (Quit: Leaving) |
| 2025-03-04 01:55:01 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:54:51 +0100 | Tuplanolla | (~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-59.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.) |
| 2025-03-04 01:50:33 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-04 01:49:19 +0100 | xff0x | (~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:9bc7:c2e3:e40a:e335) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:45:19 +0100 | sprotte24 | (~sprotte24@p200300d16f02be0071e2e7b150ab479e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Quit: Leaving) |
| 2025-03-04 01:43:28 +0100 | acidjnk_new | (~acidjnk@p200300d6e7283f05ac853a078363741e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:40:59 +0100 | yegorc | (~yegorc@user/yegorc) yegorc |
| 2025-03-04 01:37:54 +0100 | myxos | (~myxos@syn-065-028-251-121.res.spectrum.com) myxokephale |
| 2025-03-04 01:23:21 +0100 | Square | (~Square@user/square) Square |
| 2025-03-04 01:22:21 +0100 | Googulator93 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-14b2-c443-5a96-b49d-1dd5.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-03-04 01:22:09 +0100 | Googulator93 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-14b2-c443-5a96-b49d-1dd5.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-03-04 01:11:55 +0100 | LainExperiments | (~LainExper@user/LainExperiments) LainExperiments |
| 2025-03-04 01:07:36 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:05:59 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2025-03-04 01:03:40 +0100 | LainExperiments | (~LainExper@user/LainExperiments) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 01:03:09 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-04 01:01:53 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> dumb jokes: Maybe is a comonad in the pseudo-category Hask; just error "Maybe is a comonad in the pseudo-category Hask" on Nothing. |
| 2025-03-04 01:01:45 +0100 | dudek | (~dudek@2a02:a312:c9df:bf80:dd97:ea4a:fd09:4598) |
| 2025-03-04 00:58:19 +0100 | prasad | (~Thunderbi@c-73-246-138-70.hsd1.in.comcast.net) |
| 2025-03-04 00:55:20 +0100 | ljdarj | (~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 00:44:21 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS |
| 2025-03-04 00:43:55 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> /s/wins ahead/comes out ahead/ |
| 2025-03-04 00:43:51 +0100 | <geekosaur> | you want terse? mumps |
| 2025-03-04 00:43:38 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> although obv apl wins ahead, and it's all classical chinese to me (modern Chinese has tons of digraphs, classical Chinese, the older you get, the more single character words) :) |
| 2025-03-04 00:42:52 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> begin end |
| 2025-03-04 00:42:35 +0100 | <c_wraith> | I think of like apl or julia. |
| 2025-03-04 00:42:24 +0100 | <c_wraith> | python is not what I think of when I think of a terse language. |
| 2025-03-04 00:40:04 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> you know me as the guy (Inst) who likes to complain about minor syntax issues with Haskell, when Haskell is tied with Python for terseness (monad accounting cancels out FP terseness) |
| 2025-03-04 00:39:44 +0100 | ystael | (~ystael@user/ystael) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2025-03-04 00:39:10 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> also, a very nice thing about playing with Rust is that it's so freaking verbose |
| 2025-03-04 00:38:28 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Liamzee> for instance, someone told me that Haskellers just tend to define datatypes anywhere instead of using specialized modules |