2025/03/09

Newest at the top

2025-03-09 21:27:29 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:26:23 +0100Guest57(~Guest57@181.81.118.194) (Client Quit)
2025-03-09 21:26:17 +0100Guest57(~Guest57@181.81.118.194)
2025-03-09 21:25:39 +0100fp(~Thunderbi@89-27-29-68.bb.dnainternet.fi) (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:23:12 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-09 21:22:18 +0100foul_owl(~kerry@94.156.149.96) foul_owl
2025-03-09 21:22:10 +0100wootehfoot(~wootehfoo@user/wootehfoot) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-03-09 21:21:30 +0100jmcantrell(~weechat@user/jmcantrell) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:12:06 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:10:30 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:08:08 +0100chewybread(~chewybrea@user/chewybread) chewybread
2025-03-09 21:08:08 +0100chewybread(~chewybrea@c-174-181-7-135.hsd1.pa.comcast.net) (Changing host)
2025-03-09 21:08:08 +0100chewybread(~chewybrea@c-174-181-7-135.hsd1.pa.comcast.net)
2025-03-09 21:07:56 +0100foul_owl(~kerry@94.156.149.97) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-09 21:07:48 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-09 21:06:17 +0100gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh) gehmehgeh
2025-03-09 21:06:16 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-03-09 21:05:37 +0100gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh) (Remote host closed the connection)
2025-03-09 21:04:12 +0100 <monochrom> Scala can furthermore add "sealed class" to the class-object version to match up the closedness of the ADT version.
2025-03-09 21:03:49 +0100hattckory(~hattckory@bras-base-toroon4524w-grc-48-184-145-138-167.dsl.bell.ca)
2025-03-09 21:03:28 +0100gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh) gehmehgeh
2025-03-09 21:03:06 +0100gmg(~user@user/gehmehgeh) (Quit: Leaving)
2025-03-09 21:02:56 +0100 <monochrom> The class-object version yes. The ADT version no.
2025-03-09 21:01:58 +0100 <EvanR> can you even do that in ocaml
2025-03-09 20:59:27 +0100 <monochrom> OK I'm jumping ship to OCaml bye guys. (No, just kidding!)
2025-03-09 20:58:30 +0100 <monochrom> But this is actually telling me why other people like OOP more. "class Case1 extends T { foo() = ... }" "class Case2 extends T { foo() = ... }" is much more compatible to the explanation order I want.
2025-03-09 20:57:54 +0100jmcantrell(~weechat@user/jmcantrell) jmcantrell
2025-03-09 20:57:06 +0100MyNetAz(~MyNetAz@user/MyNetAz) MyNetAz
2025-03-09 20:56:46 +0100 <monochrom> A literate programming tool/environment needs that, even if we can argue how often it is used.
2025-03-09 20:56:35 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-03-09 20:55:16 +0100 <int-e> I don't think a programming language needs to support the idea that code be written in the order that it's developed, one feature at a time.
2025-03-09 20:54:21 +0100 <EvanR> Basic Category Theory book also doesn't have monads
2025-03-09 20:54:08 +0100 <EvanR> probably for the best
2025-03-09 20:54:01 +0100 <monochrom> I don't even have time to cover the Monad type class.
2025-03-09 20:53:07 +0100infinity0(~infinity0@pwned.gg) infinity0
2025-03-09 20:52:16 +0100 <monochrom> Yeah right I'm going to use trees that grow in a course where students see Haskell for the first time!
2025-03-09 20:51:39 +0100 <int-e> there's that trees that grow thing :P
2025-03-09 20:51:25 +0100infinity0(~infinity0@pwned.gg) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-09 20:51:18 +0100 <EvanR> to boldly go where no definition has been split before
2025-03-09 20:50:54 +0100 <EvanR> you split the definition
2025-03-09 20:50:05 +0100MyNetAz(~MyNetAz@user/MyNetAz) (Remote host closed the connection)
2025-03-09 20:49:46 +0100 <monochrom> And does Haskell allow you to write like "data T = Case1; foo Case1 = ...; data T = ... | Case2; foo Case2 = ..."?
2025-03-09 20:49:45 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-09 20:49:03 +0100 <monochrom> My lecture notes need that IMO.
2025-03-09 20:48:55 +0100abrar(~abrar@static-96-245-187-163.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
2025-03-09 20:48:48 +0100 <monochrom> Does Haskell even allow you to write "foo [] = 0; example1 = foo []; foo (x:xs) = x + foo xs"?
2025-03-09 20:48:27 +0100abrar(~abrar@static-96-245-187-163.phlapa.fios.verizon.net) (Quit: WeeChat 4.2.2)
2025-03-09 20:48:05 +0100 <EvanR> you can't rearrange the order in the source file?
2025-03-09 20:47:27 +0100 <monochrom> Edit I can say the same about almost every case of the Expr and Value types.
2025-03-09 20:46:23 +0100 <monochrom> I can say the same about almost every case.