↓ ↑
I made an imageboard because I was bored and thought it would be fun, but I don't know where to share it. I was thinking about sharing here, but I don't know if that's lame or if anyone from here would use it.
>>19
I'm still running it, not abandoned! To be honest, I'm still new to this so I've just been trying to see where it goes. If it dies, it dies, no hard feelings.
>>20
I feel like this would be really cool. At some point I would like to at least make my own fork of vichan. It definitely isn't the best, but with some expansion I think it could be less than shit kek
>>21
I wish you good luck. You should make it a textboard instead, imageboards fucking suck.
>>22
Thank you! I'll probably run SBBS on the site at some point.
Textboards have the important value of being extremely simple and easy to use in low-power shitass machines. But unlike something like vichan someone can't just roll up, upload gigabytes of shit or even worse, gigabytes of illegal shit.
Hope you figure out how to run SBBS. afaik Scheme is available on even the oldest of linux distros so it shouldn't be any harder than setting up vichan.
Honestly yeah, I originally *was* going to setup a textboard, but just don't have enough experience to use Scheme dangerously. Plus again, it was just a way to teach me PHP and this and that. It is more than likely that it will turn into a textboard eventually
↓ ↑
Ive found an interesting programming language called قلب, which is a scheme-like language written in Arabic. What do you think of it?
>>8 eso se llama computar, no programar, existe una diferencia, negro
>>6
Maybe domination over the world, but no one will ever be better Anglos than us.
>>9
Kio estas la celo de programado, krakulo?
>>10
Because you're you lost the cold war? And now still fight over TSMC?
Face it, you no longer semiconduct.
>>10
And who would want to be anglo? fucking cringe
ALLAHU AKBAR! (..＞◡＜..)
↓ ↑
"The core game loop might look like this (code examples in Perl)"
"Step by step, the Rust programming language is moving deeper into the Linux kernel."
"Systemd, in turn, links to liblzma, and this allows xz Utils to exert control over sshd."
They hijack sshd to spy on competing entities?
>>2
so socioautism?
to begin installation first run ./configure
"By working on the Sokoban game, its engine, and Jai at the same time, Blow is able to test the language's design and adjust it early in its lifetime.[67]"
What's wrong with that?
↓ ↑
Rejoice, Guix v1.0.0 has finally been officially released!
https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/blog/2019/gnu-guix-1.0.0-released/
I've been using this as my primary OS for 2-3 years now and cannot recommend it highly enough - Best thing that's ever happened to my computing life.
Now we're just waiting on GNUnet and Hurd ( ._.)
>>93
I want the stable nature of Debian/Ubuntu releases while at the same time, I can have the Guix system within its own division. I can continually write Guix packages for the latest software that can often require libraries that are too advanced for my base Ubuntu system. The reason why I don't just have Guix as the base is because I don't want to maintain a list of software titles that shouldn't be upgraded.
>>96
What do you mean? The issue is that some scientific software gives different results based on the version used, OS, hardware, the weather, etc., which makes it hard to verify the results. Guix helps with this by providing a reproducible software environment.
>>98
i mean just what you said consistent software operation shouldve been the norm for decades and an important foundation everyone forgot existed
instead new jersey won and everyone thinks rust is a savior over formal verification and other methods
guix fails for functional purity but i hate the nix language opinions can very here yet guix has no excuse scheme can be used more functionally and ice9 is much more capable guix is its own environment built off guile and glibc yuck completely capable of reaching the functional purity of nix and better
theres nothing more to say other than those who study history are forced to watch the masses repeat it
>>99
If New Jersey won you'd use Buildroot instead of something like Guix.
>>100
nice no true scotsman
sorry i dont do programming as a job so im not inclined to use inferior software
anyone in their right mind wouldnt be in (((it))) with the masses choices
besides i can only use guix on the gnu operating system not a problem once you understand what that means but those pushing guix as anything else need to be publicly put on display
↓ ↑
what you use?
i use artix
I use Ubuntu, since this machine is new, currently thinking of switching to Devuan.
Debian stable with BTRFS on root, GNOME, and i3 window manager.
Mint
On my desktop, I use Arch Linux mostly because I'm too lazy to install Gentoo or Artix Linux. On my laptop, I use Void Linux, and on my old potato laptop I use Alpine Linux. I can recommend all of these distros I mentioned. My parents run Xubuntu LTS and they don't have any problems with it (the HP printer works after I installed hplip (without the hplip GUI!!), cups, printer-driver-all and simple-scanner). They mostly use Firefox, though.
i was using funtoo for a bit, then gentoo, and i've finally settled on slackware as my linux of choice. i've used a lot of distros and after enough time you realize there is no fucking difference between distros aside from packages
as for bsd i use freebsd since it works nicely with intel wifi cards, netbsd's installer became retarded or i'm using the wrong livecd, openbsd wiped my hard drive with no y/n prompt
↓ ↑
I am thinking of using Dash because it is less bloated than other shells in the Bourne shell family (e.g. Bash and zsh).
I used ash and ksh both for a while but quite honestly bash isn't that bad and everyone else uses it.
It's really what you want in a shell after you fix the stupid way it handles history.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/wait.h>
int main()
{
char buffer[512];
while (1) {
printf("$ ");
fgets(buffer, 512, stdin);
*strchr(buffer, '\n') = '\0';
char *token[16] = { 0 };
token[0] = strtok(buffer, " ");
for (int i = 1; token[i] = strtok(NULL, " "); ++i);
pid_t pid = fork();
if (pid)
waitpid(pid, &pid, WUNTRACED);
else
execvp(token[0], token);
}
return 0;
}you "need" more?
(loop (print (eval (read))))you ``NEED'' more??
* (define-macro (sh . rest) `(system* ,@(map symbol->string rest)))
* (sh ls -lh)
drwxr-xr-x 2 cudder cudder 4.0K Apr 14 12:53 bin
drwxr-xr-x 2 cudder cudder 4.0K Apr 14 13:28 src
0i need more
at the moment csh since it's default on freebsd (which i'm daily driving right now), bash usually on linux, though i'm also using csh on slackware.
↓ ↑
What am I in for?
Also, /Swift general/
Resources:
https://cs193p.sites.stanford.edu/2023
https://docs.swift.org/swift-book/documentation/the-swift-programming-language/
Oh Common Lisp is okay too :)
>>13
Nothing.
ITODDLERS BTFO
>>13
Scheme is better.
Scheme is the best!
↓ ↑
If lisp never existed, what language do you think SICP would've used?
>>17
thanks god vary cool but you used perl for 99% of everything
>>18
It's the 1% that counts
>>19
the chosen i presume
combinatory logic? knuths' assembly?
I think lisp was used because of how directly shows the concept of a state machine which is one of the pillars of modern computing, also makes understanding nesting easy and the extensibility/meta programming aspect
any language that can pull that in a simple to visualize manner fits the bill imho, I could be wrong
>>21
I think it can be summed up in that very few languages can be described as homoiconic, and even fewer of those are truly so in the sense that Lisp is. It's not enough that programs be manipulable as data, but for it to be possible for the program to encode it's own understanding of itself in a simple manner, syntax be damned. Given how far this plays into the whole metaprogramming aspect, I would have to agree with what >>2,14 had to say in that any hypothetical language that shares enough qualities with Lisp in that it achieves these properties is essentially Lisp.
↓ ↑
https://gitgud.io/nvtelen/ogai/
I took a bit of inspiration from SchemeBBS in terms of layout and post formatting.
>>10
Chin nanochong nip nong <(￣︶￣)>
>ogai
>gai
lmao
névtelen
Interesting! (´・ω・`)
hi
↓ ↑
Do schemers really?
>>6
this is also what scheme vectors are but the standard pushes implementations to optimize vectors here
sure they can skit but its less likely to optimize `(caddr x)`
>7
dimwit cnile says terse is good because their execution environment cant handle more
midwit lipth commoner says terse is bad because modern machines can already handle the sideeffects of worse is better
ivywit schemer says terse is good because it keeps design proper and allows ease of generating strict proofs while they still use a lisp machine like environment to program in their own scheme >>5
and you decided to use a lisp machine like environment thats the worst lisp as an example of a proper editor
>>7,8
I'd agree that making third generic for both vectors and lists is a good idea, while making caddr the same would be stupid.
Terseness is only good up to the point where it remains obvious what something is, and I think lispers/schemers understand this well. I don't think C programmers have a right to engage in a terseness debate when any given C program of around 200 lines could be written in less than 20 lines of Lisp or Scheme with actual semantics. We can hang our hats once an APL programmer shows up.
>>9
can you tersely define for a standard how this third generic gets optimized at a lower and more abstract level where having vectors and improper lists defined is moot
otherwise it doesnt belong in the standard and its something you can already do with scheme
i agree the standard has too many vector bits scheme isnt a shining example of terseness but it departs greatly from the common lipth goop slide into a sink
im waiting for another apl programmer to make an argument but since you understand proper etiquette here
scheme allows some or all if you wish imo macros just fit the case forms of apls shortening while most lipth implementations omit even supporting λ by default
sure you can argue about unicode but some modern apl doesnt
and i will say both of these arent real arguments you can even use a emacs mode for translating long goop into terse symbols locally
Terseness is only good up to the point where it remains obvious what something is
isnt the extreme what cniles broken vocabulary believes terseness is
incomphrenciable goop isnt terseness the word implies theres still a concisely defined subject
Of speech or style: brief, concise, to the point.
Synonyms: concise, succinct
even better it comes from a latin word tersus
clean, neat, rubbed or wiped (off), cleansed, having been cleansed
pure, correct, nice, terse, spruce, neat
is errccwrkprtpwo() any of those you already know the answer
now i will say r7rs-tiny has-a-few-goop-procedures but some of them are justified
call/cc this is cnile i need to know cc means current continuation and / with by looking at it first glance not because i have background information from studying call/cc
instead the emacs mode is justified here as the local programmer i know what symbols i consider equivalent to call-with-current-continuation
sure another solution is a proper (help) but this is something that should already be there especially for standard procedures and now when someone else goes to read it they have to manually look up call/cc
it can be acceptable when the concept needs paragraphs to describe to someone with baseline knowledge in that case call/cc should scream / is with and cc is current continuation but there is no consistent nomenclature where / acts as a combination in r7rs-tiny unlike -> which is even strictly defined to return another type of object
the nice thing about apl is once you understand the graphemes enough and the bases they form things like quadwords its universality accepted how those symbols get used so you arent writing split-at-obtuse-point-five because there is no need and it removes the broken need for verbosity in procedure names
i recommend a glossary using logical graphemes that works with proper lisp environments over split-at-vector-point-five that way someone reading can just hover or something else configured and see the verbose procedure name until they inherit the personal nomenclature the author has for symbols
My issue is that it is backwards, I know that's how it is when you write things out, but I like piping better.
elaborate upon this http://snow-fort.org/s/fisher.cx/robert/fisherro/pipe/1.0.0/index.html for your preferences relevance