/dpt/ - Daily Programming Thread

Real Programmers Edition #9

Previous thread: What are you working on, Jow Forums?

Attached: bellard.jpg (240x320, 14K)

Other urls found in this thread:

gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2018/msg00002.html
www-math.bgsu.edu/~zirbel/programming/index.html
anyforums.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The Haskell programming language is excellent.

Attached: karen haskell.png (1280x719, 818K)

>Haskell programming language is excellent
fug :DDD

Attached: image of an anime girl.png (1024x749, 117K)

C has no standard compiler or build system

hasklets need to go and stay go, desu.

Attached: [Coalgirls]_Yuru_Yuri_06_(1280x720_Blu-Ray_FLAC)_[F8694A5A].mkv_snapshot_21.17_[2018.07.11_11.39.11] (1280x720, 1.27M)

nth for fsharp best language

Why does it matter if your language let's you overload function call operator? How is that related to UFCS?

fstar*

I'm leaning how to use vectors because arrays in C++ are shit. Also, recursive and dynamic algorithms.

Attached: 1532103320507s.jpg (95x124, 2K)

he's saying you can substitute the dot or ()s for a singular operator and do stuff like
thing > function > function1 > function2

What language isn't case-sensitive these days? Lisp? Do you use some kind of BASIC?

As far as case-significance goes, Haskell's variable/concrete distinction is a lot more valuable than, for instance, Go's public/private marking. I know of no others off the top of my head.

That's not what he's saying. He's saying a language that lets you define operators, like +, -, etc. You can write an operator that calls the function on the right with the argument on the left.

You can do that in D too, it just creates more confusion.
this.could.be.a.variable.within.a.module or
this.could.also.be.a.big.function.call.chain
>
That's not the point you made with your code snippet.
How is that relevant? I said chaining function is helpful and he's going on about the . operator is overloadable?

Look:

-- define the operator
x & f = f x
infixl 1 &

input&function1&function2&function3&function4

because to your point of without UFCS you get a Lisp jungle is wrong if said language lets you do that.
But you shouldn't have to do that in the first place and the dot operator for accessing and chaining is the true way.

He's saying that UFCS being baked into the language is pointless if the language is expressive enough to define it within its own semantics.

How can there possibly be so many mediocre employed programmers?

eh not really, Nim has build in UFCS but also has Lisp meta-programming 2.0 with custom operators. It's pretty nice.

Are you autistic or just baiting or just lack the ability of critical thinking

>Haskell
>standard library Monad is frustratingly limited because it is not constrained

now count array permutations in one line.

>He's saying that UFCS being baked into the language is pointless if the language is expressive enough to define it within its own semantics.
He didn't say that. After all, the argument was not about being able to invoke a function with a custom operator or not.

It's a C tard, what do you expect?

It's fine as it is. Nothing will ever capture everything you want, not without being much less usable. Another thing you can't do with Monad is indexed monads, so forth.

i love that every complaint about haskell is just nonchalantly shrugged off as "it's fine".

Haskell is head and shoulders above other mainstream languages.

king of the rats still finds you in a shit hole.

Yeah, with an unprecedented rate of 1Gb garbage / second. It should collect itself right away.

>this meme again
OO programmer sucks at Haskell. Quelle surprise.

Probably because they are busy being useful. Not surprised.

there is a lot of software to maintain/fuck up further.

"Useful" writing garbage unmaintainable OO code, I'm sure.

rekt

>GCC 8.2 Released
gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2018/msg00002.html

Attached: 1525341959521.png (2440x1228, 190K)

just a buttfix release

>I have no idea what I'm doing in this language
>so I just slung any old shit together and ran it
>but anything bad that happens is the language's fault, not mine

>28 MB data structure
kek

I posted this in the last thread.

Why did that guy believe that UFC syntax shit is necessary?

Even if I wanted to make it a dynamically sized string the user enters I could just use malloc.

I didn't make the joiner join end-to-end, should I make a new function?

I like this thread. I can read it for a bit while i'm mulling over a programming decision.

It's useful for chaining a bunch of functions. Are you being dense intentionally or what

It's compilation is standardized. It does have no standard compiler or build system. Why would your language restrict you to one tool?

It really is. Once you get more experience you'll know a lot of things come with tradeoffs.

Yeah, lack of standard build system SURELY DID NOTHING WRONG

he's a baby duck learning c, of course.
not really, i never really find trade offs in Idris.

For instance, what would you have to do to make a monad type class that works with indexed types? You'd need every non-indexed monad to take two extra type parameters. What about multiple indexes? Etc. At some point you need to say "This is flexible, this works" and when you have a special case, use it. Sure you might think "What about type lambdas, or depenent types?" but then you lose inference and the sort of "shape" or interface. Type inference is something you really learn to appreciate by writing e.g. System F.

>(((chaining functions)))
I did what you did without what you're claiming it's necessary for. Are you dense or just bad at programming?

k, might as well right the end-to-end function as well

>but then you lose inference
absolutely gross, please stop, inference is for dynamic shitlangs.

you have no idea what you're talking about

This is what I meant by A lot of these people just don't have much experience. I'm not surprised the idris guy is like that.

2.pow(4)

>A lot of these people just don't have much experience.
i don't want to get stockholmed to a shitty language.
try dependent types some day.

It is inconceivable to you that I might have used dependent types before.

its one way to write nice looking code.

>I did what you did without
Without doing the same thing. The end result is not in focus here. See

i just can't see how you can go back to haskell after using them. Or god forbid you actually used liquid haskell.

>You'll never be able to destroy C++ in your life time
Why live?

Attached: 1530904469592.png (231x218, 7K)

You can't kill what's undead.

Attached: shiki.jpg (1440x811, 64K)

how do you keep track of state in your program

StateT

by looking up a few lines in my function.

Intuitive

>learning how to use vectors
I really wish I could be young again.
Also, arrays are not shit. But for your purposes, use vectors over arrays as much as you want.

printf("%d permutations: ", strlen(mystr) + 1 - at_a_time);
Working on the end-to-end permutations.

>make a pretend case as to why a *necessary* part of a language should exist
>joins 15 functions together to complain about syntax
Have you ever actually worked at a real place before? I've used 4D arrays and used three or four ints and a +/- 1 in array addressing, but who kind of bullshit would you actually use multiply nested deep functions like that for?

>the absolute state of c """programmers"""

we call ourselves koders

State.
State never changes.

Attached: terrible meme.png (928x640, 493K)

Writing types > writing terms

ugh I have nothing to work on
I want to do something productive now that my job ended and I have a week or two before uni starts back up again
But I just can't think of anything interesting to make.
Shit is depressing

>Haskell doesn't even have a Functor for Set

>tfw no one on Jow Forums knows who this guy is

Attached: thinking-face.png (256x256, 58K)

Isn't he the D guy

-->

Reminder that OO is far from perfect but nothing else is as practical for real world programs and jobs.

Attached: 1492615428160.png (1493x2263, 1.85M)

>OO
>practical

Attached: kizuna lot of senpais.png (864x614, 577K)

Imperative and functional are both more practical than O_o

>bellard
respect, he won yet another ioccc this year.

>"real world" programs
i.e. buggy unmaintainable pieces of shit that constantly fall over and can never be fixed properly because they're written in unreasonable languages

How reliable is pic related to learn my first programming language? Only on exercise 7 so far (4, 5 and 6 are missing for some reason

Attached: lpthw.png (1366x768, 128K)

>Python
>first language
Pourquoi?

learn Haskell

Learn C

some dude recommended the website to some other guy in one of the three >tfw can't program threads up right now and I thought I'd try it.
fuck off

might be good for learning the building blocks. the best way to learn to program is to find problems to solve. try building a simple 4-operation calculator, or do some of these: www-math.bgsu.edu/~zirbel/programming/index.html

t. fell for the Haskell fud

learn haskell - it's much more fun.

is it that tcc/ffmpeg/qemu/c-obfuscation/bgp frenchfag autist?

Ignore the Haskellers. Learn Agda, it's a great programming language for beginners

ATS is the only language you will ever need to know, it's much faster than C and much more expressive than Hasklel

Imagine being Java fan, able only to understand classes and methods, no other forms of abstraction

imagine being c fan, able only to understand structs and procedures, no other forms of abstraction

has anyone here used reflex frp?

Imagine thinking C and Java are the only programming languages

One of the worst fucking ways to learn python and it’ll probably make you not even like programming.

Is there a graphical designer for creating QtGui's on linux? Right now I'm writing a gui by hand and it's giving me a headache trying to fucking design a simple screen with a bunch of frames. I just want something that I can quickly prototype a gui in the paste the core code in and then wire all the actions and logic into it.

Attached: 1519059755099.png (483x487, 201K)

Well that took too long.

>his language doesn't even have a preproccesor!

Attached: utilitymacros.png (1031x548, 35K)

Meant to post

Attached: joiner_v3.png (2148x1276, 219K)

only a C programmer would consider C """macros""" to be impressive

QT Creator
?

Attached: 81nKJ8qvcYL._SL1500_.jpg (1500x1500, 157K)