<Regenaxer>
What has the thread to do with "predictability"?
<Regenaxer>
Anyway, the simpler the more predictable (if priledictable meas "understandable")
rob_w has joined #picolisp
schulze has joined #picolisp
kuao has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
razzy has joined #picolisp
razzy has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
razzy has joined #picolisp
<razzy>
Regenaxer: simple and understandable depends on perspective and experience. picolisp way of quote could be more simple from language designer view. I lack experience there. So far I think standard way of quote is better and sugar should be solved with "glasses" in editor.
<Regenaxer>
Hmm, so you did not understand the essence of PicoLisp
<Regenaxer>
(fun . args)
<Regenaxer>
single cell
<Regenaxer>
what can be simpler?
<Regenaxer>
"standard" way of quote is (quote . (any))
<schulze>
Hej, I am new here ;) I am also comming from a Scheme/CL background and the more I follow these discussion for example about quote the more I understand about PicoLisp very diffrent form of simplicity.
<Regenaxer>
Hi schulze! Welcome! :)
<Regenaxer>
yeah, indeed very different
<schulze>
Its less a theoretical simplicity with lots of details hidden from the programmer.
<Regenaxer>
The problem is that it *looks* so similar to Scheme etc.
<schulze>
Like assembler is at the same time very simple and very much not.
<Regenaxer>
right
<Regenaxer>
For me simple means that also the lower layers can be understood
<Regenaxer>
like in assembly
<schulze>
Yes, I tried to start with PicoLisp a few times and never got far because it was so very different. The blog series got me started.
<Regenaxer>
cool
<Regenaxer>
You can ask here any time too
<schulze>
Cool!
<schulze>
Yesterday I understood what the `*Dbg lines in the sources do ;) It's fun to read the code and reconstruct what's happening. Even small snippeds taks a long time to understand but then it is *possible* to aktually understand what's happening.
<Regenaxer>
:)
<razzy>
Regenaxer: I did not understand essence of picolisp. I still do not understand properly. using simple cell to the fullest has significant benefits in pure interpretted picolisp. I still think that everything in proper lisp should work with proper linked lists as default (it is good for beginers).
<Regenaxer>
ok
<beneroth>
welcome schulze :)
<beneroth>
schulze, yeah PicoLisp is simple, not easy.
<Regenaxer>
I just do not understand why a non-NIL CDR is so confusing
<beneroth>
because of the fix idea of static definition of list
<beneroth>
well I don't understand neither
<beneroth>
but then I grokked C pointers. this seems to be fundamental.
<Regenaxer>
yes, related issue
<beneroth>
the problems start when people project magic complications into things which simply aren't there
<beneroth>
don't make assumptions. First rule of science and debugging.
<razzy>
i like picolisp, i like picolisp way in general. i confess, i do not assume which functions are "lispy" and which lisp rules are working. i mostly randomly try functions until it works. I got better at it.
<beneroth>
Regenaxer, maybe one could say: PicoLisp is not suited to rote learning (memorizing rules). Standardized rules and standardized expectations support rote learning and makes knowledge (seemingly) transferable.
<Regenaxer>
Yes, this is the point
<Regenaxer>
just try to understand the core machine
<Regenaxer>
cells mostly
<beneroth>
rote learning and standardized expectations have the fundamental flaw that all understanding and ability breaks down when a special case is violating the expectations. Like now the log4j feature of evaluating data meant to be simply written into a logfile.
<beneroth>
which was intended as feature, it's not a code error. it's a very fatal conceptual mistake.
<Regenaxer>
Mom, tel.
<beneroth>
kk
<beneroth>
razzy, I recommend you to try to completely understand a function, e.g. drawing on paper what it does with cells. I think you would better understand picolisp by understanding one function thoroughly than by knowing how to use 100.
<beneroth>
it's hard to climb on the mountain top. but then you can view it all easily.
<razzy>
beneroth: nice wisdom :]
<beneroth>
thanks :)
<razzy>
beneroth: btw, iptables file in if-pre-up.d is not working. and i have good dir. maybe something rewriting my setup. who knows.
<beneroth>
google for it. surely some systemd bullshit interfering
<beneroth>
at least so it was when I had similar issues. but was not exactly same as your problem.
<beneroth>
could also be that the file must end with .conf or such, maybe lookup up some help about the if-pre-up.d directory
<beneroth>
file endings in unix used to be decorations without semantic meaning. but now windows coders have fun with linux and bring bad habits