beneroth changed the topic of #picolisp to: PicoLisp language | The scalpel of software development | Channel Log: | Check for more information
bjorkintosh has quit [Quit: "Every day, computers are making people easier to use." David Temkin]
axioms has joined #picolisp
Nistur has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
Nistur has joined #picolisp
Nistur has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Nistur has joined #picolisp
axioms has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
axioms has joined #picolisp
axioms has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rob_w has joined #picolisp
axioms has joined #picolisp
axioms has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
axioms has joined #picolisp
Guest80 has joined #picolisp
axioms has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
rob_w has quit [Quit: Leaving]
beneroth has quit [Quit: Leaving]
rob_w has joined #picolisp
Guest64 has joined #picolisp
Guest64 is now known as tankf33der
<tankf33der> hi all
<tankf33der> abu[7]: do you have now 5mins ?
<abu[7]> Yes
<tankf33der> i am writing code:
<tankf33der> series of (call ') (call ') ...
<tankf33der> how to stop on first NIL and return it ?
<tankf33der> i need just a hint
<abu[7]> (or (call ..) (call ..) .. ?
<tankf33der> damn it, RIGHT!
<abu[7]> 👍
<tankf33der> see you
tankf33der has quit [Quit: Client closed]
<abu[7]> Oops. It is 'and' if you want to return on the first NIL of course :(
bjorkintosh has joined #picolisp
geri has joined #picolisp
<geri> hey, very silly question
<geri> trying to make an alias to de for fun; what's wrong with this exp? (de defun Args (apply de Args))
<abu[7]> 'de' does not evaluate. You can simply do (def 'defun de) or (setq defun de)
<abu[7]> The latter just does not put the source property (i.e. *Dbg)
<geri> my idea was that apply calls de with a few args - first one doesnt get eval'd normally and the rest are processed as de processes them too
<geri> guess im still not understanding something about fexps
<geri> so defun just takes a list of stuff and passes it to de...
<abu[7]> 'de' can't be called in 'apply', only fuactions which eval all args can
<abu[7]> 'apply' evaluates the args
<geri> oh, i thought that's one of the good things about fexps - you can use them with higher order functions and stuff
<geri> maybe i misunderstood something
<geri> or apply isnt a hof
rob_w has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<abu[7]> Fexprs want to decide by themsetves when and what to evaluate
<geri> yes, my defun doesnt evaluate args either, so im just trying to give de what it's pretty much expecting
<geri> except for apply eval'ing args and such
<abu[7]> So (setq defun de) :)
<geri> 🤧
<abu[7]> Better (def 'defun 'de)
<abu[7]> def is like 'set'
<abu[7]> but puts source properties
<geri> so instead of setting defun to function in `de` we set it to symbol de?
<abu[7]> No
<abu[7]> to the *value* of 'de'
<geri> (def 'defun 'de) vs (def 'defun de)
<abu[7]> I was wrong :)
<abu[7]> Above I wrote it correctly
<geri> with two quotes?
<abu[7]> (def 'defun de)
<geri> oki
<abu[7]> v
<geri> vvvvvv)
<abu[7]> oops :)
<geri> its a cute game
<abu[7]> :)
<geri> how much complexity did you manage to get rid of by going fexp/fsubr route?
<geri> ive heard that they're way simpler than macro approach
<abu[7]> It is a different issue. Macros make no sense in an interpreter
<geri> well yeah
<abu[7]> Or only sometimes
<geri> theres no compile time after all
<abu[7]> I do not see FEXPRs opposed to macros
<abu[7]> They are a natural way for an interpreter like Pil
<geri> so there's no difference in complexity at all?
<geri> or i could say, "so theres a way bigger difference between interpreted vs byte compiled?"
<abu[7]> Not much, but a little simpler
<abu[7]> more uniform
<abu[7]> There is only a single function type
<geri> i love that i can check defintion for some stuff like 'doc just by checking its value
<geri> cause its literally just a list
<abu[7]> T
<abu[7]> or a number
<geri> yeah
<geri> sadly cant interspect those easily
<geri> not with my knowledge anyway, except using vi
<abu[7]> Yes, seeing the source
<geri> (pp '+) is kinda funny
<geri> (de + 5928787705294 . 5928787705294 )
<abu[7]> Yeah, can't be pretty-printed
<geri> oh, vip doesnt autoindent?
<geri> you just spam tab? :D
<abu[7]> Tabs are shown as Cntrl-I
<abu[7]> as a red "I"
<geri> i mean tab key
<abu[7]> You can do ":tabs"
<abu[7]> Right, no auto-indent
<abu[7]> But you can press "," to indent a paragraph
<geri> and almost no syntax highlighting
<geri> hardcore
<abu[7]> Yep
<abu[7]> Lisp *has* no syntax :D
<geri> okay question - do you spam tab key or do you write everything without tabs, jump up and press comma?
<abu[7]> I usually type the tabs so that the code looks like pretty-printed from the beginning
<geri> omg you write spaced closing parens by hand too
<geri> cursed!
<abu[7]> I use the comme more for a check
<geri> is there a shortcut to do comma on whole buffer
<abu[7]> There is (was?) a script 'pilIndent'
<abu[7]> You can to !GpilIndent
<geri> i saw it in the docs but its not in bin anymroe
<abu[7]> I never do though
<geri> in the repo
<abu[7]> cause I want to stay in control
<abu[7]> Moment
<geri> or maybe it was never there
<geri> its a personal script then?
<geri> i.e. actually not distributed with picolisp
<abu[7]> I dont remember well. At least no longer in the distro
<geri> oki
<abu[7]> beneroth also oftes says that he like auto-parenthesing co
<abu[7]> de
<abu[7]> I must say that it bugs me if the editor interfers with my typing
<geri> (de co () "!")
<geri> it bugs me too if it actually interferes
<abu[7]> :)
<geri> but if i can make it behave the way i want it to (ahem ahem emacs) then its fine
<geri> vip too in this case, you literally wrote it from scratch
<abu[7]> True
<geri> it can be comfy to not have to care about indenting code and such
<geri> might be a fun thing to implement
<geri> although minus simplicity
<abu[7]> Yes. could be extended in ~/.pil/viprc
<geri> i wrote a pretty simple personal picolisp mode for emacs and trying to write an autoindent function but brain very smol
<geri> so rn its spamming tabs too
<abu[7]> ☺
<geri> and yes, i have an alias in bashrc where vi is emacs
<geri> 👽
<abu[7]> ok :)
<geri> okay question
<geri> why 3 space indentation?
<geri> 2 or 4 is way more popular nowadays, and 8 too, so im wondering
<abu[7]> It is historical
<abu[7]> Yeah
<abu[7]> ah
<abu[7]> oops
<abu[7]> So no special reason
<geri> you just decided that randomly and stuck with it?
<abu[7]> 4 is too wide, and 2 too narrow
<geri> xd
<geri> fair enough
<abu[7]> I think I took it over from a project in the mid-80s
<abu[7]> It is a good question
<geri> i was gonna ask how to indent multiple/multiline let bindings and noticed that pilIndent has two nested lets for seemingly no reason
<geri> honestly i agree that 4 and 2 dont look quite right
<geri> oh, maybe let isnt recursive
<abu[7]> Right, the two let's are not good
<geri> or is it recursive?
<abu[7]> You mean nesting?
<abu[7]> No problem
<abu[7]> (let A (let B ... B) ...
<geri> like is (let (X 12 Y (+ X 1)) ...) legal
<abu[7]> The ultimate horror is the habit of mixing 4 spaces and tabs with 8
<abu[7]> Yes, what is special here?
<geri> in CL let cant do that, theres let* for that
<geri> in scheme apparently its letrec, although im not sure
<abu[7]> Pil's 'let' is more let*
<geri> oki
<abu[7]> i.e. it evaluates one after the other
<geri> neat, i dont even understand why let isnt just let*
<geri> like in CL and such
<abu[7]> Yeah
<abu[7]> Sometimes you need to assign values simultaneously
<geri> hmm
<abu[7]> Quite seldom I feel
<geri> well yeah, docs say let does it in parallel or something
<geri> iirc
<abu[7]> T
<abu[7]> Evals all values, ther assigns
<geri> can you drop an example of how to indent multiline let?
<geri> like 2+ bindings over multiple lines
<abu[7]> ok. let me search
<abu[7]> It is quite often in the base sources
<abu[7]> (vi 'cons)
<abu[7]> Even more in (vi 'need)
<abu[7]> or ranqe
<abu[7]> Most funs in the base sources do so
<geri> ah, you just indent it once more
<abu[7]> T
<geri> not very pretty but hey, at least its consistent logically
<abu[7]> I follow the rule of 'pp': If the size is > 12, I indent
<abu[7]> Even less pretty is 'cond' if too big
<abu[7]> It may indent twice
<abu[7]> because of the two parens in a clause
<geri> got examples?
<geri> "normal" cond looks nice
<abu[7]> difficult to search for
<abu[7]> I make up one
<geri> ah, so if theres like an and in condition
<abu[7]> right!
<abu[7]> foo and bar need to be indented twice
<geri> oh, pp looks at indent by how many open and non-closed parens are on previous line?
<abu[7]> on the current line, yes
<geri> that was the idea i had for writing the autoindent function
<geri> maybe better not like that :D
<geri> alrighty
<geri> gotta sleep
<geri> have fun
<abu[7]> Good night! ☺
geri has quit [Quit: ERC (IRC client for GNU Emacs 29.3)]
Guest80 has quit [Quit: Client closed]
lagash has joined #picolisp
beneroth has joined #picolisp
Guest58 has joined #picolisp