Counting occurences
in [Lisp]
|
Prev: Black-Jewish History FAQ - Is The Secret Relationship between blacks and jews a “hate literature”?
Next: which library to generate xml with namespaces?
From: RG on 20 Jun 2010 15:49 In article <hvllng$j2a$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)tfeb.org> wrote: > On 2010-06-20 16:41:01 +0100, RG said: > > If I want an actual hash table that > > is guaranteed to respect the size, rehash-size and rehash-threshold > > parameters, do I have to write my own? > > You certainly do: "The values of rehash-size and rehash-threshold do > not constrain the implementation to use any particular method for > computing when and by how much the size of hash-table should be > enlarged. Such decisions are implementation-dependent, and these values > only hints from the programmer to the implementation, and the > implementation is permitted to ignore them." > > Worth reading the spec before posting, I find. Worth reading the question before getting smug. Where did I specify that I wanted this behavior to be portable? The correct answer to my question is no, I do not have to write my own, I just have to find an implementation that doesn't avail itself of the spec's permission to ignore these parameters. rg
From: RG on 20 Jun 2010 16:03 In article <hvlmgr$m7o$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)tfeb.org> wrote: > On 2010-06-20 19:13:04 +0100, Tim Bradshaw said: > > > > Worth reading the spec before posting, I find. > > And since I now have a copy of it (sadly, Erik's copy) I'll go and read > that: arguing against Erann is like fighting porridge. I do not want to start an argument with a man who is no longer here to hold up his end of it, but since you chose to bring it up I will say that ad hominems are the last refuge of the scoundrel trying to defend an untenable position. I'll also say, since you chose to bring it up, that arguing with people here on CLL is often like arguing against creationists. Both will highlight certain facts while ignoring other facts, and freely context-switch between different sets of tacit assumptions, anything to avoid admitting even the slightest defect in their holy text (Genesis in the case of creationists, the ANSI spec in the case of Lispers). And then, of course, when backed into a corner both will resort to insults. rg
From: RG on 20 Jun 2010 16:15 In article <hvlm85$l74$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)tfeb.org> wrote: > On 2010-06-20 16:29:06 +0100, RG said: > > > There's a lot of data from programming as well. Languages that offer > > abstract maps as core constructs (e.g. Python, Javascript, PHP) seem to > > get more traction with beginners more than those that don't. > > Of course! Now I understand! JavaScript's popularity is due to > *abstract maps*, and nothing at all to do with it being built into > every web browser for the last 12 years. How foolish I have been! In another branch of this post I remarked that arguing with certain people here on CLL is like arguing with creationists. Here is a perfect example. I observe that languages with abstract maps are more popular with beginners than languages without them, and advance the hypothesis that there might be some kind of causal connection. The response is to arbitrarily zero in on one of three concrete data points, picking some OTHER factor that might also have contributed to this particular languages popularity (which, it is worth noting, doesn't apply to the other two data points, the ones that are being quietly ignored), and then implying that not only does this refute the original hypothesis, but that it does so so fully and completely that one doesn't even have to advance the argument, that mere ridicule of the other side suffices to make the point. There are more logical fallacies here than I have the patience to enumerate. rg
From: Bob Felts on 20 Jun 2010 17:09 RG <rNOSPAMon(a)flownet.com> wrote: > There are more logical fallacies here than I have the patience to > enumerate. Maybe a correct impelementation of the right abstraction would help you get it done within your patience threshold?
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 21 Jun 2010 08:01
Tim Bradshaw <tfb(a)tfeb.org> writes: > On 2010-06-20 16:29:06 +0100, RG said: > >> There's a lot of data from programming as well. Languages that offer >> abstract maps as core constructs (e.g. Python, Javascript, PHP) seem to >> get more traction with beginners more than those that don't. > > Of course! Now I understand! JavaScript's popularity is due to > *abstract maps*, and nothing at all to do with it being built into > every web browser for the last 12 years. How foolish I have been! By the way, nothing prevents us to provide browsers including ECL (and web servers providing CL scripts), apart perhaps the lack of time to do it... -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ |