c is shit

> c is shit
> go sucks

try haskell, faggot

Other urls found in this thread:

xahlee.info/comp/Common_Lisp_quotations.html
clojuredocs.org/clojure.core/for,
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Aside from the lack of generics, what's wrong with Go?

Unemployed autists on Sup Forums think they are above using it because it's not esoteric enough.

what has go on lua?

Aside from lack of anything innovative, [pause for GC], most programmers don't feel the need to use an inferior language to the one they're already using.

>pause for GC
That meme is only a few years out of date.

it's literally like 1990's java

it's complete shit and literally inferior in every conceivable way to java 9.

i have no fucking clue why Go is so nextgen to some of these fucking brainlet retards. maybe because it's "neue" and it's google.

protip, google langs are shit or massive memes. Go is no different.

I just looked it up and I found out that GC pauses used to be even longer than they are now. Didn't realize until you told me that.

but lisp is better

Scheme is better

tfw have to learn F# for classes. WHY IS THIS SO HARD IT SUCKS I HATE IT

>haskell, so quicksort runs 20x slower than C
ayylmao.

Just learn Clojure

scheme is lisp you retard

Scheme is better though
Lisp-2 dialects are legacy mistakes

You can make quicksort in Haskell just as fast if you're fine using mutable vectors and making your code ugly.

This is what I don't like about Haskell
It's elegant and expressive but it's forcing a particular programming style
Use Scheme

> fine using mutable vectors and making your code ugly.

Thats the fucking point, I know this thread is a bait but you can't compare a functional language with an imperative , structured one, they target different problems.

>everyone is learning interesting languages like F# and Haskell in college
>meanwhile I have shitty Visual Basic and PHP classes instead

Haskell hasn't contributed to anything, it's shit. C on the other hand is widely used and has created foundations and basically all shit you see. Haskell is a sad attempt and will never be close to C.

I hate lisp like languages, things like cdr makes feel I am coding in a useless language because needs a lot of built in functions made in other language in that case I prefer logic programming in Prolog which is also small, elegant and has pattern matching.

At least you could have a job and merchantable skills once you graduate and you won't have to shitpost on Sup Forums

Just teach it to yourself nerd. If you only use what your classes teach you you'll end up knowing jack shit.

> (I (hate (lisp (like (languages)))))
Sup Forums "lol python significant whitespace" is a meme forgot lisp parens? smdh

Isn't this more lisp like?
>(hate I (languages '(lisp like)))

do not remind me fucking parentheses, in C like there is a fight between { or \n{ , but in lisp like languages the ((((((((( its a fucking joke , you really need a high level of autism, the inception of autism, autism inside autism inside autism ,to claim that crappy syntax elegant.

(defn vrange2 [n]
(loop [i 0 v (transient [])]
(if (< i n)
(recur (inc i) (conj! v i))
(persistent! v))))

What problems do each of them solve? I always heard functional fanboys saying that everything should be functional because it makes software completely safe, modular, and structural.

I already "know" a few programming languages, but the problem is that I have to waste my time watching those classes if I want to graduate.

I find lisp syntax the most elegant because it isn't a keyword and symbol soup
If it had Haskell's pattern matching it would be absolutely perfect

you use haskell when you wanna spend most of your time telling to the computer what to do instead to tell it how to do it.

You can check the huge difference implementing something like quicksort in a pure functional or constraint based language vs an imperative one.

Use paredit mode and make your parens effectively invisible. Helps to feel like you're just navigating a tree and doing insert/delete at some points.

Golang is god tier not because its edgy or fancy but because it just werks. Used to the hate go and its forced formatting but after using it for a couple projects I love it. Literally almost everything I write just works the way I thought it would first time. Not sure what exactly it is but its incredible.

Also the way the build system is brain dead simple and easy, static binaries, is great.

If you want at alternative to Go, look at OCaml and Crystal, not Haskell.

Lisp machines would take minutes collecting garbage.

It's a shame most everyone wants to see a degree because college is such a waste of time and money if you're even remotely self-motivated.

Comparing 1987 machines to 2017 technology is not fair user.

Sure. I'm just pointing out that pauses are inherently a thing with GC. The best you can do is make them short and/or predictable.

What makes scheme better than CL

Single namespace
No legacy shit
Minimal language specification
SICP
xahlee.info/comp/Common_Lisp_quotations.html

Go back to washing dishes, Xah Lee.

What do you write?

Seriously, what's the loop macro equivalent in Scheme
Also, why didn't the loop macro include a continue loop keyword

>tagbody & go
how about no

>what's the loop macro equivalent in Scheme
Scheme is DIY. Write/find/port one. Clojure comes standard with clojuredocs.org/clojure.core/for, though.

>Having separate “value cells” and “function cells” (to use the “street language” way of saying it) was one of the most unfortuanate issues
>Daniel Weinreb

but this is a good thing lmao
just cause it kills readability isn't a good argument

>DIY
lmao no I"m not a cfag

>programming in a write-only language

if only scheme had an implementation that was convenient and not bloated

What is wrong with CHICKEN, Chibi Scheme, or Chez?

It doesn't have an ncurses API

Which one?

All of them.
How am I supposed to use Scheme to write my Sup Forums ncurses browser when non of them a good library.
Common Lisp at least has croatoan.

CHICKEN has ncurses bindings, as does Chez. In fact, I think you need ncurses to compile Chez. Level up your research skills, user.

The only one I know if is RACKET


So I'm kinda new to programming and I'm trying working through CL

should I go to Scheme? Is it a better intro? whats the differences

learn24chan

tinyscheme

yeah but theyre just bindings, not a library

I think you're doing the Cunningham's Law thing, so I am not going to help you.

huh

I seriously can't find the one for chez.

Only if you're a brainlet

SO WHICH IS BETTER?
SCHEME OR COMMON LISP?

CL is just more practical and scheme is only good to teach someone a lisp

...

It is elegant because it is consistent, as opposed to the arbitrary heterogenous syntax of C-like languages. I'm not saying LISP is a better language than those languages, but the syntax certainly is neater.

But Chicken Scheme seems more feature rich and neater then Common Lisp
Not to mention that it compiles to C directly

But isnt that a contradiction? CL is the one that has more things built in with Scheme being more minimal

im on windows i dont think chicken scheme works

Should I learn Haskell? I'm already employed so don't worry about that.

Chicken Scheme has a lot of extensions.

If you want to feel like you wanna kill yourself, then yes.
>feel like I've already learned the basics
>go to codefights and try the challenges
>some are hard but I manage
>get to a simple program that would only take a few lines in imperative programming
>can't do it because I exceed the time limit
>wtf
>see the solutions
>mfw

its genuinely too hard for me to figure out

i guess im stuck with cl,,,

if you want to reduce parentheses make more high order functions do you even lambda calculus

seems simple desu
cl sbcl and quickload are too inconvenient for me
binaries are also at least 60mb since it has to have sbcl embeded

the arch chicken package comes with about 6 programs, one of them being chicken-install
plus sicp is scheme

I dont know what to do please help me

arent cl and scheme same shit

I like Haskell. Monads make continuations a joy to use.

>Anonymous 11/04/17(Sat)19:28:56 No.63
You sound like a brainlet, but yeah, it's a completely different way to program that you will have to get used to

binary size is irrelevant in 2017

OCaml has more real world value, Haskell is fun, though.

You can apply this to most posts on Sup Forums

>hes okay with 20 mb hello world binaries