Re: [Factor-talk] callbacks in Factor?
Hi cw, I think that isn't the right commit to look at -- all it did was chmod -x *.factor. The right commit is probably this one which created the file: https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/commit/9bd38767ab4b61d24d46bf9f2ca5a2a9a58ccd79 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:42 PM, CW Alston cwalsto...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Factoristas - Pursuing my interest in Factor's continuations capabilities, I'm checking out the callbacks vocabulary. On github I see that callbacks.factor has been moved out of the source tree, from furnace.callbacks into /unmaintained/cont-responder/, with the admonition Factor source files should not be executable. Can anyone lay out the issues standing in the way here? Thanks kindly, ~cw -- *~ Memento Amori* -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] callbacks in Factor?
Hi John - Yes, the commit you point to (Big web framework refactoring of 2008) seems to be the the historical moment when the callbacks vocab was moved from extra/furnace/callbacks/ to unmaintained/: *13 * extra/furnace/callbacks/callbacks.factor → unmaintained/cont-responder/callbacks.factor But I'm trying to understand just why the callback code was sidelined. Note that I'm running OS X 10.6.8, thus grabbed the 7 February build with: git clone https://github.com/slavapestov/factor.git cd factor ./build-support/factor.sh update So I have the unmaintained directory in my Factor. The source for callbacks is now there, in unmaintained/cont-responder/, although the preamble of callbacks.factor still places it IN: furnace.callbacks. Question is, did the callbacks code break in the framework refactoring, or is it deprecated for security reasons (ergo the the admonition Factor source files should not be executable)? Or should callbacks not be used in responders for some other reason, e.g., callcc1 in responders considered harmful? Or does the callbacks vocab just need more work to integrate it back into the updated Furnace framework? I do find a reference to a Factor cont-responder using callcc0/1 in a 2004 post by Chris Double http://double.co.nz/factor/cont-responder.factor. Is there some connection with this old work and the current state of the Furnace framework? Interesting. Puzzling! Any insights welcome. Thanks, ~cw On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:20 AM, John Benediktsson mrj...@gmail.com wrote: Hi cw, I think that isn't the right commit to look at -- all it did was chmod -x *.factor. The right commit is probably this one which created the file: https://github.com/slavapestov/factor/commit/9bd38767ab4b61d24d46bf9f2ca5a2a9a58ccd79 On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 11:42 PM, CW Alston cwalsto...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Factoristas - Pursuing my interest in Factor's continuations capabilities, I'm checking out the callbacks vocabulary. On github I see that callbacks.factor has been moved out of the source tree, from furnace.callbacks into /unmaintained/cont-responder/, with the admonition Factor source files should not be executable. Can anyone lay out the issues standing in the way here? Thanks kindly, ~cw -- *~ Memento Amori* -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb ___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk -- *~ Memento Amori* -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] callbacks in Factor?
Hi Chris - Oh, I see. I didn't grasp what 'conversation' and 'asides' were really up to! I'll turn my attention there. Furnace is gonna take a while to absorb; so many moving parts! Onward. Thanks! ~cw On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Chris Double chris.dou...@double.co.nzwrote: On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:45 PM, CW Alston cwalsto...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting. Puzzling! Any insights welcome. IIRC It was deprecated because the new Furnace framework provided the same functionality in the 'asides' and 'conversation' features. There seemed no point maintaining two frameworks. Chris. -- http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz -- *~ Memento Amori* -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] matrices
Dear Doug, Humbly request that your next planet-factor blog post be about arrays.shaped. Need some examples to get started. Shaped arrays could be an important building block in the language, it seems. Cheers, Leonard -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
Re: [Factor-talk] matrices
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:23 PM, John Benediktsson mrj...@gmail.com wrote: I think you'd want virtual sequences as well, so getrow wouldn't necessary copy data. Doing the API right would involve walking through various numerical programming examples. We'd love any contributions you'd want to make! Thanks, John. A neat idea might be to implement two versions of the Laplace expansion... one as BFS and one as DFS. The BFS version would do the regular expansion by copying data. The DFS version could be a virtual sequence. Each element in the sequence is a leaf node in the tree of the Laplace expansion. The DFS version would save space, at the expense of redundant calculations. - Leonard -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb___ Factor-talk mailing list Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
