On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:22:35 PM UTC-6, Ashish Negi wrote:
>
> I am reading joy of clojure. In the "forward to second edition" William E
> Byrd and Daniel P Firedman says :
>
>
>
> *As with recursion, the art of defining little languages encourages—and
> rewards—wishful thinking. You m
One common problem we deal with in programming goes like this:
I have certain inputs. I desire a certain output. What function (or
combination of functions) will give me the desired output?
Since a relation makes no distinction between "inputs" and "outputs",
relational programming is one way
Gary - that was great to read. Thanks ;-)
On 23 June 2016 at 08:18, Gary Verhaegen wrote:
> In functional programming, you work with functions. Functions have a
> well-defined list of inputs and a single output. So you can say of the
> function cons, for example, that it takes as input a value an
In functional programming, you work with functions. Functions have a
well-defined list of inputs and a single output. So you can say of the
function cons, for example, that it takes as input a value and a list,
and yields as output a new list with the value prepended to the given
list; for example
Running "backwards" here pertains to logic/relational programming in
MiniKanren/core.logic style. Roughly here programs are expressed in terms
of relations between the input and output. So given an input and an output
query you'll run it forwards and by making the input itself a variable with
a fix
I am reading joy of clojure. In the "forward to second edition" William E
Byrd and Daniel P Firedman says :
*As with recursion, the art of defining little languages encourages—and
rewards—wishful thinking. You might think to yourself, “If only I had a
language for expressing the rules for leg
