On 12/09/13 21:13, Nicholas Leippe wrote:
Don't forget Clojurescript--all the power of clojure compiled into es5
javascript. Very interesting IMO.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
To be perfectly ho
Don't forget Clojurescript--all the power of clojure compiled into es5
javascript. Very interesting IMO.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
> I used a script that would emerge the packages that needed specific USE
flags on their own command lines
You're doing it wrong.
Set use flags for individual packages in /etc/portage/packing.use
Don't do:
# USE=foo emerge bar
*that's* asking for trouble.
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on
On Mon, Dec 9, Levi Pearson wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Eric Wald wrote:
>
>> The good news is that asynchronous primitives are much easier to treat
>> as a synchronous system than synchronous primitives are to morph into
>> asynch systems; the latter often involves either threads or
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Eric Wald wrote:
> Functional programming is the notion that functions (almost) never have
> side effects. Think Haskell. It makes mathematicians happy, because it
> enables them to prove that programs are correct, but it requires even
> more brain warping and p
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 7:41 PM, S. Dale Morrey wrote:
> One thing that I admit I am struggling with, is the idea of functions not
> returning values. Obviously, this isn't a limitation in the language
> itself and more a matter of style. But it seems like most of the libs I'm
> working with want
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM, S. Dale Morrey wrote:
> Now don't get me wrong. I'm hardly a javascript noob. I was writing
> Ajax-like website helpers scripts before we ever coined the terms Comet or
> Ajax. Nevertheless I've always viewed it as a tool for making shiny bits
> and/or using it
I read that back in 2007, and I was surprised at the time, but he was right.
—Dave
On Dec 9, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Mike Moore wrote:
> Anyone remember this?
>
> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Yes indee
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Mike Moore wrote:
> Anyone remember this?
>
> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
>
>
I don't know if I read that back in 2007, but it's pretty good.
I'm especially inclined to agree with his assessment of D. It is too bad
that D hasn't
Anyone remember this?
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> Yes indeed. The evolution of JavaScript from red-headed stepchild to its
> present state has been a surprising journey.
>
> I predict a day in the not-too-di
10 matches
Mail list logo