17 entries in 0.504s
deedbot: ave1 rated spyked 2 << wrote a
scheme in
Ada ave1: !!rate spyked 2 wrote a
scheme in
Ada mircea_popescu: asciilifeform no but this is my point. "why are you using emacs when in fact trb will need
ada scheme anyway and then you could just have a musl-gnat nerwmacs" ?
caaddr: instead we have... what do we have? we have the blockchain but we're still using dns. we have common lisp but we're still using
scheme, or, worse, clojure. we have
ada but we're using rust. "we" being "we the people", as in the redditoid masses
mircea_popescu: and the supersecret future plan of factory -> vsli ->
ada -> lisp ->
scheme / numeric algebra / stuff is busted open by careless accidental coversations in a public channel
mircea_popescu: anyway, re earlier discussion, i guess it'd be worth belabouring the point that nothing therein contained is an argument against using
ada. it's still a great technical solution, for bounds checking, for other reasons, it's still a great practical solution, for native linkability with c object code, for other reasons. same stands for
scheme, still best option for a scripting language for bitcoind.
phf: asciilifeform: recall that i spent probably most time here on tinyscheme going as far as writing swank integration and unreleased bignums, i'm saying that you go through phases of "this is how we solve bitcoin". i grok the value of
ada, and i grok the value of
scheme, but neither are alternative-less. in fact with the amount of skill available, simply hacking on btc consistently we would've been further along
phf: but first we port symbolics
ada to
scheme-81, so we can compile trb with symbolics
ada mircea_popescu: mod6> bunch of us have been learning
scheme and
Ada << hey, time spent retooling the shop is still work
mod6: bunch of us have been learning
scheme and
Ada jurov: but in the course of this, i got an idea, is there a small lisp/
scheme implemented in
ada?