Lisp

Is there a lisp with manual memory management? I.e. with the ability to choose between pass-by-value and pass-by-ref, to free and allocate memory, to choose what gets allocated on heap, stack, registers, to choose the memory layout of structs, etc?

Why don't you just start by writing a code analyzer that (fatally) complains on memory whose temporal extent it cannot resolve?

>>2
It shouldn't fatally complain, just as a warning. And the language should support extent annotations like in Rust. But that's beside the point. Is there a Lisp without GC? - that's the question.

1. remove useless shit like lambda
2. write a thing that transforms your sexps into c
3. write a script that automatically compiles it

>>3
You can call c from lisp.

http://www.sbcl.org/manual/index.html#Foreign-Function-Interface
http://common-lisp.net/project/cffi/ if you want it to be portable
http://www.cliki.net/FFI ffis for other languages

and you can inline C in chicken scheme. chicken scheme is the shit.
http://www.call-cc.org/

The interpreted schemes each have their own ffi but there isn't a library to unify them like cffi.

>>4

1. remove useless shit like lambda

Are you serious?

>>6
Ultimately, closures are the way to go. Lambdas are for the intellectually lazy.

>>5
No, I don't want C, I want a Lisp with manual memory management.

>>1

Yes. There are a lot of Lisps of all kinds. There was even a guy, who mapped a Java's syntax to SEXPs, which allowed him to avoid all the boilerplate, while still producing enterprise quality code.

>>7
Lambdas are closures. What the fuck.

>>10
Actually lambda is the constructor for the function data type, and a closure is a function with free variables.
That is to say, >>7 doesn't know jack shit.

>>11

the function data type

Unityped Lithp degenerates don't realize that there cannot be "the" one and only function datatype.

>>10
Lambdas are not closures because they are not closed under endotensor multiplication except for the degenerate case. That is to say, the set of all lambdas form a commutative ring, while true closures form a commutative field. Furthermore, the transformation T: C >L is onto, but not injective, meaning that while every lambda has an associated closure form, not every closure can be a lambda.

>>13
Fuck off nerd or I'll baet the fuck out of you.

>>13

endotensor multiplication

What the fuck is that? I just get russian shit when I google it.

>>15
An endotensor is a tensor of monoid endofunctor that maps to it's own category. Multiplication in that field is defined as successive recursive function calls (an example of a algebraic functions doing this: f(f(f(...f(x)...))); note that if f() is the successor function then this defines addition for the field of real numbers).

>>16
autism

>>16
Wow, that actually makes sense. And I thought you were just pulling those niggers' legs here.

>>13
:%s/onto/surjective/

>>13
CS grad or what?

Could anyone help me im writing a lisp reading in R5RS scheme, howo should I throw exceptions when i get a parse error? And how do I get the line number from the input stream?

>>19
regex a shit

>>16
Shalom, hymie! Shalom, hymie! Biggest shalom ever to the biggest kike on /prog/.

>>20
Oh yes, I have a PhD in Math, Comparitive Literature, and working in my PhD in CS. I'd post the papers with proof of what I'm talking about, but Abelson-san personally murdered the last person to do that.

>>16
Never heard of endotensor. You working on a paper of some sort?

>>25

PhD in math
recites entire page of garbage jargon that means nothing at all

looks about right

>>25

Comparative literature (sometimes abbreviated "Comp. lit.," or referred to as Global or World Literature) is an academic field dealing with the literature of two or more different linguistic, cultural or nation groups.

>not studying the classics or english
Shalom, kike!

>>27,28
/g/ is the other way.

>>29
How would someone from /g/ know about shalom and le stylized exclamation mark?

>>30
Through osmosis while he shits up /prog/ for several months.

>>26
Yes, I discovered it. It is my doctoral dissertation. My mentor says that it's Field's Medal material.

>>16
All this ABSTRACT BULLSHITE and you write ``it's own category'' in the same post?

>>33
Hey faggot, whose the one with 2.8 PhD's here? I just invented endotensor theory without even trying; if I use something, it is obviously correct. Besides that, Archimedes spoke shitty English, but I don't see you shitting all over his primitive differential calculus for that! Why am I the one being singled out for abuse here? I guess that it is true that a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country.

>>34
That isn't how Ph.Ds work, faggot. And you're just making shit up. Gotta prove it somehow. No such thing as ``endotensor'' or something about it would show up on google that isn't a person's name.

>>35
I've already explained in this very thread how they work in the simplest terms possible. Can you try to articulate what it is that you don't understand so that I can help you, please?

Also, please stop with the irrelevant attacks based on grammar. If you think that there is a problem with the underlying math concepts, feel free to comment on it, but keep in mind that this is not a published paper or an academic environment where precise mathematical rigor is practical. Also keep in mind that I contribute to this board out of the goodness of my heart and that I gain nothing out of this, please respect that my time is valuable and appreciate the fact that I have elected to allot a portion of it to you.

>>34,36
I've only posted once in this thread and >>35-kun is not attacking your grammar. I was just making a pointless remark as a joke. Please stop taking every single post you read on the Internet as a personal attack.

>>37
I accept your apology.

>>36
I'm gonna find your paper when you publish it and post your name and university page here. And facebook/linkedin if you have them, motherfucker.

>>39
I do not understand: is that supposed to threaten me? Should I also be worried that you might call for /b/lackup and have dozens of pizzas sent to my house? Should I fear that my /prog/ students who I have so generously educated are going to find my phone number and full up my voice mail box?

No, I think not. I have nothing to fear from you. I do, however, think that you should return to /g/ and practice your ANONYMOUS IS LEGION bravado there a bit more. Or don't. It is never to late to improve yourself.

>>40
Why does one plus one equal two?

>>41
Because the accepted axioms applied to the real numbers concludes so. In Peano arithmetic, from which basic arithmetic gets it's theoretical underpinnings (which is itself derived from numer theory, set theory, and logic), the existence of a successor function, which returns the immediate value that proceeds the given value in the set of natural numbers, is presumed. The addition operator in the form of a+b is taken to mean that the successor of a is composed b times. With 1+1, the successor function is applied once to 1, which results in the immeditate successor, which is 2. Once this is derived from the natural numbers, it can be trivially extended to many other fields, such as C.

I hope that this has enlightened you a bit!

>>42
I thought endotensors in R always produced homomorphisms that remain hylomorphic in Q, ie, the commutative ring is the set of endofunctors such that all anamorphic catamorphisms are homoiconic in L. What you are saying suggests that the anamorphic catamorphisms are surjective instead of homoiconic.

>>43
Mother functor, you overloaded >>42 with your monads

>>42
NOT HIM BUT THANKS

>>43
Whoa, whoa, whoa! How did you get this far off base? Firstly, while it is true that the projections of all first class, ordered endotensors onto Rⁿ spans the set of of the contravariants of all such endotensors, but that in no way implies homoiconicity. Homoicinicity is unrelated to the study of endotensors, and quite honestly, I believe that it is harmful to the study of endofunctors as well, as it assumes the axiom of free choice when such an assumption is unnecessary for purely theoretical research.

Secondly, the set eigentensors of the endotensor identity matrix have infinite cardnality. This implies that it must be surjective. Granted, this is a proof by contraindication, but producing a formal proof has been shown to be NP-hard.

Lastly, you make a good point the hylomorphic properties of the catamorphic transformations. Indeed, it was one asked by my mentor early on. The solution lies in considering finite automata. The intersect of one regular language with another is itself a regular language. Since endotensors are not regular languages, nor are they even in the subset of context free grammars that do not forbid birecursion, they are not bound by this restriction. Thus, they are Turing complete yet also Godel incomplete. Hence the computability of the individual elements of the commutative field.

Interestingly enough, this property is the dividing difference between lambdas and closures.

>>44
No he didn't, I was taking a shower. Why is everyone always ready to assume the worst? Anyway, I have I go to bed. Tommorrow I will begin lecturing a summer course as a guest lecturer at MIT, and after that I'm going to give a talk about Touhou and it's place in Asian-American literature and why Reimu should take a more proactive approach to governance at Harvard the next day. I'll still try to answer questions here when not being bombarded with them by students in real life though.

>>45
Always feels great to eliminate a little ignorance in the world.

>>46
Now THAT is quality shitposting

>>47 Don't be such a cretin. >>46-sama is mostly right, but has he considered whether commutative monomorphs in R can also be considered adjoint endomorphisms in the set of all computable hylomorphisms, since according to the contraindication provided, the eigentensors that constrain the hylomorphisms remain surjective, thus remaining a preadditive eigenfunctor.

>>48
The fuck, you guys are making shit up.

eigenfunctor
endotensor

Where the fuck do these terms exist in the literature?

>>49
Come on man. The fact that you ask that question seriously proves that category theory is an unfalsifiable, incomprehensible cancer that has infected computer science.

http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.html

Thanks Haskell dickheads. Thanks.

>>50
Falsification is for simple minds (aka: atheists).

hurr i cant see or touch it then it must not be real!

God's existence is proved by the fact that we managed to discover particles with these retards hanging around.

>>50,51
You two are arguing like a pair of non-commutative anamorphic epifunctors, if you catch my drift. >>50-kun, open your eyes, and don't let privileged rape culture of so-called "falsifiable" statements be your only experience of computer science. The patriarchy has blinkered your vision. >>51, we must smash the non-eigenfunctor computing catamorphic hylocaust denying goyim field and force them to accept anamorphic diversity.

>>51
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█ ___ █
█ // 7 █
█ (_,_/\ WORSHIP THIS █
█ \ \ YOUR THROBBING GOD █
█ \ \ █
█ _\ \__ █
█ ( \ ) █
█ \___\___/ █
█ █
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

>>52
"Haskell hacker and intersectional feminist in training"

I lieralyl puked so hard

>>54
Please don't abuse the word ``literally''.

>>55
Please don't abuse the word ``abuse''. Think about the children who have been sexually abused, you chauvinistic white male PIG.

How do I implement endotensors in Haskell?

>>56
you forgot the thin, pedophile, cis scum

>>57
The same way you would implement an infinite reduction of an eigenfold.

>>59
Do you mean a heterogeneous eigenfold or the generalized epiflux form?

>>60
No, the epiflux form within a commutative endotensor under R.

>>61
I asked for tips on how to implement endotensors in Haskell and you tell me to use endotensors to implement them! is this supposed to be some sort of zen? Because I don't find it profound.

Fine, I guess it would be best to figure it out myself. This int exactly beginner work though. I'll try implementing the epiflux z-network for now. Using the inner Euclidian product seems better (faster, more efficient) at normalizing the nodes. Can you at least tell me of I'm on the right track here?

>>62
I made that shit up, I don't even know calculus.

>>63
Imposter! BACK TO /g/ PLEASE