Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Not all in the implementation (Score 1) 252

by tuffy (#49012591) Attached to: AP Test's Recursion Examples: An Exercise In Awkwardness

That's what I'm saying though, it's not all in the implementation, tail call recursion relies pretty heavily on the code being set up (and kept up) properly so that it is possible.

Writing code such that the last call in the function is always another call to itself isn't some deep mystery, though. The only question is whether the language is guaranteed to optimize that case.

Um, is that not sneaking in a normal iterative loop with a conditional check that's always true? What would be the difference from the code that generates and "while (1 == 1)"?

Since Haskell has no built-in "while" statement as such, you're going to need to either write an explicit recursive loop or just use one that's already been pre-built for running some action forever. It's just more obvious what's going on by using the latter.

Comment: Re:I'm weary of recursion (Score 1) 252

by tuffy (#49012317) Attached to: AP Test's Recursion Examples: An Exercise In Awkwardness

Of course, in someplace like Haskell one can just use the "forever" function which loops some action forever rather than implementing an explicit tail-call loop and making sure to get it right. I'm just saying that recursion isn't guaranteed to blow up one's stack in all cases - it's all in the implementation.

Comment: Re:Well, that's cool I guess (Score 1) 125

by tuffy (#48251937) Attached to: It's Official: HTML5 Is a W3C Standard
Browsers pushing stuff outside the standard may have given us the <marquee> and <blink> tags, but it also gave us the <table> tag. The good thing about having a standards body is that it can incorporate the useful stuff into the next standard while (hopefully) relegating the junk to permanent outcast status.

Comment: Re:OS X (Score 1) 611

by tuffy (#47110119) Attached to: Which desktop environment do you like the best?

I go back and forth between OS X and Linux daily and a lot of OS X's window management is still sub-par. Its virtual desktop management still needs work, sloppy focus is never going to be an option, and hacks for tiling window management are about as terrible as one would expect.

It has its good points, but its double-buffered windows and nice aesthetics aren't enough to make me want to use OS X full-time while Linux environments do things better.

Comment: Re:most lego's are a rip off (Score 3, Informative) 355

by tuffy (#46771729) Attached to: Kids Can Swipe a Screen But Can't Use LEGOs

To be honest, I'm really disappointed with the modern lego sets. When I was a kid, I had the city sets, and for the most part they were buildings that you made from brick-shaped bricks with only a few uniquely molded parts for that set. Today there's barely any blocks. They're all cross-licensed tie-ins with movies or cartoons, and so in order to get the assembled set to look like something from The Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, 75% of the blocks are special molds.

There's almost no point in it being a lego toy, because you're just assembling a crude model of an x-wing, and the only thing you can make with the set is...an x-wing. Why not just...play with a model x-wing?

This is completely wrong. Here's the instructions to the latest X-Wing. Flip to the back and count the number of "special molds" yourself. Do you see anything in there that can't be used for anything but an X-Wing?

Comment: Re:Like photo printers (Score 1) 400

by tuffy (#46611097) Attached to: The 3D Economy &mdash; What Happens When Everyone Prints Their Own Shoes?

Hardly anybody prints their photos at all these days since people just stick them on the interwebs, but I think the basic argument is sound. Economics of scale mean that it'll likely always be cheaper to buy widgets from some company who cranks them out in the millions than trying to buy a bunch of equipment to print them at home.

Comment: Re:Turn the question in the right direction (Score 3, Informative) 432

by tuffy (#45915831) Attached to: Why Do Projects Continue To Support Old Python Releases?

Not that. PHP's only real problems are inconsistent naming and parameter order. (Interestingly enough, a problem partially shared by python in spite of PEP 8) Unlike Python, it doesn't suffer from any serious design flaws.

Is this some kind of joke? Python's use of syntactically-significant whitespace is not in the same league as all the issues PHP has.

The tao that can be tar(1)ed is not the entire Tao. The path that can be specified is not the Full Path.