A compiler takes source codes and turns them into assembler code. That's lines of human-readable machine instruction mnemonics (for example, "Copy from here to here." "Is that bigger than zero?"). The assembler takes those lines and turns them into machine instructions, a sequence of binary numbers.
Finding the difference between two huge gobs of binary numbers is difficult. Instead, they turn the binary numbers back into lines of mnemonics and use a algorithm that finds the difference between two huge listings of mnemonics.
That method is easier because the listings of a program that has been changed slightly can be very similar to the listing of a unmodified program. That has to do with how compilers work.
This augmented reality is prominently featured in William Gibson's novel Spook Country. I was talking to a suit about this idea just a couple of weeks ago. He suggested that it was worthwhile pursuing. Now that they seem to have done that, I'm discouraged. Fuck, I'm always too late...:(
Isn't adding surveillance to monitor a group a punishment of said group? One student flips out and goes on a killing spree, therefore all other students need to be monitored from now on -- that seems like a treatment, not a cure, for the problem.
It isn't. That's why 'if' is a special operator in Lisp. You *could* write it in the former style, but the second is much more readable: syntactic sugar. There's no advantage of doing it the difficult way. Except, maybe, that you can now pass true and false around as functions.:-)
BTW, why do you think that defining true and false as functions makes them 'only extremely locally true'? If you have a predicate, the only outcome is either true or false.
You wrote something accidentally insightful. Look at the following expression: (if (> 3 2) 5 4) which obviously evaluates to 5. But you know what? You can eliminate the if operator entirely if you let > (and any other predicate) return a two-ary function: (define true (x y) (x)) (define false (x y) (y)) and stuff the arguments into separate functions for deferred evaluation: ((> 3 2) (lambda () 5) (lambda () 4)) :-)
The problem here, and the thing that makes it outrageous, is that publisher (Universal Edition) threatened to obtain a "judgement" against the guy in Europe - which then (according to UE's version of Canadian law, which may or may not be entirely accurate) would be enforceable against the guy in Canada. I don't know about you, but I find that kinda fucked up.
Slashdot Mirror
A compiler takes source codes and turns them into assembler code. That's lines of human-readable machine instruction mnemonics (for example, "Copy from here to here." "Is that bigger than zero?"). The assembler takes those lines and turns them into machine instructions, a sequence of binary numbers.
Finding the difference between two huge gobs of binary numbers is difficult. Instead, they turn the binary numbers back into lines of mnemonics and use a algorithm that finds the difference between two huge listings of mnemonics.
That method is easier because the listings of a program that has been changed slightly can be very similar to the listing of a unmodified program. That has to do with how compilers work.
Capiche? ;)
This augmented reality is prominently featured in William Gibson's novel Spook Country. I was talking to a suit about this idea just a couple of weeks ago. He suggested that it was worthwhile pursuing. Now that they seem to have done that, I'm discouraged. Fuck, I'm always too late... :(
90% of the student population isn't interested in math because it's taught in the way and by the people he talks about in his text.
*insert snide comment about reading comprehension here*
En-crypt-ion!!
Holy moly, if I had mod points I'd mod you up instead. That's a great resource. Thanks!
LAlALala, wooooooot. Kinda ironic that this message is released on frikkin' St. Paddy's Day. D:
So? It also allows everybody else to see what they are doing.
Isn't adding surveillance to monitor a group a punishment of said group? One student flips out and goes on a killing spree, therefore all other students need to be monitored from now on -- that seems like a treatment, not a cure, for the problem.
Here Mr Stallman, here Mr. Torvalds -- have some money to write a better Operating System for us.
There, fixed that for you.
You might want to consider donating to the aforementioned makers of the software.
Hear, hear. I'm on my third computer in five years and it's still compiling KDE!
</joke>
With regards to your object theory, Project Xanadu by Ted Nelson had that idea in 1960. :-)
And that's why atomic reactors are munitions. :-)
It isn't. That's why 'if' is a special operator in Lisp. You *could* write it in the former style, but the second is much more readable: syntactic sugar. There's no advantage of doing it the difficult way. Except, maybe, that you can now pass true and false around as functions. :-)
BTW, why do you think that defining true and false as functions makes them 'only extremely locally true'? If you have a predicate, the only outcome is either true or false.
(if (> 3 2) 5 4)
which obviously evaluates to 5. But you know what? You can eliminate the if operator entirely if you let > (and any other predicate) return a two-ary function:
(define true (x y) (x))
(define false (x y) (y))
and stuff the arguments into separate functions for deferred evaluation:
((> 3 2) (lambda () 5) (lambda () 4))
Why won't this meme die already?
There is also AddAll, a international search engine for new and used books. :)
I thought 'M' stood for 'minor'! :-)
Go back to bed.
welp! wishful whoaing with wicked women will woe waists!