A little F# for you
-
I've been studying F# a lot recently and find it really mind-bending. Tomas Petricek, a fellow CPian, let me sneak preview his series of F# articles and they are very good. I took one of his examples and modified it a bit. The following code displays "sum = 6", but how that happens is other-worldly...check it out:
#light
let rec sum nums =
match nums with
| head::tail -> head + sum(tail)
| [] -> 0
printf "sum = %i" (sum [1; 2; 3])Weird, eh? F# is coooool. :cool:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
Looks like a bastardization of dBase2 and interpreted basic.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Chris Maunder wrote:
(Where's the sarcasm icon when I need it)
I think you need more help with the site - it's become obvious that we can't rely on you to think of everything. :)
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001As XP says: There are not sufficient resources to run that API.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
That looks like a huge advancement in clarity and code maintainability. (Where's the sarcasm icon when I need it)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
That looks like a huge advancement in clarity and code maintainability.
Hahaha. Yeah right. I get the feeling that F# isn't going to become a "mainstream" .NET language anytime soon. It's out there: far, far out there. It has virtues different from clarity and code maintainability. I'm just a newbie so don't quote me, but supposedly using F# as a functional programming language allows you to more easily write code which can be parallelized across multiple processors or cores. I'm interested to see how to do that, because I think that's an important aspect of modern software design.
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
That looks like a huge advancement in clarity and code maintainability. (Where's the sarcasm icon when I need it)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I don't know....it seems a little too childish and easy. 001010101110101010010101110110111010100101101001010100101010110 111010010101110101011011011011100100100100101001001011010100101 011010100101001010001011010010110111101001010010000010101001010 101011110101111010100010111011111001000101010001010101001010101 There! That's much better. :cool: Uh....don't try and use that, by the way. ;P
Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du, yeah Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du, yeah
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
That looks like a huge advancement in clarity and code maintainability.
Hahaha. Yeah right. I get the feeling that F# isn't going to become a "mainstream" .NET language anytime soon. It's out there: far, far out there. It has virtues different from clarity and code maintainability. I'm just a newbie so don't quote me, but supposedly using F# as a functional programming language allows you to more easily write code which can be parallelized across multiple processors or cores. I'm interested to see how to do that, because I think that's an important aspect of modern software design.
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
The daft thing is that they could have designed the syntax to be clear and maintainable, but instead went down the path of ghastly and even more ghastly.
Me: Can you see the "up" arrow? User:Errr...ummm....no. Me: Can you see an arrow that points upwards? User: Oh yes, I see it now! -Excerpt from a support call taken by me, 08/31/2007
-
:omg: Whoa!
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Steve Echols wrote:
Whoa!
My sentiments exactly! The hardest part about learning F#, for me, is the fact that it has both new syntax and new concepts (well, new for me anyways). I must say, though, that I haven't had this much geeky fun in a long time! There's nothing better than freeing your mind a little bit, and thinking about things from a totally different perspective. :-D
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
Looks like a bastardization of dBase2 and interpreted basic.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Looks like a bastardization of dBase2 and interpreted basic.
Something tells me that you won't be an F# "early adopter." :)
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
Looks like a bastardization of dBase2 and interpreted basic.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001Oh boy, looks sure can be deceiving...
-
I don't know....it seems a little too childish and easy. 001010101110101010010101110110111010100101101001010100101010110 111010010101110101011011011011100100100100101001001011010100101 011010100101001010001011010010110111101001010010000010101001010 101011110101111010100010111011111001000101010001010101001010101 There! That's much better. :cool: Uh....don't try and use that, by the way. ;P
Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du, yeah Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du, yeah
Ravel, you are one smart kid. I read your profile yesterday, and it baffels me how smart you are. You have a really bright future ahead of you. I really hope you didn't listen to Captin See Sharp yesterday. Don't do anything dumb!
I get all the news I need from the weather report - Paul Simon (from "The Only Living Boy in New York")
-
Oh boy, looks sure can be deceiving...
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
Oh boy, looks sure can be deceiving...
Well put.
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
Ravel, you are one smart kid. I read your profile yesterday, and it baffels me how smart you are. You have a really bright future ahead of you. I really hope you didn't listen to Captin See Sharp yesterday. Don't do anything dumb!
I get all the news I need from the weather report - Paul Simon (from "The Only Living Boy in New York")
:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O:-O I'm not sure if it's possible to blush or be embarrassed to death, but I shall try! Uh, ahem! Anyway...pretending that was never uttered by me...:~ Umm....you've really...struck me dumb. I'm quite literally speechless. Not a word, a sentiment, an opinion, or even a sardonic quip. :cool: But no, I won't do anything like that. I promise. :rose:
Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, ba duba dop Ba du, yeah Mmmbop, ba duba dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du bop, Ba du dop Ba du, yeah
-
I've been studying F# a lot recently and find it really mind-bending. Tomas Petricek, a fellow CPian, let me sneak preview his series of F# articles and they are very good. I took one of his examples and modified it a bit. The following code displays "sum = 6", but how that happens is other-worldly...check it out:
#light
let rec sum nums =
match nums with
| head::tail -> head + sum(tail)
| [] -> 0
printf "sum = %i" (sum [1; 2; 3])Weird, eh? F# is coooool. :cool:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
Thats simply a map/reduce pattern, also called folding. Here is a Scheme example:
(define (fold func accum lst)
(if (null? lst)
accum
(fold func (func accum (car lst)) (cdr lst))))(define (sum . lst) (fold + 0 lst))
(display "sum = ")
(display (sum 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (0 + 1 + 2 + 3)
(newline)(define (product . lst) (fold * 1 lst))
(display "product = ")
(display (product 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (1 * 1 * 2 * 3)xacc.ide
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach." -
I've been studying F# a lot recently and find it really mind-bending. Tomas Petricek, a fellow CPian, let me sneak preview his series of F# articles and they are very good. I took one of his examples and modified it a bit. The following code displays "sum = 6", but how that happens is other-worldly...check it out:
#light
let rec sum nums =
match nums with
| head::tail -> head + sum(tail)
| [] -> 0
printf "sum = %i" (sum [1; 2; 3])Weird, eh? F# is coooool. :cool:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
You know your a nerd when ...
Josh Smith wrote:
Weird, eh? F# is coooool.
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTL -
Thats simply a map/reduce pattern, also called folding. Here is a Scheme example:
(define (fold func accum lst)
(if (null? lst)
accum
(fold func (func accum (car lst)) (cdr lst))))(define (sum . lst) (fold + 0 lst))
(display "sum = ")
(display (sum 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (0 + 1 + 2 + 3)
(newline)(define (product . lst) (fold * 1 lst))
(display "product = ")
(display (product 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (1 * 1 * 2 * 3)xacc.ide
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach."leppie wrote:
Here is a Scheme example:
Wow, Scheme makes F# look "normal." :wtf:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
You know your a nerd when ...
Josh Smith wrote:
Weird, eh? F# is coooool.
:..::. Douglas H. Troy ::..
Bad Astronomy |VCF|wxWidgets|WTLDouglas Troy wrote:
You know your a nerd when ...
Takes one to know one. ;P
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
-
I've been studying F# a lot recently and find it really mind-bending. Tomas Petricek, a fellow CPian, let me sneak preview his series of F# articles and they are very good. I took one of his examples and modified it a bit. The following code displays "sum = 6", but how that happens is other-worldly...check it out:
#light
let rec sum nums =
match nums with
| head::tail -> head + sum(tail)
| [] -> 0
printf "sum = %i" (sum [1; 2; 3])Weird, eh? F# is coooool. :cool:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
I get it, but I couldn't do it. Match says if nums is null, return 0, otherwise return head + sum(tail). But: What does the "head::tail ->" mean?
-
leppie wrote:
Here is a Scheme example:
Wow, Scheme makes F# look "normal." :wtf:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
But once you learn it :) Having a brace matching editor is rather essential for any function more than a few lines.
xacc.ide
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach." -
Thats simply a map/reduce pattern, also called folding. Here is a Scheme example:
(define (fold func accum lst)
(if (null? lst)
accum
(fold func (func accum (car lst)) (cdr lst))))(define (sum . lst) (fold + 0 lst))
(display "sum = ")
(display (sum 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (0 + 1 + 2 + 3)
(newline)(define (product . lst) (fold * 1 lst))
(display "product = ")
(display (product 1 2 3)) ; prints 6 (1 * 1 * 2 * 3)xacc.ide
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach."Now that hurts! :~
-
I get it, but I couldn't do it. Match says if nums is null, return 0, otherwise return head + sum(tail). But: What does the "head::tail ->" mean?
Thats the pattern matcher I assume :)
xacc.ide
The rule of three: "The first time you notice something that might repeat, don't generalize it. The second time the situation occurs, develop in a similar fashion -- possibly even copy/paste -- but don't generalize yet. On the third time, look to generalize the approach." -
I've been studying F# a lot recently and find it really mind-bending. Tomas Petricek, a fellow CPian, let me sneak preview his series of F# articles and they are very good. I took one of his examples and modified it a bit. The following code displays "sum = 6", but how that happens is other-worldly...check it out:
#light
let rec sum nums =
match nums with
| head::tail -> head + sum(tail)
| [] -> 0
printf "sum = %i" (sum [1; 2; 3])Weird, eh? F# is coooool. :cool:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^] Without a strive for perfection I would be terribly bored.
Not very different than prolog or scheme (my favorite language). Prolog:
sum([X | Y], Z) :- sum(Y, A), Z is A + X.
sum([], 0).Scheme:
(define sum (lambda (x)
(if (null? x) 0 (+ (car x) (sum (cdr x))))))Co-Author ASP.NET AJAX in Action
