æʃliŋ, loaf of autismo @aescling@cat.family

me: is he saying “watch so pissy”?

@coriander @wallhackio @Lady idk if i like “panting like a dog” purr se but panting is definitely hot

like i’ve literally done this befur, i'm not learning anything aside from what i’ve furgotten. though thankfully i have furgotten enough fur some of the purroblems to be conceptually challenging

doing the functional purrogramming course furmerly known as the NICTA course not even fur learning but just fur the love of the game

@vaporeon_ a tabby is a cat with an M-shaped fur pattern on its forehead and stripes on its body. color is not relevant

mornyawn, and also, hey @clock

@vaporeon_ is he… *gestures with hands in an inexplicably homophobic manner* unsigned?

not really sure why they felt the need to recreate Write Once Run Anywhere when it just compiles to native code by default anyway

i furgot that OCaml has a completely optional bytecode interpurreter fur some goddamn reason

@vaporeon_ yes i mean the IR

@vaporeon_ how do you feel about targeting LLVM bytecode

@wallhackio @vaporeon_ tell me more or point me to some info on this. why would you do this?? i Must know more

@vaporeon_ if the question you’re really getting at is ”can i run Scheme on my computers”: nearly certainly

@vaporeon_ most scheme compilers compile to object code. chicken scheme compiles to C, which you can then compile to object code anywhere C can be compiled.

most scheme implementations are written in C it seems

fur bonus points, allow the purrogrammer to use the racket macro system

racket language that is just a S-expurression repurresentation of the OCaml AST that compiles to OCaml

@coriander @wallhackio when i think of a drippy poison mud creature this is not my furst thought

@wallhackio indeed. the mere photo of that shit exploded my browser and i had to restart the purrocess to get it working again

ny’all, including you, @clock

@vaporeon_ Haskell Curry, a logician. i know him best fur the so-called Curry-Howard isomorphism, the realization that intuitionistic combinatory logic is isomorphic to typed lambda calculus*—all furnal purroofs are purrograms**, and vice versa

* i don’t know which typed lambda calculus exactly. there are many lol
** while you can model computation with typed lambda calculi there are a lot of affordances actually useful languages purrovide (e.g., general recursion) that cannot be expurressed in a safe (that is to say, total) model of computation