Cross-posted to c.l.l and c.l.s
We are a team of two programmers developing a product and started with
CL as our language of choice because most of the work involves
manipulation of data structures for which a language like CL or Scheme
is ideal. Our preference for CL is also more of a familiarity issue
and we heavily use macros for generating quite a few things.
However, being developers from a poor country, we cannot afford to
purchase commercial CL licenses. We needed something thats
cross-platform and permits royalty free runtimes. In the Lisp space we
only find Xanalys Lispworks to be a choice we like to make. A quote
from Xanalys just blew us away in terms of how ignorant companies are
to world markets and currency differences. Basically we were forced to
stick to an open source/free implementation to keep our project
commercially viable for us and our customer.
We did not find any CL implementation to be truly cross-platform
except Clisp and did much of our development in it while trying to
maintain ANSI compliance so that it can be ported to other flavours as
well.
However, now we need database access as well as GUI libraries. Our
customer runs windows and it would be unreasonable to ask for a change
of platform and that eats into our potential profits as well. Hence,
we have decided to investigate PLT-Scheme as our development platform.
We both are a little worried being more exposed to CL than Scheme. As
far as we know PLT is the only scheme which is cross-platform and has
a huge set of well-supported libraries.
A couple of questions.
1. Is it viable for commercial apps and does the license permit that?
2. How stable are the libraries?
3. How much would we lose/gain by switching?
4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
Thanks very much in advance. We really appreciate any feedback.
···········@yahoo.com (OCID) writes:
[...]
> we have decided to investigate PLT-Scheme as our development platform.
> We both are a little worried being more exposed to CL than Scheme. As
> far as we know PLT is the only scheme which is cross-platform and has
> a huge set of well-supported libraries.
>
> A couple of questions.
>
> 1. Is it viable for commercial apps and does the license permit that?
I believe it is the intention of PLT to encourage free commercial use.
There are some restrictions, but I believe most commercial use is not a
problem. (I am only a user of PLT Scheme, so I cannot speak
authoritatively.)
> 2. How stable are the libraries?
Most are quite good, and it's my impression that the average *quality*
of the libraries is better than that of some languages that are more
popular.
> 3. How much would we lose/gain by switching?
> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
You mentioned that your code uses macros. If you migrate to Scheme, you
will probably want to rework your CL macros as Scheme "syntax-case" or
"syntax-rules". If you do this, PLT DrScheme provides some excellent
tools for visualizing and debugging these syntax extensions.
If you are exposing Scheme expressions to the end users of your
application, you may find it helpful to expose these as a DrScheme
"language." You could then leverage the various facilities of DrScheme
to give your application slick editing, reporting of errors, navigation
to code, etc. You can also selectively expose subsets of standard
Scheme to end users through this DrScheme "language."
--
http://www.neilvandyke.org/
OCID wrote:
> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
Your problem is basically money. I would suggest that you
bring additional programming partners in, partners that already
have licenses for LW on one or more platforms. Make a deal
with them to deliver the apps, pay them some compensatory
amount, or a share of profits. Find a non-technical
solution to the problem, there are lots of LW developers
that have licenses, give it a try.
Wade
"OCID" <···········@yahoo.com> wrote in message
·································@posting.google.com...
> Cross-posted to c.l.l and c.l.s
>
> <SNIP>
>
> 1. Is it viable for commercial apps and does the license permit that?
Yes. LGPL allows for you to use DrScheme to write and compile your programs,
but not its source.
> 2. How stable are the libraries?
Quite stable. When bugs are found, they get fixed immidiately by the great
PLT team. That includes memory leaks, which are quite rare.
> 3. How much would we lose/gain by switching?
I think if you are good learners, you should have no problem coding with
DrScheme. Also, the PLT team will always be happy to assist you in the
plt-scheme mailing list (I recommend listing yourselves there if you are
planning to use Scheme)
> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
Yes, there is a problem: speed. DrScheme is not as fast as it should be. I
did notice, though, that they are working on making it faster. And if a
specific procedure is too slow for your needs, you can always write it in C
and link them together.
> Thanks very much in advance. We really appreciate any feedback.
You're quite welcome.
ifconfig.
In article <············@news2.netvision.net.il>,
"ifconfig" <················@hotmail.com> writes:
> ...
>> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
> Yes, there is a problem: speed. DrScheme is not as fast as it should be. I
> did notice, though, that they are working on making it faster. And if a
> specific procedure is too slow for your needs, you can always write it in C
> and link them together.
DrScheme is the whole IDE. The underlying scheme is MzScheme. i
haven't looked into what makes DrScheme so slow, but it need not be
the language implementation
hs
--
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel
Samuel Johnson
Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all
others because you were born in it
George Bernard Shaw
Hartmann Schaffer wrote:
> In article <············@news2.netvision.net.il>,
> "ifconfig" <················@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>...
>>
>>>4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
>>
>>Yes, there is a problem: speed. DrScheme is not as fast as it should be. I
>>did notice, though, that they are working on making it faster. And if a
>>specific procedure is too slow for your needs, you can always write it in C
>>and link them together.
>
>
> DrScheme is the whole IDE. The underlying scheme is MzScheme. i
> haven't looked into what makes DrScheme so slow, but it need not be
> the language implementation
All languages in DrScheme (the IDE) come automatically with a heavy duty
debugging mechanism or profiling mechanism or coverage meachnism turned on. Turn
them off in the language menu (show details) and you get mzscheme's observable
behavior and speed -- roughly.
Why roughly? Unlike many other IDEs, DrScheme acts as an OS for the running
program. It executes directly on the same vm as the IDE. This makes it easy to
communicate values and objects between the running program and the tools in the
environment. As you can imagine, however, it imposes some overhead on the
execution. For example, your program will always run in a thread so that the
Break button works properly.
For more information on how this environment works and on how to build a
portable GUI app with the suite, take a look at the paper
Programming Languages as Operating Systems
(or, Revenge of the Son of the Lisp Machine)
which is available from http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/ . The date is 99 and
Matthew Flatt is the lead author.
-- Matthias
In article <············@camelot.ccs.neu.edu>,
Matthias Felleisen <········@ccs.neu.edu> writes:
> ...
> All languages in DrScheme (the IDE) come automatically with a heavy duty
> debugging mechanism or profiling mechanism or coverage meachnism turned on. Turn
> them off in the language menu (show details) and you get mzscheme's observable
> behavior and speed -- roughly.
i take it that you get (roughly) the speed of mzscheme running on the
vm. how about code compiled with mzc? to which extent doesit rely on
the vm?
hs
--
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel
Samuel Johnson
Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all
others because you were born in it
George Bernard Shaw
I have been pondering a similar decision. PLT Scheme is great. The
module system is awesome, the libraries are great, support is
fantastic as are the docs.
However there are some issues you should consider:
1) MzScheme does not have a native compiler so it is likely not
competitive with the faster Lisps.
2) There are no native GUI bindings. The (Spartan) GUI toolkit is
cross-platform which is good but it looks cross-platform which is
bad.
3) By default MzScheme uses a conservative GC. Some people seem to
have a problem with this (Google c.l.s for details), though I have
never observed any issues.
4) The standard DB toolkit is tricky to setup (I have never managed to
use it to connect to MS-SQL - I suppose it could be my fault),
though it's easy enough to implement a simple DB layer in C or
alternatively use the .NET ADO.NET API's.
People have produced commercial apps in PLT Scheme though, see for
example Michael Sperber�s "Developing a Stage Lighting System from
Scratch" [1].
Good luck. If you do end up using PLT Scheme it would be great if you
guys could share your experiences.
-pp
[1] http://www-pu.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/users/sperber/papers/
OCID wrote:
> A couple of questions.
>
> 1. Is it viable for commercial apps and does the license permit that?
> 2. How stable are the libraries?
> 3. How much would we lose/gain by switching?
> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
>
> Thanks very much in advance. We really appreciate any feedback.
From: Friedrich Dominicus
Subject: Re: Need help with a decision!
Date:
Message-ID: <87fza3y1wk.fsf@fbigm.here>
···········@yahoo.com (OCID) writes:
>
> However, being developers from a poor country, we cannot afford to
> purchase commercial CL licenses. We needed something thats
> cross-platform and permits royalty free runtimes. In the Lisp space we
> only find Xanalys Lispworks to be a choice we like to make. A quote
> from Xanalys just blew us away in terms of how ignorant companies are
> to world markets and currency differences.
Well this sentence alone says very much about you, even more than
about the Common Lisp companies, not to your advantage IMHO
> Basically we were forced to
> stick to an open source/free implementation to keep our project
> commercially viable for us and our customer.
Strange strange. Let us assume your customers will have to pay around
US-$ 20 for your software. Then you would have to sell around 50
copies to pay one LispWorks license. If you will not be able to sell
50 copies I doubt very much that you program will be viable for
anyone.
>
> We did not find any CL implementation to be truly cross-platform
> except Clisp and did much of our development in it while trying to
> maintain ANSI compliance so that it can be ported to other flavours as
> well.
So what is you problem? If you keep it portable you can use any Lisp
on any platform. If you have to add compatiblity layers what is the
problem? You seem to have enough time for that.
>
> However, now we need database access as well as GUI libraries. Our
> customer runs windows and it would be unreasonable to ask for a change
> of platform and that eats into our potential profits as well. Hence,
> we have decided to investigate PLT-Scheme as our development platform.
> We both are a little worried being more exposed to CL than Scheme. As
> far as we know PLT is the only scheme which is cross-platform and has
> a huge set of well-supported libraries.
Why do you post in comp.lang.lisp then? You do not want to knwo
anything about Common Lisp but certain Scheme implementation. So why
don't you ask in comp.lang.scheme and probably the DrScheme mailings
lists?
> 4. Any other important point that we may have missed?
Yes, you cross-posted into comp.lang.lisp
Unkind regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Friedrich Dominicus wrote:
> ···········@yahoo.com (OCID) writes:
>
>
>>However, being developers from a poor country, we cannot afford to
>>purchase commercial CL licenses. We needed something thats
>>cross-platform and permits royalty free runtimes. In the Lisp space we
>>only find Xanalys Lispworks to be a choice we like to make. A quote
>>from Xanalys just blew us away in terms of how ignorant companies are
>>to world markets and currency differences.
>
> Well this sentence alone says very much about you, even more than
> about the Common Lisp companies, not to your advantage IMHO
Well this sentence alone says very much about you, even more than
about the Common Lisp companies, not to your advantage IMHO
From: Friedrich Dominicus
Subject: Re: Need help with a decision!
Date:
Message-ID: <874qqjxuaa.fsf@fbigm.here>
"J.L. Perez-de-la-Cruz" <·····@lcc.uma.es> writes:
> Well this sentence alone says very much about you, even more than
> about the Common Lisp companies, not to your advantage IMHO
So much text just to repeat something? Nice try.
Unkind regards
Friedrich
--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Friedrich Dominicus <···················@q-software-solutions.de> wrote:
> > Basically we were forced to
> > stick to an open source/free implementation to keep our project
> > commercially viable for us and our customer.
> Strange strange. Let us assume your customers will have to pay around
> US-$ 20 for your software. Then you would have to sell around 50
> copies to pay one LispWorks license. If you will not be able to sell
> 50 copies I doubt very much that you program will be viable for
> anyone.
I'm pretty sure you can't get a license of LW that allows distribution
of the run-time for $1,000.
Michael
On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:08:32 -0400, ·······@bcect.com (Michael Sullivan) wrote:
> I'm pretty sure you can't get a license of LW that allows
> distribution of the run-time for $1,000.
And why are you so sure?
"Applications developed with the Professional Edition can be
distributed free of charge."
"Applications developed with the Enterprise Edition in version 4.2
and later can be distributed free of charge."
(from <http://www.lispworks.com/products/lispworks.html>)
Prices are here: <http://www.lispworks.com/buy/index.html>
Edi.
Edi Weitz <···@agharta.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 May 2004 12:08:32 -0400, ·······@bcect.com
> (Michael Sullivan) wrote:
>
> > I'm pretty sure you can't get a license of LW that allows
> > distribution of the run-time for $1,000.
>
> And why are you so sure?
Because I'm a moron?
I must have been confusing them with somebody else, or an earlier
policy.
Michael
>>>>> "OCID" == OCID <···········@yahoo.com> writes:
OCID> Hence, we have decided to investigate PLT-Scheme as our
OCID> development platform. We both are a little worried being more
OCID> exposed to CL than Scheme. As far as we know PLT is the only
OCID> scheme which is cross-platform and has a huge set of
OCID> well-supported libraries.
OCID> A couple of questions.
OCID> 1. Is it viable for commercial apps
Yes. I've done two commercial applications using PLT Scheme (and now
am finishing my third).
OCID> and does the license permit
OCID> that?
Yes.
OCID> 2. How stable are the libraries?
If you mean "do they work correctly," the answer is pretty much
"yes"---the quality is usually good.
If you mean "do they change significantly" then the answer,
historically, is no: in the past, PLT Scheme has tended to go through
significant interface changes in the libraries to accomodate the needs
of the users. So it's probably that you'll need to make changes in
your code in the future to make it run under future versions of PLT.
OCID> 3. How much would we lose/gain by switching?
That's hard to say. Generally, after half a year of experience with
Common Lisp in the commercial field, I'd generally say that Scheme in
general and PLT Scheme specifically behaves in much more systematic
and predictable ways than typical Common Lisp systems. (Albeit, I
only have experience with Clisp and LispWorks.) Major pain goes away
when you don't have to deal with the Common Lisp intricacies of
staging, compilation, and the whole macor mess.
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, V�lkerverst�ndigung und �berhaupt blabla
···········@yahoo.com (OCID) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
> only find Xanalys Lispworks to be a choice we like to make. A quote
> from Xanalys just blew us away in terms of how ignorant companies are
> to world markets and currency differences.
You are confusing self-interest with ignorance. Xanalys is not a
charity. It's a company that needs to make a profit, in the context
and terms of the economy in which it operates.
It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
···@ashi.footprints.net (Kaz Kylheku) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
> ···········@yahoo.com (OCID) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
> > only find Xanalys Lispworks to be a choice we like to make. A quote
> > from Xanalys just blew us away in terms of how ignorant companies are
> > to world markets and currency differences.
>
> You are confusing self-interest with ignorance. Xanalys is not a
> charity. It's a company that needs to make a profit, in the context
> and terms of the economy in which it operates.
>
> It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
> the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
I am the original poster and felt the need to respond to this.
Firstly, I know that Xanalys is a business and I have nothing against
their "self interest" or their making money. They currently do not
have a market in my country so expanding here IS in their interest,
but, of course that is their prerogative. As far as making money, they
can always offer additional restrictions of a license based on locale.
Its not that hard to do. If they offer me a stripped down license that
only allows me to sell in my country, that is something that should be
attractive to all parties, us - because we get a very good development
environment at a reasonable price, our customer who get a product at a
reasonable price as well as Xanalys who get a chance to expand into
another country. Software really does not cost much to distribute,
especially once it has been created. Since they are already making
profits in their current markets, expanding to a different country
will only help increase that. Their likeliness of making even one sale
here depends on their pricing here ... not a standard pricing for the
whole world. Creating a restrictive license will help stop a price
dilution if they fear that.
Also every country that has a weaker or lower currency or where cost
of living is much lower is not necessarily run by murderers and
thieves. Just fyi, my country is the worlds largest democracy and the
currency has been strong against the dollar. However because of the
disparity in cost of living a product at an "American" price may not
be attractive to me mainly because I am not selling in the "American"
market. It is as simple as that.
I have lived and worked in the US and could afford to pay for an
Xanalys license while I was there just from a fraction of a months
pay, whereas it is a different scenario after moving here. It is no
different than moving from a place like Indiana to California or New
York where salaries almost double.
If and when we want to sell to the "international" market, especially
the US, we would be very happy to buy the licenses at the listed
prices. Hence, I still maintain my point that the company is ignorant.
Once again, because it is their decision to do so, I am looking for
alternatives that we can afford. For development on the server side we
find the free/open source flavours adequate for our needs, whereas, we
have issues on the client side with non-standard or no GUI libraries,
non-standard database access libraries etc, for which we currently
find PLT-Scheme the best option despite our strong preference for CL
as a language.
However, I do live in a free country where everyone is entitled to an
opinion and I thank everyone who has provided one. It is very helpful.
Take Care
···········@yahoo.com (OCID) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
> Software really does not cost much to distribute,
> especially once it has been created. Since they are already making
> profits in their current markets, expanding to a different country
> will only help increase that. Their likeliness of making even one sale
> here depends on their pricing here ... not a standard pricing for the
> whole world. Creating a restrictive license will help stop a price
> dilution if they fear that.
Keep in mind that they have to bear the costs of support. So it is
possible to lose money on the deal, depending on how few seats you
buy. (Presumably if you're using an unusual language like lisp or
Scheme, you're one of those small-and-dangerous teams.) Plus there may
be added costs to supporting people abroad due to communication gaps.
> Also every country that has a weaker or lower currency or where cost
> of living is much lower is not necessarily run by murderers and
> thieves.
Yes, that was an unfortunate thing to say; I don't pay close attention
to your country, but even in the hypothetical world where your gov't
is run by murderers/thieves, it's hardly your fault.
However, your post was quick to call Xanalys ignorant, when it was
possible you were ignorant. Perhaps some might assume the only purpose
to crosspost was to say this.
In any case, good luck. I think it is better for people to help their
economies along, because it raise prices. ;) There was a Slashdot
article recently about Africans frustrated about those "ridiculous"
$100 rentacoder jobs since their gov'ts underestimated local talent.
Presumably strong local development may help keep things stable for
coders everywhere.
OCID wrote:
> ···@ashi.footprints.net (Kaz Kylheku) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
>
>>···········@yahoo.com (OCID) wrote in message news:<····························@posting.google.com>...
>>
>
> I am the original poster and felt the need to respond to this.
> Firstly, I know that Xanalys is a business and I have nothing against
> their "self interest" or their making money. They currently do not
> have a market in my country so expanding here IS in their interest,
> but, of course that is their prerogative. As far as making money, they
> can always offer additional restrictions of a license based on locale.
Man... I'm not going to address the obvious troll in this thread, but
I thought I should answer you.
I don't work for Xanalys, and I don't know what realities they're
looking at. But often, the price at which a company sells
software is about one-tenth of the cost to them of one day of the
time of a tech support person. If you assume that a support guy
can serve about 100 issues a day, and a customer generates 5 issues
over the life of his/her software ownership, that's half their revenue
from sales. If they're selling into a market with a weak currency,
one tech support issue per customer is going to completely eat any
profits.
Looking at an international market in a country with a weak currency,
they have a problem; their support people have to be paid the same,
but if the currency exchanges for less than, say 1/100 of a support
person's day, they have to rely on virtually nobody from that country
ever using any tech support.
Also, since they're going to have to include different documentation
(omitting the promise of tech support, possibly complying with local
laws) and a stripped-down license, they have to repackage the
software specially for each foreign market, incurring the time of
legal experts who write that license, marketing guys who put together
the package, and engineers to produce and test a new build and
installer. Also, and this is particularly true of american companies,
they have to find international legal expertise to fully explain and
evaluate their exposure to liability laws in every country where their
software is sold, and those guys don't work cheap. If the proposed
market has a weak currency and they can't recoup the money they have
to pay these experts who live in a strong-currency economy, they lose.
So, while I sympathize, it's not cut-and-dried. Every new market incurs
a cost in the time and effort of employees who have to be paid. If your
employees are in a nation with a strong currency and the market has a
weak currency, it is very easy to lose money by providing something to
that market.
But, as we used to say, "a problem is just an opportunity wearing its
work clothes." This problem, like most problems, can be turned to
your advantage if you are willing to work at it.
The license and pricing of GPL'd stuff is probably the easiest and
most effective way to build infrastructure and services in areas
with weak currencies. In fact, given the situation, it's probably
better for those countries in general, since it allows itself to
be sold locally (producing local business and keeping money in
your country) and supported locally (where people can provide
support etc and get paid in your local currency), fostering local
expertise and local programming talent.
If you use LGPL libraries and GPL tools, there's nothing to prevent you
from creating and supporting your own commercial software locally, and
the currency market being what it is, if you do the above "problems"
become "advantages" for you, since you'll be paying your staff and
support employees in local currency. My advice to you in any developing
economy is to use GPL and LGPL stuff as far as you can, and develop
your own commercial alternatives to any commercial stuff you can't
afford.
American and European providers are more-or-less forced to develop
for windows, because it's dominant in the countries that have
strong enough currencies and markets to make it worth their
expensive development time. But that leaves a huge market relying
on GPL or free operating systems that aren't well served by these
commercial providers, and if you write software for that market,
you should be able to work pretty much without competition. If
you're based in a nation whose currency is weak, and you produce
software that other people who live in weak-currency economies
can afford and use, you'll be able to sell at a profit into markets
that Xanalys, Microsoft, et al, can't make any money on.
Bear
Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>
> It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
> the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
Oh...my...god.
[Am I really reading this? Is this a second-generation Erik Naggum?]
felix <·····@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:
> Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> > murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
> > the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
>
> Oh...my...god.
>
> [Am I really reading this? Is this a second-generation Erik Naggum?]
What are you complaining about? What Kaz said is a triviality, not
controversial at all (at least among knowledgable people).
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x7E4651AD
Nils G�sche wrote:
> felix <·····@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:
>
> > Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > > It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> > > murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
> > > the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
> >
> > Oh...my...god.
> >
> > [Am I really reading this? Is this a second-generation Erik Naggum?]
>
> What are you complaining about? What Kaz said is a triviality, not
> controversial at all (at least among knowledgable people).
I take it you're talking about people who are knowledgable about trolling
techniques.
Anton
Anton van Straaten <·····@appsolutions.com> wrote:
> Nils G�sche wrote:
>
> > felix <·····@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:
> >
> > > Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > > > It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> > > > murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything that the rest of
> > > > the world wants, and consequently have a worthless currency.
> > >
> > > Oh...my...god.
> > >
> > > [Am I really reading this? Is this a second-generation Erik Naggum?]
> >
> > What are you complaining about? What Kaz said is a triviality, not
> > controversial at all (at least among knowledgable people).
>
> I take it you're talking about people who are knowledgable about trolling
> techniques.
He might be talking about people who would very much like to appear
knowledgeable in certain newsgroups. Extensionally, there might not
be much difference between our two definitions.
What I have said here is a triviality, of course, not controversial
at all.
It is also, like Kaz Kylheku's post, a troll. Uncontroversial
trivialities make the best trolls, don't you think? Context is all.
Discuss. Every reader will grade you on your intelligence, civility,
knowledge, and various other criteria, but you are unlikely ever to
learn your grades unless your comments are outstandingly bad by the
standards of one or more of the grading criteria. Diplomas will not
be awarded, nor will remuneration be remunerated. Don't waste your
time on this if you have anything better to do.
Will
From: Nils Gösche
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <87vfiwxj5z.fsf@darkstar.cartan.de>
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> > Anton van Straaten <·····@appsolutions.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Nils G�sche wrote:
> >>
> >>>felix <·····@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:
> >>>
> >>>>Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the
> >>>>>ground by murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything
> >>>>>that the rest of the world wants, and consequently have a
> >>>>>worthless currency.
>
> No, they are just based in such a country.
Haven't you looked at the UK since the 1970s? They have since greatly
improved :-)
> >>>>Oh...my...god.
> >>>
> >>>What are you complaining about? What Kaz said is a triviality,
> >>>not controversial at all (at least among knowledgable people).
> >>
> >>I take it you're talking about people who are knowledgable about
> >>trolling techniques.
>
> Kaz and Nils are just trying to self-fulfill the Yabos of Lisp IRC
> opinion of c.l.l. They do not seem to understand that they are the
> best Lispniks acting the worst: calling established Lispniks liars,
> flaming newbies, flinging schoolyard insults at established
> Lispniks, and now trying to start a never-ending flamewar on
> geopolitics.
*sigh* Could everybody /please/ calm the hell down already? The OP
said he couldn't buy a copy of LispWorks because the purchasing power
of his currency was too low. The reason for low purchasing power of a
currency is low demand for this country's goods, low productivity, or
inflation, usually all three of them. Low productivity does not mean
that the people are lazy, it only means there has not been enough
capital accumulated and invested to make them more productive. And
practically always there is only one reason for this: Some evil
government, sometimes the current one, sometimes an older one,
sometimes even one from another country, has obstructed business and
trade, destroyed capital by pointless wars, usually plundering the
country and transferring whatever capital was left to Swiss bank
accounts.
This is indeed not the fault of Xanalys, nor Kaz', nor mine, nor the
OP's. That's all Kaz was saying.
The solution should be obvious, too: Just like you don't get a
Mercedes for 10% of the price down there, you won't get a cheaper
LispWorks, either. But if you need it for business, you can go to a
bank and borrow the money. That's what banks are for.
Now what the hell is so unusual or upsetting about this?
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x7E4651AD
From: Kenny Tilton
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <UWUpc.85551$Nn4.17084988@twister.nyc.rr.com>
Nils G�sche wrote:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>>Anton van Straaten <·····@appsolutions.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Nils G�sche wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>felix <·····@call-with-current-continuation.org> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the
>>>>>>>ground by murderers and thieves, and fail to produce anything
>>>>>>>that the rest of the world wants, and consequently have a
>>>>>>>worthless currency.
>>
>>No, they are just based in such a country.
>
>
> Haven't you looked at the UK since the 1970s? They have since greatly
> improved :-)
Oh, sorry, not sure what made me think Xanalys was in Massachusetts.
Maybe they have an office there?
>
>
>>>>>>Oh...my...god.
>>>>>
>>>>>What are you complaining about? What Kaz said is a triviality,
>>>>>not controversial at all (at least among knowledgable people).
>>>>
>>>>I take it you're talking about people who are knowledgable about
>>>>trolling techniques.
>>
>>Kaz and Nils are just trying to self-fulfill the Yabos of Lisp IRC
>>opinion of c.l.l. They do not seem to understand that they are the
>>best Lispniks acting the worst: calling established Lispniks liars,
>>flaming newbies, flinging schoolyard insults at established
>>Lispniks, and now trying to start a never-ending flamewar on
>>geopolitics.
>
>
> *sigh* Could everybody /please/ calm the hell down already? The OP
> said he couldn't buy a copy of LispWorks because the purchasing power
> of his currency was too low. The reason for low purchasing power of a
> currency is low...
...is no excuse for a respect Lispnik to disparage all countries with
low per capita income as deserving their fates because they do not
overthrow their leadership.
The OP was wrong to call Xanalys names, and could have been flamed for
it with something other than gasoline. Kaz is not like that, but folks
on Lisp IRC have lost all respect for c.l.l. so they come here and act
badly, thinking it is OK because they think it is a cesspool anyway.
Me, I read c.l.l. occasionally, and I can tell you, the only Lispniks
acting badly on c.l.l. are the Yabos of Lisp IRC.
kenny
but The fact that a deliberat
demand for this country's goods, low productivity, or
> inflation, usually all three of them. Low productivity does not mean
> that the people are lazy, it only means there has not been enough
> capital accumulated and invested to make them more productive. And
> practically always there is only one reason for this: Some evil
> government, sometimes the current one, sometimes an older one,
> sometimes even one from another country, has obstructed business and
> trade, destroyed capital by pointless wars, usually plundering the
> country and transferring whatever capital was left to Swiss bank
> accounts.
>
> This is indeed not the fault of Xanalys, nor Kaz', nor mine, nor the
> OP's. That's all Kaz was saying.
Nonsense. Spare me the macroeconomics and tell it to the judge:
"Fighting words doctrine. The First Amendment doctrine that holds that
certain utterances are not constitutionally protected as free speech if
they are inherently likely to provoke a violent response from the
audience. N.A.A.C.P. v. Clairborne Hardware Co., Miss., 458 U.S. 886,
102 S.Ct. 3409, 73 L.Ed.2d 1215 (1982). Words which by their very
utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the
peace, having direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the persons
to whom, individually, remark is addressed. The test is what persons of
common intelligence would understand to be words likely to cause an
average addressee to fight. City of Seattle v. Camby, 104 Wash.2d 49,
701 P.2d 499, 500.
"The "freedom of speech" protected by the Constitution is not absolute
at all times and under all circumstances and there are well-defined and
narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of
which does not raise any constitutional problem, including the lewd and
obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting
words" which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an
immediate breach of the peace. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S.
568, 62 S.Ct. 766, 86 L.Ed. 1031.
"SOURCE: Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition "
> Now what the hell is so unusual or upsetting about this?
Trolling by a respected Lispnik? It sucks.
If I went on IRC and mistakenly called Dan Barlow a liar for saying he
had fixed Cliki indexes, one of the moderators would snuff me, right? If
a newbie asked on Lisp IRC how to use Vi with Lisp and I flamed him for
not accepting advice to use Emacs, you'd snuff me, right? If I got on
Lisp IRC and called Rahul a douchebag, how long would I last?
You guys come here and act worse than you would otherwise just because
for some reason you have all decided cll is, what? landfill?, and this
ironically leads you to come here and act worse than anyone other than a
deliberate troll.
the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll is
a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something no
non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
kenny
--
Home? http://tilton-technology.com
Cells? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Cello? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cello/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
>
> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
perverted creature.
Barbara Schwarz
copied from the www.religiousfreedomwatch.org
David Touretzky and
Government Grants
Abuse of Taxpayer Money?
This page inaugurates a special feature of Religious Freedom Watch. We
have posted the evidence of Touretzky's extremism. We have shown
evidence of Touretzky wasting the time, money and computer facilities
of his employer by devoting his energies to these destructive
pursuits.
We will now begin posting the government grants received by Touretzky
so that everyone will know the government agencies who are indirectly
supporting Touretzky's extremist agenda by way of their financial
contributions. Considering the first grant, one would think, for
example, that the National Science Foundation would not want their
$338,334 supporting Touretzky's bomb-making instructions, his racist
hate speech and his other excesses -- especially at a time when
government resources are strained fighting the war on terrorism.
This grant is only the first of many we have obtained and, frankly, it
is quite a load to analyze, scan and post, but it is worth it
considering the invaluable material uncovered. So look for regular
postings on this site.
Further information concerning Professor Touretzky's extravagant
experiments will be posted when obtained.
Grants Applied For By Professor David Touretzky
National Science Foundation: Account Number 9978403
Home | Latest News | Anti-Religious Extremists | Hate Groups
| Influence of Hate | Experts | False Experts? | Hate Crimes &
The Law | Whistleblowers | Articles | Combating Hate
For the truth about religion:
Buddhism, Christianity, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism,
Scientology, What is Scientology?, Scientology Theology General
················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
> Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
>> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>>
>> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
>> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
>> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
>> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
>>
>> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
>
> Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> perverted creature.
Aw, this is getting too easy.
Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
>
> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> >> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> >> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> >> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> >> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
> >>
> >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
> >
> > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> > perverted creature.
>
> Aw, this is getting too easy.
Easy, but very sneaky, Joe.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz <················@myway.com> wrote:
> Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
>> ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
>> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
>> >> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
>> >> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
>> >> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
>> >> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
>> >>
>> >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
>> >
>> > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
>> > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
>> > perverted creature.
>>
>> Aw, this is getting too easy.
>
> Easy, but very sneaky, Joe.
Did you know that David Touretzky has an interesting Web page about
people who believe (among other crazy things) that Hawai'i existed 75
million years ago?
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/OTIII/
--
Karl A. Krueger <········@example.edu>
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Email address is spamtrapped. s/example/whoi/
"Outlook not so good." -- Magic 8-Ball Software Reviews
"Karl A. Krueger" <········@example.edu> wrote in message news:<············@baldur.whoi.edu>...
> Barbara Schwarz <················@myway.com> wrote:
> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> >> ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
> >> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> >> >> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> >> >> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> >> >> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> >> >> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
> >> >
> >> > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> >> > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> >> > perverted creature.
> >>
> >> Aw, this is getting too easy.
> >
> > Easy, but very sneaky, Joe.
>
> Did you know that David Touretzky has an interesting Web page about
> people who believe (among other crazy things) that Hawai'i existed 75
> million years ago?
He has bomb instructions and porn on his website. He shows crazy
juveniles and terrorists the way.
Touretzky knows that those OT III materials, that he has on his
website, are forgeries. But he leaves them there to make Scientology
and L. Ron Hubbard look ridiculous. He is a religious persecutor.
Barbara Schwarz
Barbara Schwarz wrote:
> He has bomb instructions and porn on his website. He shows crazy
What's wrong with porn?
Oh sorry..
You're in the U.S.
*chuckle*
--
Matthias Buelow; ···@{mukappabeta,informatik.uni-wuerzburg}.de
In article <············@ccs.neu.edu>, Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu>
wrote:
> ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
>
> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message
> > news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> >> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> >> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> >> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> >> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
> >>
> >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
> >
> > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> > perverted creature.
>
> Aw, this is getting too easy.
>
I wonder how the 'bot will do with Joe Touretzky and
David Marshall?
In article <··························@news.vanderbilt.edu>,
Sashank Varma <····@vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
> In article <············@ccs.neu.edu>, Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
> >
> > > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> > >> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> > >>
> > >> > the sad thing is that unless someone is aware that you several fine
> > >> > young Lispniks are effectively acting in concert, they will agree cll
> > >> > is a dump; you guys /are/ turning c.l.l. into a cesspool, something
> > >> > no non-Lispnik troll could ever do.
> > >>
> > >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
> > >
> > > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> > > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> > > perverted creature.
Crap. I mean to delete all this context. I guess a
Turing test of its sophistication will have to wait
for another day/time/thread.
> > Aw, this is getting too easy.
> >
>
> I wonder how the 'bot will do with Joe Touretzky and
> David Marshall?
Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
> > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message
> > news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
> >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
> > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> > perverted creature.
> Aw, this is getting too easy.
It's even funnier if you haven't read the group for a few days and her
response came up wham, bam, right after your call, as if she was in the
room listening.
Michael
·······@bcect.com (Michael Sullivan) wrote in message news:<······························@bcect.com>...
> Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> > ················@myway.com (Barbara Schwarz) writes:
> > > Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:<············@ccs.neu.edu>...
>
> > >> I think it is worth mentioning David Touretzky at this point.
>
> > > Dave Touretzky is a psychiatric troll. The porn and bomb instruction
> > > master has no character. I would not trust in the "science" of such a
> > > perverted creature.
>
> > Aw, this is getting too easy.
>
> It's even funnier if you haven't read the group for a few days and her
> response came up wham, bam, right after your call, as if she was in the
> room listening.
>
>
> Michael
I do have that effect on people, Michael. I just can't do nothing against it. :)
Barbara Schwarz
Joe Marshall <···@ccs.neu.edu> writes:
> Aw, this is getting too easy.
Yeah. Beetlejuice has to be said three whole times!
--
I wouldn't mind the rat race so much if it wasn't for all the damn cats.
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Me, I read c.l.l. occasionally, and I can tell you, the only Lispniks
> acting badly on c.l.l. are the Yabos of Lisp IRC.
San someone please explain what's meant by "Yabo" here? I was going
to put it in my .signature, but perhaps it's obscene.
Google suggests a cookware store, a Japanese word meaning
"unsophisticated", or a furniture outlet. Furniture is borderline
obscene, I suppose, but the others seem relatively harmless.
-dan
--
"please make sure that the person is your friend before you confirm"
Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>Me, I read c.l.l. occasionally, and I can tell you, the only Lispniks
>>acting badly on c.l.l. are the Yabos of Lisp IRC.
>
>
> San someone please explain what's meant by "Yabo" here?
I had no idea, actually, just a sense that it would be applied
affectionately to a misbehaving group of colleagues or subordinates. I
had been meaning to check the spelling, and (bless Google) here it is:
http://www.insultmonger.com/slang/insulting_slang_y.htm
"yob / yobbo noun
A rowdy, aggressive, or violent young man. [Boy spelled backward]"
Not bad, but not exactly the note I was looking to strike, so you can go
ahead and have the Yabos jerseys printed up, I'm sticking with the
misspelling. Feel free to think of it as "Bay spelled backward".
Now it's time to strap on the five-wheelers and see if I can shed
30seconds off my season best, or at least a few ounces of fat, but
before I go: my mailbox has been filled with hundreds of letters of
criticism saying I should be talking about Cello and not the Yabos.
Rainer is just beside himself. So....
As for Cello, bad news and good news. The good news is that the bad news
may not be so bad after all.
Background: I am doing something seriously wrong with display lists, as
manifested by all sorts of bad behavior including dead slow performance
(2-3fps on some demos) which gets cured by discarding all play lists at
some point. Exactly what I am doing wrong I do not know, but I will get
the monkeys on it later. My guess is that I am making some lists "too
soon", and I just have to find out what I mean by "too soon".
Good news: I previously reported frame rates of 25-35. Now we're looking
at 45-55. This happens if I do the curative resize on the Light Panel
(didn't know it needed curing because it was so fast) and maybe because
I found a couple of leftover debug tweaks unGCed and GCed those. And now
the spinning shape /really/ sets the variation, and the beauty of
display lists is that I can decompose the spinning scene into three
components (the shape vertices, the /orientation/ of the shape, and the
eye-candy background) and just re-execute the orientation to make the
shape spin. So today I will do that just to get the fastest rates
possible. Not to embarrass Rahul any further, but because the bad news is...
...he may have been right! I might have a screaming fast graphics card!!
Another XP/AllegorCL 6.2 user reported frame rates of only 10fps (vs my
30). Still waiting on more deets (card specs, system clock, which demo),
but along the way I ended up doing a semi-port to WindowsNT/AllegroCL
and a 1.5ghz system with a Matrox dual-head card (business, not gamer,
but hardware accel) was like sub-five, IIRC. So I want to see Cello on
my set-up up around warp one or two so folks with less studly platforms
can have fun, too.
kenny
--
Home? http://tilton-technology.com
Cells? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Cello? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cello/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
From: Nils Gösche
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <ly4qqffd9k.fsf@cartan.de>
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Nils G�sche wrote:
>
> > Now what the hell is so unusual or upsetting about this?
>
> Trolling by a respected Lispnik? It sucks.
Thanks for the explanation, Kenny. It just occurred to me that during
all those years, I might have misunderstood the reasoning behind
Godwin's Law, for instance. Now I understand that you are not
supposed to mention Hitler so Germans like me are not offended if
people speak in disparaging and unfeeling terms about one of our
former governments. Who woulda thunk? ;-)
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0
From: Fred Gilham
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <u7zn87azih.fsf@snapdragon.csl.sri.com>
Oh-oh. Another political thread. You guys should subscribe to
talk.politics.misc so that whenever the urge strikes, you can just
post there.
Or, as the waiter at the posh restaraunt said, when he saw a man
suddenly leap up and try to strangle his wife, "Sir! There's a
*place* for that!"
--
Fred Gilham ······@csl.sri.com
A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a
superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry
and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about
in nature. --- Fred Hoyle
From: Nils Gösche
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <lywu3bdqs5.fsf@cartan.de>
Fred Gilham <······@snapdragon.csl.sri.com> writes:
> Oh-oh. Another political thread. You guys should subscribe to
> talk.politics.misc so that whenever the urge strikes, you can just
> post there.
Good idea; I just hope that the next one condemning either LispWorks,
Allegro, MCL, Corman Lisp, Genera, Macsyma, or other Lisp products
regularly attracting the wrath of certain posters for being too
expensive in their opinion, will do it there, too ;-)
> Or, as the waiter at the posh restaraunt said, when he saw a man
> suddenly leap up and try to strangle his wife, "Sir! There's a
> *place* for that!"
:-)
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0
From: Kenny Tilton
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <f65qc.128204$WA4.109826@twister.nyc.rr.com>
Nils G�sche wrote:
> Fred Gilham <······@snapdragon.csl.sri.com> writes:
>
>
>>Oh-oh. Another political thread. You guys should subscribe to
>>talk.politics.misc so that whenever the urge strikes, you can just
>>post there.
>
>
> Good idea; I just hope that the next one condemning either LispWorks,
> Allegro, MCL, Corman Lisp, Genera, Macsyma, or other Lisp products
> regularly attracting the wrath of certain posters for being too
> expensive in their opinion, will do it there, too ;-)
Nonsense. I agreed the OP was wrong to flame Xanalys and that a
correction was sensible. I explicitly objected to the use of fighting
words.
I'd like to think it's your reading comprehension, but much more of this
weaseling and occam will plop for "intellectual dishonesty".
kenny
--
Home? http://tilton-technology.com
Cells? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Cello? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cello/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
From: Kenny Tilton
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <x15qc.128203$WA4.44691@twister.nyc.rr.com>
Nils G�sche wrote:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>Nils G�sche wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Now what the hell is so unusual or upsetting about this?
>>
>>Trolling by a respected Lispnik? It sucks.
>
>
> Thanks for the explanation, Kenny. It just occurred to me that during
> all those years, I might have misunderstood the reasoning behind
> Godwin's Law, for instance. Now I understand that you are not
> supposed to mention Hitler so Germans like me are not offended if
> people speak in disparaging and unfeeling terms about one of our
> former governments. Who woulda thunk? ;-)
Your logic or intellectual honesty needs work. It is fine to disparage
cll, and it is fine to troll cll, but doing both is cheating. Pay
attention, will you? I have made that point twice now. Well, thrice.
kenny
From: Nils Gösche
Subject: Re: The Yabos of Lisp IRC [was Re: Trolling with triviality (was Re: Need help with a decision!)]
Date:
Message-ID: <lyisevdkjl.fsf@cartan.de>
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> Nils G�sche wrote:
>
> > Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> >
> >>Nils G�sche wrote:
> >>
> >>>Now what the hell is so unusual or upsetting about this?
> >>
> >>Trolling by a respected Lispnik? It sucks.
> > Thanks for the explanation, Kenny. It just occurred to me that
> > during all those years, I might have misunderstood the reasoning
> > behind Godwin's Law, for instance. Now I understand that you are
> > not supposed to mention Hitler so Germans like me are not offended
> > if people speak in disparaging and unfeeling terms about one of
> > our former governments. Who woulda thunk? ;-)
> Your logic or intellectual honesty needs work.
Calm down: It's a /joke/! Hence the /smiley/! What I was trying to
tell you with this joke is that people have no reason to be offended
just because somebody doesn't like one of their former governments,
just as I would not be offended if you dared to express anything but
love and affection towards our former "F�hrer" (There! I've just been
joking again! Please don't kill me!). So, I am not convinced by your
"fighting words" argument because I can't see any "fighting words".
But even if you choose to disagree with me on this point, which is of
course your God-given right, please consider that people also tend to
disagree about what constitutes "fighting words" and what doesn't,
people from different cultures and countries even more so. Are you
really so sure that /you/ have never offended /me/ (or Kaz) with
anything you said? Do you think it would matter a lot? Well, I
don't. People come here to exchange ideas. If X happens to be
offended by an opinion Y expressed, the best X can do is to strip Y's
message from anything that looks like "fighting words" to him and look
at what Y's actually been saying, think about it, and then respond.
Incidentally, and remarkably, the OP did exactly that. It was /you/
and some other people in this thread, not the OP, who have been making
a major fuzz about all this for reasons unknown to me. What's the
matter? What are you afraid of? Are you afraid people are going to
have fistfights over this? I think the niveau in here is a bit
higher, and besides: How exactly can you have a fistfight over the
internet? Now to your other point:
> It is fine to disparage cll, and it is fine to troll cll, but doing
> both is cheating. Pay attention, will you? I have made that point
> twice now. Well, thrice.
You keep repeating this, but Kaz or I are not the ones disparaging cll
on #lisp, so I think this is utterly irrelevant.
Regards,
--
Nils G�sche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."
PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> If I got on Lisp IRC and called Rahul a douchebag, how long would I
> last?
Douchebag that I am, it's taken this long for me to catch up to this
point in c.l.l. But for the record, I believe the answer would be
"rather long", considering the fate of others who have done likewise.
Does that mean you approve of Kaz's and Nils's behavior?
;)
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
Rahul Jain wrote:
> Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
>
>
>>If I got on Lisp IRC and called Rahul a douchebag, how long would I
>>last?
>
>
> ... it's taken this long for me to catch up to this...
Too long. Ancient history.
All i know is that Cells II is pretty close to passing the old
regression test suite, and that for the first time I have a formal
description of the damn things (not that i know what a formal
description is). Want to be a reader? I think i should have at least one
Yobbo in there just for fun.
:)
kenny
ps. Omigod! i finally saw a most astonishingly bad artifact from OpenGL:
as a simple outline of a square moved diagonally down/left off the
screen, a /portion/ of the bottom managed to stay in view with the top
slowly closing in on it. You were right! But I still like the OpenGL
bet, especially since I see online virtual gaming eroding television
significantly. The resources going into OpenGL is exactly where Lisp
wants to be.
k
--
Home? http://tilton-technology.com
Cells? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cells/
Cello? http://www.common-lisp.net/project/cello/
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Your Project Here! http://alu.cliki.net/Industry%20Application
Kenny Tilton <·······@nyc.rr.com> writes:
> ps. Omigod! i finally saw a most astonishingly bad artifact from OpenGL:
They're from your crappy (a.k.a. consumer-level) OpenGL accelerator, not
from the API spec, to be correct. Get a better accelerator and you'll
have a better GUI.
:)
> But I still like the OpenGL bet, especially since I see online virtual
> gaming eroding television significantly.
Hmm. I don't see how that has anything to do with your 2-D UI model, but
OK. Unless you've actually described how a text field behaves when all
you can see is the top edge or if you're looking at the back of it.
:)
> The resources going into OpenGL is exactly where Lisp wants to be.
Eh? I don't see anything particularly important about the connection
between Lisp and any specific graphics API any more than I see anything
particularly important about the connection between Lisp and any
specific programming paradigm (say logical or contraint-propagation).
What do you _really_ mean here?
--
Rahul Jain
·····@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist
···@ashi.footprints.net (Kaz Kylheku) wrote
> You are confusing self-interest with ignorance.
And you are confusing bigotry with rational argument.
> It's not Xanalys' fault that some countries are run to the ground by
> murderers and thieves
Well, this is arguably happening to the U.S. - which would be no reason
to spew invective against innocent USians, mind you...
OCID wrote:
> As far as we know PLT is the only scheme which is cross-platform and has
> a huge set of well-supported libraries.
Well, Kawa should be portable to any platform which has Java (including
those on which GCJ runs), and provides very convenient access to any
Java library. Plus it has a compiler, which can (very quickly) compile
Scheme to JVM .class files or (using GCJ) to native code. (Kawa also
implements a small subset of Common Lisp and a larger subset of Emacs Lisp.)
--
--Per Bothner
···@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/