What happens to Chicken Scheme?
naruto...@gmail.com
What happens to Chicken Scheme? Their website is blank.
William D Clinger
More and more website designers are designing web pages
that appear completely broken unless JavaScript is enabled
in your browser.
That's a way for them to showcase their deep commitment
to emerging language standards.
Will
Nils M Holm
> > What happens to Chicken Scheme? Their website is blank.
Last time I checked (1min ago) it was not.
> More and more website designers are designing web pages
> that appear completely broken unless JavaScript is enabled
> in your browser.
Although this is certainly true and an annoyance, I do not
see in which way it is related to Chicken.
> That's a way for them to showcase their deep commitment
> to emerging language standards.
And this statement certainly needs some explanation.
--
Nils M Holm <n m h @ t 3 x . o r g> -- http://t3x.org/nmh/
William D Clinger
> > > What happens to Chicken Scheme? Their website is blank.
>
> Last time I checked (1min ago) it was not.
Turn off JavaScript in your browser. Then visit
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/chicken.html
Then view the HTML for that page.
Will
Nils M Holm
> > > > What happens to Chicken Scheme? Their website is blank.
> >
> > Last time I checked (1min ago) it was not.
>
> Turn off JavaScript in your browser. Then visit
Javascript is turned off by default in my browser and
http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/
works just fine.
> http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/chicken.html
This URL yields a blank window, indeed. With Javascript
enabled it appears to redirect to the above URL.
I still fail to recognize how this is related to the
statement you made earlier in this thread:
| That's a way for them to showcase their deep commitment
| to emerging language standards.
--
William D Clinger
> Javascript is turned off by default in my browser and
>
> http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/
>
> works just fine.
>
> > http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/chicken.html
>
> This URL yields a blank window, indeed. With Javascript
> enabled it appears to redirect to the above URL.
To help you understand the original poster's question,
then, I guess I have to tell you that a Google search
for Chicken Scheme ranks the chicken.html page
higher than the index.html page to which it redirects.
I believe I have answered the original poster's question.
> I still fail to recognize how this is related to the
> statement you made earlier in this thread:
>
> | That's a way for them to showcase their deep commitment
> | to emerging language standards.
That was an inside joke, which I won't bother to explain
in detail, referring to the many informal connections
between development and ongoing standardization
of the programming languages formerly known as
JavaScript and Scheme.
Lars Hansen, for whom Larceny is named, explained
JavaScript to me: "It's basically Scheme with Java
syntax and the object system from hell."
Will
Nils M Holm
> then, I guess I have to tell you that a Google search
> for Chicken Scheme ranks the chicken.html page
> higher than the index.html page to which it redirects.
Indeed, the index page is not even on the first page of
results. I tend to forget that people use Google as their
bookmarks and address bar these days.
> I believe I have answered the original poster's question.
To me it sounded rather like you took the chance to make
some indirect and not-so-pleasant remarks about the author
of Chicken, especially when taking the last statement of
your original reply into account, which sounded quite ironic.
But then, any disagreement you may have with him is none of
my business.
> Lars Hansen, for whom Larceny is named, explained
> JavaScript to me: "It's basically Scheme with Java
> syntax and the object system from hell."
I finally got that one. Thanks for explaining.
Ray Dillinger
>>What happens to Chicken Scheme? Their website is blank.
>
>
> More and more website designers are designing web pages
> that appear completely broken unless JavaScript is enabled
> in your browser.
I generally interpret this as "another website I can get
along without because the guys doing it are clearly morons"
and keep going.
Seriously; it's easy to make webpages that work for
everybody. What earthly reason does anybody have to break
their own site?
Bear
Ray Dillinger
> This URL yields a blank window, indeed. With Javascript
> enabled it appears to redirect to the above URL.
>
> I still fail to recognize how this is related to the
> statement you made earlier in this thread:
>
> | That's a way for them to showcase their deep commitment
> | to emerging language standards.
Perhaps you are sarcasm-impaired? In this case the
"deep commitment" spoken of is more like "a casual
and groundless assumption that the emerging language
of javascript, which is used mostly to make things
wriggle while one is trying to read them and power
unwanted popup ads, is tolerated by everyone they
care to reach with their website."
Bear
Nils M Holm
> Perhaps you are sarcasm-impaired? In this case the
I do not think so.
> "deep commitment" spoken of is more like "a casual
> and groundless assumption that the emerging language
> of javascript, [...]
The statement was related to "emerging languages"
(note the pluralis), so it was obviously not just
about Javascript.
Nils M Holm
> Seriously; it's easy to make webpages that work for
> everybody. What earthly reason does anybody have to break
> their own site?
The page in question seems to be the only one that uses
Javascript. All other pages I have tried work fine.
Ray Dillinger
> Ray Dillinger <be...@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>>Seriously; it's easy to make webpages that work for
>>everybody. What earthly reason does anybody have to break
>>their own site?
>
>
> The page in question seems to be the only one that uses
> Javascript. All other pages I have tried work fine.
>
done with a meta redirect tag. Redirect tags are
supported by every browser in the world and works just
fine even if people have the thing that powers annoying
wriggly pages and popup ads turned off. Javascript
is not. Assuming the people doing it are not in fact
boneheaded, what was the motive for using it?
Bear
Nils M Holm
> Nils M Holm wrote:
> > The page in question seems to be the only one that uses
> > Javascript. All other pages I have tried work fine.
> >
> It's using javascript to do something that could be
> done with a meta redirect tag. Redirect tags are
> supported by every browser in the world and works just
> fine even if people have the thing that powers annoying
> wriggly pages and popup ads turned off. Javascript
> is not. Assuming the people doing it are not in fact
> boneheaded, what was the motive for using it?
Of course a redirect meta tag would have been the way
to go in this case. I have no idea what the reason for
this peculiar page is. Maybe some unfortunate attempt
at search engine optimization.
Anyway the rest of the site works fine, so why judge
the whole thing -- or even the software promoted on it
-- by this single page?
asandroq
On 24 jun, 17:21, Nils M Holm <before-2007-07...@online.de> wrote:
>
> Of course a redirect meta tag would have been the way
> to go in this case. I have no idea what the reason for
> this peculiar page is. Maybe some unfortunate attempt
> at search engine optimization.
>
> Anyway the rest of the site works fine, so why judge
> the whole thing -- or even the software promoted on it
> -- by this single page?
>
Because some bitter people will use any chance they have to
harass other people they may think are the cause of their bitterness,
or to vent their bitterness at any possible target, or because they're
just... You know, not the social type.
Cheers,
-alex
William D Clinger
> Because some bitter people will use any chance they have to
> harass other people they may think are the cause of their bitterness,
> or to vent their bitterness at any possible target, or because they're
> just... You know, not the social type.
It's hard to imagine anyone would do that on Usenet.
The problem, of course, is that reality leaves so little to
the imagination these days. Just yesterday, for example,
someone who identified himself as "Alex Queiroz"
<asand...@gmail.com> posted this in linux.debian.devel:
> Wow, I've not seen a moronic argument like this in a while.
I wish I could say that.
Will
asandroq
On 24 jun, 20:47, William D Clinger <cesur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The problem, of course, is that reality leaves so little to
> the imagination these days. Just yesterday, for example,
> someone who identified himself as "Alex Queiroz"
> <asand...@gmail.com> posted this in linux.debian.devel:
>
> > Wow, I've not seen a moronic argument like this in a while.
>
> I wish I could say that.
>
And your point is?
-alex
Ray Dillinger
> Of course a redirect meta tag would have been the way
> to go in this case. I have no idea what the reason for
> this peculiar page is. Maybe some unfortunate attempt
> at search engine optimization.
> Anyway the rest of the site works fine, so why judge
> the whole thing -- or even the software promoted on it
> -- by this single page?
Sigh. I guess it just shows a disregard for the users.
I will say simply that whenever I follow a link and get
a blank or unusable page, I don't poke around and try to
get the site to work, or even see whether the rest of the
site will work. I just get out of there.
This is, as you've probably guessed, one of the slightly
too many things that tick me off a little bit too much.
As such, I suppose I'm overreacting.
It is so unbelievably simple to create webpages that work
with any browser that failure to do is -- well, it's like
hitting yourself over the head with a hammer. You can do
it, sure, but why??? The only things you really need
browser-specific or settings-dependent code to do, are
usually things you shouldn't be doing anyway.
Bear
David Rush
> Lars Hansen, for whom Larceny is named, explained
> JavaScript to me: "It's basically Scheme with Java
> syntax and the object system from hell."
Well, this is arguably a little off-topic, but I just couldn't pass it
up as I think I am starting to actually *like* javascript (even if I
hate programming web browsers). Javascript is also the first widely-
deployed instance-oriented (also known in OO speak as a 'Prototyping')
language. The only other major instance I am aware of in Self, and the
instance-oriented model works for much the same reason - well over 90%
of your work is leaf-node customization of the type tree.
Actually there are deeper reasons why instance-oriented OO is
important, but they are hidden in the esoterica of meta-modelling, and
HOFP has all of the same capabilities in a cleaner (at least IMNSHO)
form, and this is comp.lang.scheme so I just won't go there.
I just found it pleasantly surprising to find something kinda cool
hiding under the browser-programming rock - even if there's a lot of
other things you usually find under rocks, too :)
david rush
--
http://cyber-rush.org <- a very messy construction^Wweb-site that will
probably work with Javascript turned off...
bunn...@gmail.com
Is the Scheme community so completely fucked up that it needs
threads like this to keep c.l.s. busy?
cheers,
felix
Rob Warnock
+---------------
| ...I think I am starting to actually *like* javascript (even if I
| hate programming web browsers). Javascript is also the first widely-
| deployed instance-oriented (also known in OO speak as a 'Prototyping')
+---------------
The "Garnet" UI development environment & GUI for Common Lisp
[developed 1987-1994 at CMU, maintained since CMU stopped funding
it in 1995 by various users, most recently by Fred Gilham at SRI
(last update 2000-06-1)] was built on top of the "KR" ("Knowledge
Representation") prototype/instance object system. As the following
Cliki page notes, KR "is completely independent of CLOS and features
among other things multiple-inheritance and value propagation using
constraints, much like Cells or COSI do". If you're interested,
there's more information here:
http://www.cliki.net/KR
http://www.cliki.net/Garnet
ftp://ftp.csl.sri.com/pub/users/gilham/garnet/src/kr
+---------------
| I just found it pleasantly surprising to find something kinda cool
| hiding under the browser-programming rock - even if there's a lot of
| other things you usually find under rocks, too :)
+---------------
Yup. I thought it was kinda cool to find a prototype/instance
object system with constraints & value propagation hidden under
a CL GUI rock, too. ;-}
-Rob
-----
Rob Warnock <rp...@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607
William D Clinger
> Well, this is arguably a little off-topic, but I just couldn't pass it
> up as I think I am starting to actually *like* javascript (even if I
> hate programming web browsers).
You're in good company. Guy Steele edited the first
edition of ECMA-262 [1]. One fourth of the 12-person
E4X committee consists of unrepentant Schemers [2].
Will
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript
[2] http://www.ccs.neu.edu/news/CCIS-Newsletter-Fall-06/CCIS-Newsletter-Fall-06-5.html
Ray Dillinger
Hey. Sorry. As I said before, this is one of the slightly
too many things that ticks me off just slightly too much, and
as such I'm overreacting. Mea Culpa.
I try to also contribute positively to the group. But recently
I've been starting to wonder if too much usenet is bad for me
and if maybe I ought to give it up.
Bear
Ray Blaak
> On Jun 24, 12:20 pm, William D Clinger <cesur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Lars Hansen, for whom Larceny is named, explained
> > JavaScript to me: "It's basically Scheme with Java
> > syntax and the object system from hell."
>
> Well, this is arguably a little off-topic, but I just couldn't pass it
> up as I think I am starting to actually *like* javascript (even if I
> hate programming web browsers).
Well, me too. There's both some subtle cleverness and silliness going on with
it. Its closures and generalized object-as-maps idea are quite powerful. Now
if they only have local var scoping in {...} sections it would be much better.
--
Cheers, The Rhythm is around me,
The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYb...@STRIPCAPStelus.net The Rhythm has my soul.
Jens Axel Søgaard
> David Rush <kumo...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Jun 24, 12:20 pm, William D Clinger <cesur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Lars Hansen, for whom Larceny is named, explained
>>> JavaScript to me: "It's basically Scheme with Java
>>> syntax and the object system from hell."
>> Well, this is arguably a little off-topic, but I just couldn't pass it
>> up as I think I am starting to actually *like* javascript (even if I
>> hate programming web browsers).
>
> Well, me too. There's both some subtle cleverness and silliness going on with
> it. Its closures and generalized object-as-maps idea are quite powerful. Now
> if they only have local var scoping in {...} sections it would be much better.
I read ECMA 262 and was thrilled to learn that "with" can be used for
local scoping:
with ({foo : 42})
document.write(foo);
(Displays 42 in FireFox).
However, later I found out that ECMA-327 says:
5.3 The with Statement
A conforming implementation is NOT REQUIRED to support the with
statement (ES3 section 12.10). If with is not supported, use of a with
statement results in a syntax error.
NOTE
The with statement makes access to named references inefficient,
because the scopes for such access cannot be computed until runtime.
I must admit I haven't check which browsers support "with". I know
FireFox support it.
12.10 The with Statement
Syntax
WithStatement :
with ( Expression ) Statement
Description
The with statement adds a computed object to the front of the scope
chain of the current execution context, then executes a statement with
this augmented scope chain, then restores the scope chain.
Semantics
The production WithStatement : with ( Expression ) Statement is
evaluated as follows:
1. Evaluate Expression.
2. Call GetValue(Result(1)).
3. Call ToObject(Result(2)).
4. Add Result(3) to the front of the scope chain.
5. Evaluate Statement using the augmented scope chain from step 4.
6. Let C be Result(5). If an exception was thrown in step 5, let C be
(throw, V, empty), where V is the exception. (Execution now
proceeds as if no exception were thrown.)
7. Remove Result(3) from the front of the scope chain.
8. Return C.
NOTE
No matter how control leaves the embedded 'Statement', whether
normally or by some form of abrupt completion or exception, the scope
chain is always restored to its former state.
--
Jens Axel Søgaard