A Hyperturtle Monad Draws Pretty Pictures
jvt
previous Monads In Lisp tutorial I've written useful in understanding
what monads are/do. I've recently written a new one about various
instances of state-like monads used to construct purely functional
Turtle Graphics-like systems with some interesting extended
capabilities (this tutorial is in Scheme, rather than Emacs Lisp). It
is here:
http://dorophone.blogspot.com/2011/05/hyperturtle-monad-makes-pretty-pictures.html
The previous tutorial which serves as a kind of introduction (even
though its in Elisp) is here:
http://dorophone.blogspot.com/2011/04/deep-emacs-part-1.html
And for completeness, I've got a screen cast about monadic parser
combinators up here:
http://dorophone.blogspot.com/2011/05/monadic-parser-combinators-in-elisp.html
I'd worry about spamming the list serve with my own content except Xah
Lee is always posting his crazy blog posts, so I guess its ok?
-V
Pascal J. Bourguignon
Yes, it's a relief to see a posting more related to lisp than psychiatry.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
Xah Lee
> Hi cll -
> …
> I'd worry about spamming the list serve with my own content except Xah
> Lee is always posting his crazy blog posts, so I guess its ok?
i guess i'm honored. It's great of u to peddle ur stuff at the expense
of my name.
perhaps you seek a lil constructive advice from me: if you think your
stuff is useful, feel free to post here, without feeling guilty and
needing to find scapegoat as excuse.
and now you should thank me too, because i've contributed to your
advertisement.
long live the spirit of newsgroup.
Xah
jvt
The jab was entirely good natured, Xah. I actually enjoy your posts,
for the most part.
-V
namekuseijin
Xah is just mad because he doesn't like jargon like "Monads". ;)
Xah Lee
Wee! I figured if the pesky Pascal J B would praise a article, it must
be worthwhile.
〈Deep Emacs Lisp Part 1 (Basically, a Monad Tutorial)〉, (2011-04-09)
by JVT. @ http://dorophone.blogspot.com/2011/04/deep-emacs-part-1.html
btw, is there a subscribe button on your blog? Blogger is annoying in
that by default they have subscribe button to comments but not the
blog. (one can subscribe in Google Reader just by plain blog site's
url, but still, a explicit rss button would be better)
i'll be reading your article soon and perhaps blog about it on my blog
and maybe give some feedback.
PS it annoys me to no end when one cannot easily find the name of the
author on blogs, when the blog author clearly didn't meant to be
anonymous. Is there a reason you didn't want it spelled it out?
(i despise hacker culture, where these “hackers” idiotic-namesake
prefer to go by “handles” or abbrevs (e.g. “RMS”, “ESR”, “JWZ”) or
whatnot insider-fashion fuck. But that's just me.)
Xah
Antony
> (i despise hacker culture, where these “hackers” idiotic-namesake
> prefer to go by “handles” or abbrevs (e.g. “RMS”, “ESR”, “JWZ”) or
> whatnot insider-fashion fuck. But that's just me.)
-Antony
Pascal J. Bourguignon
> (i despise hacker culture, where these “hackers” idiotic-namesake
> prefer to go by “handles” or abbrevs (e.g. “RMS”, “ESR”, “JWZ”) or
> whatnot insider-fashion fuck. But that's just me.)
If you despite hacker culture why do you stick with us all the time?
Are you masochist?
Shut down you computer and go meet other people with another culture!
Xah Lee
wrote:
> Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> writes:
> > (i despise hacker culture, where these “hackers” idiotic-namesake
> > prefer to go by “handles” or abbrevs (e.g. “RMS”, “ESR”, “JWZ”) or
> > whatnot insider-fashion fuck. But that's just me.)
>
> If you despite hacker culture why do you stick with us all the time?
> Are you masochist?
>
> Shut down you computer and go meet other people with another culture!
there is a substantial number of programers in this world, who truely
enjoy programing, and all sorts of computing technologies, hardware
and or software, digging into their innards. This group of people,
some are computer scientists, some pro programers, some amature
programers, very diverse. This is a group i belong to.
Now, in this group of people, there is a sub-group, who share certain
styles, personalities, propensities, in their activities or outlook in
computing. This group is the “hacker” subculture i refer to.
Note that there's no clear-delineated definition. But roughly: Richard
Stallman generation at MIT, people who thrive with {perl, unix, C},
fall into this group. It's hard to come up with even rough definition,
but the best i can think of is those who enjoys the word “hacking” or
“hacker”. e.g. they like to call a enjoyable programing session as
hacking, they address respected peers as “hacker”, they simply enjoy
all connotations afforded by that word, but they absolutely hate how
journalists or laymen use the work “hack” to mean what they would call
“crack”, and often go at lengths to speak against such usage.
--------------------------------
Here's what Wikipedia has to say about the term “hacker”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(term)
here's a excerpt:
«
Hacker is a term that has been used to mean a variety of different
things in
computing. Depending on the context, the term could refer to a person
in any
one of several distinct (but not completely disjoint) communities and
subcultures:[1]
* A community of enthusiast computer programmers and systems
designers,
originated in the 1960s around the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology's (MIT's) Tech Model Railroad Club (TMRC) and MIT
Artificial
Intelligence Laboratory.[2] This community is notable for
launching the
free software movement. The World Wide Web and the Internet
itself are
also hacker artifacts.[3] The Request for Comments RFC 1392
amplifies
this meaning as "[a] person who delights in having an intimate
understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and
computer networks in particular." See Hacker (programmer
subculture).
* The hobbyist home computing community, focusing on hardware in
the late
1970s (e.g. the Homebrew Computer Club[4]) and on software
(computer
games,[5] software cracking, the demoscene) in the 1980s/1990s.
The
community included Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak and Bill Gates and
created
the personalcomputing industry.[6] See Hacker (hobbyist).
* People committed to circumvention of computer security. This
primarily
concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a
communication
networks such as the Internet (Black hats), but also includes
those who
debug or fix security problems (White hats), and the morally
ambiguous
Grey hats. See Hacker (computer security).
Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer
criminals, due
to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s. …
»
--------------------------------
Here, the first definition is in our context. Wikipedia has a
dedicated article on that, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(programmer_subculture)
, which elicits the Jargon File, and also has sections on “Ethics and
Principles”, “Artifacts and Customs”.
It is this group of people, i despise. More accurately: i despise
their general style and outlook. I despite them. Fuck them. FUCK
hackers. FUCK their hacking. Fuck their mothers. Scumbags.
These hackers, a large percentage of them, also are what i call Tech
Geekers. Here are related articles about tech geekers and hackers.
• 〈What is a Tech Geeker?〉
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/tech_geeker.html
• 〈Spy vs Spy; Tech Geekers vs Spammers〉
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/tech_geekers_vs_spammers.html
• 〈Hacker News, Xahlee.org, and What is Politics?〉
http://xahlee.org/Netiquette_dir/hackernews_xahleeorg_politics.html
• 〈GUI Makes People Dumb?〉
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/gui_and_dumbness.html
• 〈Paul Graham's Infatuation with the Concept of Hacker〉
http://xahlee.org/comp/Paul_Graham_language_design.html
• 〈The Idiocy of Hacker Keyboards〉
http://xahlee.org/emacs/keyboards_hacker_idiocy.html
• 〈The Unix Pestilence〉
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/freebooks.html
Xah
jvt
(to the right of the content) and there is a "subscribe to" button/
link at the very bottom of the page. Is there some blogger idiom I
don't know about like putting a giant "subscribe" button somewhere?
Xah Lee
│ Seems like my actual name (Vincent Toups) is in the "about me"
section
│ (to the right of the content)
i missed that. Thanks.
│ and there is a "subscribe to" button/
│ link at the very bottom of the page. Is there some blogger idiom I
│ don't know about like putting a giant "subscribe" button somewhere?
i still don't see the subscribe button though. The one at the bottom
subscribes you to comments.
you might check blogs by google to see how they do the webfeed button.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/
which i kinda follow.
Xah
Xah Lee
> 〈Computing Culture: What's Hacker?〉
> http://xahlee.org/Netiquette_dir/whats_hacker.html
> there is a substantial number of programers in this world, who truely
> enjoy programing, and all sorts of computing technologies, hardware
> and or software, digging into their innards. This group of people,
> some are computer scientists, some pro programers, some amature
> programers, very diverse. This is a group i belong to.
>
> Now, in this group of people, there is a sub-group, who share certain
> styles, personalities, propensities, in their activities or outlook in
> computing. This group is the “hacker” subculture i refer to.
>
> Note that there's no clear-delineated definition. But roughly: Richard
> Stallman generation at MIT, people who thrive with {perl, unix, C},
> fall into this group. It's hard to come up with even rough definition,
> but the best i can think of is those who enjoys the word “hacking” or
> “hacker”. e.g. they like to call a enjoyable programing session as
> hacking, they address respected peers as “hacker”, they simply enjoy
> all connotations afforded by that word, but they absolutely hate how
> journalists or laymen use the work “hack” to mean what they would call
> “crack”, and often go at lengths to speak against such usage.
>
> --------------------------------
> Here's what Wikipedia has to say about the term “hacker”:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(term)
>
> here's a excerpt:
>
> «
> Hackeris a term that has been used to mean a variety of different
> things in
> computing. Depending on the context, the term could refer to a person
> in any
> one of several distinct (but not completely disjoint) communities and
> subcultures:[1]
>
> * A community of enthusiast computer programmers and systems
> designers,
> originated in the 1960s around the Massachusetts Institute of
> Technology's (MIT's) Tech Model Railroad Club (TMRC) and MIT
> Artificial
> Intelligence Laboratory.[2] This community is notable for
> launching the
> free software movement. The World Wide Web and the Internet
> itself are
> alsohackerartifacts.[3] The Request for Comments RFC 1392
> amplifies
> this meaning as "[a] person who delights in having an intimate
> understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and
> computer networks in particular." SeeHacker(programmer
> subculture).
>
> * The hobbyist home computing community, focusing on hardware in
> the late
> 1970s (e.g. the Homebrew Computer Club[4]) and on software
> (computer
> games,[5] software cracking, the demoscene) in the 1980s/1990s.
> The
> community included Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak and Bill Gates and
> created
> the personalcomputing industry.[6] SeeHacker(hobbyist).
>
> * People committed to circumvention of computer security. This
> primarily
> concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a
> communication
> networks such as the Internet (Black hats), but also includes
> those who
> debug or fix security problems (White hats), and the morally
> ambiguous
> Grey hats. SeeHacker(computer security).
>
> Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer
> criminals, due
> to the mass media usage of the word since the 1980s. …
>
> »
>
> --------------------------------
>
> Here, the first definition is in our context. Wikipedia has a
> dedicated article on that, here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(programmer_subculture)
>
> , which elicits the Jargon File, and also has sections on “Ethics and
> Principles”, “Artifacts and Customs”.
>
> It is this group of people, i despise. More accurately: i despise
> their general style and outlook. I despite them. Fuck them. FUCK
> hackers. FUCK their hacking. Fuck their mothers. Scumbags.
>
> These hackers, a large percentage of them, also are what i call Tech
> Geekers. Here are related articles about tech geekers and hackers.
If you wonder why do i hate “hackers” and everything associated with
that term, here's more.
〈HTML5 Doctype, Validation, X-UA-Compatible, and Why Do I Hate
Hackers〉
http://xahlee.org/js/html5_validation_doctype.html
plain text version follows
------------------------------------
HTML5 Doctype, Validation, X-UA-Compatible, and Why Do I Hate
Hackers
Xah Lee, 2011-06-21
I'm giving up on html validation. Fuck the W3C. Fuck Google. Fuck
Apple. Fuck Microsoft. Fuck Firefox.
In the past 10 years, i've been quite strict and stern about html
validation. However, every little thing you do run into problems. In
[14]embedding YouTube videos, in [15]adding Google search widgets,
[16]adding Comment System, in embedding Twitter or Facebook widgets,
in adding ads, in mirroring documents from other sources (e.g.
[17]Emacs Lisp Manual.)…. Normally, it might take 5 min to do a job.
But with concern about correct HTML, it takes n hours to research and
find a solution that work across browsers yet still correct. See:
* [18]HTML Correctness and Validators
* [19]Google Earth KML Validation Fuckup
* [20]Programing: Google and Amazon Generates Invalid HTML
* [21]W3C HTML Validator Invalid
* [22]W3C HTML Validation Problem: p in li
* [23]How to Embed Video with Valid HTML
* [24]Programing: GNU Texinfo Problems; Invalid HTML
What's worse is that every [25]elite programing idiot (aka
“hacker”) will insist how validation is important while completely
ignoring reality.
Worse is that supposedly the “good guys” big companies {Google,
Apple} now peddle HTML5 because it would benefit THEMSELVES, while
completely ignore anything about validation. They — in particular the
“do no evil” Google — do not even pay lip service to validation.
(Google is trying to overtake the world and run over Microsoft with
the web. They cannot do that unless web tech supports traditional
desktop functionalities, that's why they need to push HTML5. Apple do
it for the same reason for their iPad iPhone money-cow.)
What's HTML5? It's a flying-fuck-in-your-face against a decade of
what W3C told us about what HTML should or should not be. HTML5 was
started by mostly Google and Apple, and in the beginning was sneered
by W3C, but W3C finally lost the power struggle and accepted HTML5.
You know? W3C is like United Nations. It was supposed to be this
neutral standard body. But in fact it really is just a masked face of
the powers. The distinction between good for the masses and the powers
behind group, gets thin over the years.
The situation is not much different than the 1990s where the
leading companies push new tech to gain market. (e.g. Netscape with
<blink>, <font>, javascript, cookies, etc.)
* [26]Internet History, Netscape, Dot Com, Code Rush
* [27]HTML, CSS, javascript, Web Tech and Browser Timeline
* [28]Cookies, Super Cookies, Your Privacy
The difference is that this time, the new stuff is sold as a
“standard”, and the [29]Tech Geekers went along smiling.
How to Make Your Site IE Compatible with X-UA-Compatible
What prompted me to write this rant on this topic AGAIN? Well, when
i view my site with Internet Explorer 9 (IE9), it shows a little ugly
icon of broken page in the url field. That broken page icon doesn't
show for Google, Apple, or Microsoft sites. So i took a bit to
investigate, which inevitably ends up several hours spent.
The matter is not simple as usual just like every html stuff.
Basically, if your site doesn't include a “X-UA-Compatible” metatag
such as <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9">, than that
icon will show up, even if you use the “html5 doctype” <!doctype html>
and all your page is valid and pretty simple and doesn't use any css/
js/browser-sniffing/quirksmode or whatnot hack.
So my dilemma is, if my completely valid html4 site with extremely
simple markup, do i need to cave-in to whatever some company is doing
and add that “X-UA-Compatible” non-standard stupid extra little string
just so that IE won't show that little ugly broken-page icon?
So i also took a little time to check what other big sites do.
Here's Apple.com:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" lang="en-
US">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8" />
<meta name="Author" content="Apple Inc." />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=1024" />
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=EmulateIE7,
IE=9" />
…
Here's google.com when served to IE9:
<!doctype html><html><head><meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible"
content="IE=8"><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">…
Here's microsoft.com:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://
www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"><html dir="ltr"
lang="en" xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xmlns:bi="urn:bi" xmlns:csp="urn:csp"><head><title>…</title><meta http-
equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=EmulateIE8" /><meta http-
equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
…
Here's Wikipedia, which does not use the “X-UA-Compatible” and the
broken-page icon shows:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://
www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html lang="en" dir="ltr" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>…</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
…
Note, Wikipedia is one of the few most trafficked site that uses
valid HTML/XHTML, in the few times i've checked since ~2005, but the
few times i've checked in the past 2 years they seem to have slacked.
The “X-UA-Compatible” was introduced with IE8. (in contrast to
typical tech geekers, i don't blame Microsoft for it) Here's
Microsoft's official doc about it: Defining Document Compatibility
(2011-04) @[30]Source msdn.microsoft.com
Here's a very short summary. Use one of:
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9">
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=8">
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=7">
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=EmulateIE7">
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=5">
What's the difference between “IE=7” and “IE=EmulateIE7”?
It's not clear to me from scanning that long article, but then i
found this Microsoft blog: Introducing IE=EmulateIE7 (2008-06-10) By
Jefferson Fletcher (IE product manager) of ieblog. @ [31]Source
blogs.msdn.com. Quote:
Content Value Details
IE=7 Display in IE7 Standards mode; Already supported in the IE8
Beta 1 release
IE=EmulateIE7 Display standards DOCTYPEs in IE7 Standards mode;
Display quirks DOCTYPEs in Quirks mode; Available through the IE June
Security Update for IE8 Beta 1
Complexer and Complexer
There is a mantra, widely accepted among web communities from unix
idiots throughout 1990s and even early 2000s.
It's from Unix's RFC (aka Really Fucking Common) #793, under the
section “Robustness Principle”: «be conservative in what you do, be
liberal in what you accept from others». Typically quoted as:
Be conservative in what you send; be liberal in what you accept.
— [32]Jon Postel
If you ever wonder why web tech is so fucked up, you have to thank
these idiots. (See: [33]The Nature of the Unix Philosophy)
[34]✍
* [35]HTML5 Video and Audio Tag
* [36]HTML6: Your JSON and SXML Simplified
* [37]HTML5 Canvas vs SVG
* [38]Using iframe to Embed Youtube Videos
* [39]Javascript Execution Order; HTML5 Asynchronous Javascript
* [40]HTML5 “figure” ＆ “figurecaption” Tags Browser Support
Xah
Jukka K. Korpela
> On Jun 4, 5:00 am, Xah Lee<xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
Why are you self-quoting?
>> http://xahlee.org/Netiquette_dir/whats_hacker.html
Oh, you are self-quoting your own page. It would make much more sense to
summarize your point in one sentence and refer a web page for more
information. If you can’t summarize the point, there usually is no point.
> If you wonder why do i hate “hackers”
I don’t, and honestly, I don’t care.
> 〈HTML5 Doctype, Validation, X-UA-Compatible, and Why Do I Hate
> Hackers〉
> http://xahlee.org/js/html5_validation_doctype.html
>
> plain text version follows
No summary, no point. Thank you for confirming this by the absurd
crossposting. If a message is on-topic in comp.lang.lisp, it’s surely
off-topic in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html, and vice versa.
No point, no points. Thanks for playing.
F’ups set to poster.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> 2011-06-22 19:31, Xah Lee wrote:
>> [usual troll-spam]
> […]
> No point, no points. Thanks for playing.
Thanks in advance for not feeding this well-known troll again.
(How come that you easily call everyone "troll" when they happen to disagree
with you, or challenge your *beliefs*, but that you have failed to recognize
each and every *real* troll so far?)
> F’ups set to poster.
Ignored since this is of public interest.
F'up2 poster
PointedEars
--
realism: HTML 4.01 Strict
evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
madness: XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
-- Bjoern Hoehrmann
Jukka K. Korpela
> Thanks in advance for not feeding this well-known troll again.
It has occasionally seemed necessary to comment on your messages, even
though it also means feeding you.
> (How come that you easily call everyone "troll" when they happen to disagree
> with you, or challenge your *beliefs*, but that you have failed to recognize
> each and every *real* troll so far?)
You are pretending that you do not know the difference between trolling
and spamming. Xah Lee might be a spammer, but I hadn't seen his spam,
and the spam (perhaps accidentally) contained text that made it look
relevant to c.i.w.a.h. Some study was needed to see that it just looked
that way.
With your trolling, it's different, because you make comments that look
relevant even in a closer look - it just turns out, on even closer
inspection and by following your postings for some time, that you are
just showing off, trying to present all your expertise on everything, no
matter how irrelevant your facts, factoids, and lecturoids might be to
the discussion at hand. And of course they contain a fair share of errors.
>> F’ups set to poster.
>
> Ignored since this is of public interest.
>
> F'up2 poster
Quite trollish, isn't it?
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/