User talk:GordonCharlton: Difference between revisions

 

::::::That's a catch I've caught so many times it's become part of my work-flow. Step 1, get it working for simple nests, Step 2, generalise it to nested nests by figuring out where to insert the <code>nested</code>.<br><br>Eventually I want to build a little library of the more useful combinators, but, lacking the background in functional programming (my LISP experience was mostly about consing up lists, and mapcar was rather exotic) I figured that I'd get some Quackery experience under my belt before addressing that. <code>filter</code> and <code>reduce</code> are obvious candidates, but beyond that the list of combinators that Factor offers is quite bewildering to me.<br><br>Indeed. I had noticed that Python users get the functional approach, the iterative approach, the recursive approach, dynamic programming, object oriented, Python 2, Python 3, ... (and then a scrap of Quackery just below it like an impertinent footnote at the end of a long chapter. Which amuses me. I have been tempted to add "Using Quackery" to the end of the the list of Python approaches. (<code>import quackery; print(quackery.quackery('$ "Hello World"')) </code> (or something like that.) LOL.) At the moment my distant mountain is [https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code:TODO#Ideal_Minimum_Penetration Ideal Minimum Penetration] (fnarr), but if I see an opportunity to add a very different approach to a task I'll certainly add it.<br>--[[User:GordonCharlton|GordonCharlton]] ([[User talk:GordonCharlton|talk]]) 11:54, 27 January 2021 (UTC)