freenode/#lisp - IRC Chatlog
Search
22:08:27
jmercouris
I'm working with: https://github.com/atlas-engineer/cl-webkit/blob/master/webkit2/webkit2.web-view.lisp#L171
22:21:19
jmercouris
https://webkitgtk.org/reference/webkit2gtk/2.5.1/WebKitWebView.html#webkit-web-view-run-javascript
22:21:30
jmercouris
so the thing is, we are catching the error in webkit_web_view_run_javascript_finish
6:25:07
beach
I think of a style guide as merely documenting established conventions. Not as an attempt to expose personal preferences.
7:47:34
beach
A two page document that contains more than 40 occurrences of "I" is not a style guide. It is an exposure of personal preferences.
7:55:17
no-defun-allowed
http://verisimilitudes.net/2020-02-14 I guess. Usually I would expect that the newest documents are at the top of the list.
7:57:32
Shinmera
beach: He did say that he just wanted to note his own preferences, but I honestly don't understand the point of writing something like that up, if it's not meant to be generally useful?
7:59:27
no-defun-allowed
I disagree with (the example of) reusing symbols; the latter would cause less of a hastle if another programmer wanted to extend the program, maybe to also count the number of symbols with function bindings.
8:04:20
White_Flame
most of the doc is personal preference (much of which I could give real reasons against), but that one is pretty cut and dry
8:07:27
no-defun-allowed
I don't understand what is meant by "A macro should strive to have an expansion which is pleasant to a human reader and also stress using pure standard Common Lisp where possible". The first part is hard to do in some situations, such as parsing, where the code generated is going to be ugly no matter what, but I don't understand what "pure standard Common Lisp" means. Can I not expand to another macro I define using
8:08:08
jeosol
I am not sure if he is trying to be funny, argumentative or not. He said he doesn't use WHEN and UNLESS. Haha. Interesting ...
8:09:14
beach
jeosol: I think "argumentative" is the answer. If you look in the logs of this channel for the last 2 years, and you search for utterances by me mentioning that name, you will see.
8:10:10
jeosol
I am surprised by some of the things he writes, whether is a lisper or just some troll.
8:10:17
no-defun-allowed
If so, I'm done for, because in one of my projects I have a DEFINE-FUNCTION-OPCODE, which generates a body for DEFINE-OPCODE which calls a function, which then expands to %DEFINE-OPCODE with some typo checking. That seems like a fair expansion path otherwise.
8:10:24
beach
jeosol: It is basically a long list of "I don't give a damn about conventions. This is what *I* think."
8:11:26
jeosol
That's how I read it. Especially the comment about using 100 columns vs. 80 columns, and alluding to tribal fire ...
8:12:41
jeosol
I guess I shouldn't take it seriously then. I thought it was something that probably incorporated and built on Norvig's/Pitman's guidelines
8:13:46
beach
It's the exact opposite. That document was recommended to this person more than a year ago. The fact that Norvig and Pitman are much more experienced does not seem to matter.
8:14:17
jeosol
He really just wants to argue and be against convention. In almost every paragraphs, he comes across as not wanting to heed or following any convention.
8:15:47
no-defun-allowed
And the example code shouldn't be presented differently to actual code, as it is already distinguishable from other text by the gray background and monospace font. That is especially confusing in the context of a style guide; should we write all upcased code?
8:16:00
beach
I mean, by not following the recommendations on that page, you actually follow the recommendations on that page. :)
8:16:24
jeosol
no-defun-allowed: yeah, the comment about upcase, I didn't see the point of it at all.
8:17:31
no-defun-allowed
(I don't mind people saying "screw you guys, I'm going to do my own thing" and acting upon it, as that sometimes creates very interesting results, but this style and its presentation are very silly.)
8:19:22
White_Flame
what is this supposed to mean? "if a multi-word predicate name ends in P, that implies it's not a predicate, but a variation on one."