The Raku Programming Language
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gurth Polish was standardized several times, the latest was Soviet effort in late 1940s-early 50s to make everything uniform and doubleplus good, building upon the work in the interwar period. Because it's both recent and centrally planned, we have almost 1:1 mapping between spelling and pronunciation
We’ve got that to a fairly large degree, but there are a bunch of spellings that reflect the pronunciations of the main dialects of Dutch on which the standard spelling was based and/or which have etymological reasons, leading to unnecessary confusion IMHO. There are also some frankly inconsistent things and other odd decisions where they made spelling less clear.
The problem of not knowing how to write or pronounce words you've just learned basically doesn't exist. It even applies to names and surnames.
Names are the one thing whose spelling is never changed here, certainly not people’s names and very rarely place names. So we get archaic spellings of place names (Den Bosch, in which the sch is pronounced /s/ because that ending moved from /ʃ/ or /sk/ to /s/ centuries ago), unnecessarily complicated spelling (Oss rather than Os) and almost English-like absurdity (Gorinchem being pronounced /ˈxɔr.kəm/, which could just be spelled Gorkem for the exact same pronunciation). And good luck writing someone’s last name right if you were told its, say, Meiers without it being spelled for you.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska Spanish is the same, and didn't require communism. But you do you.
Which Spanish? Castillian, Aragonian, Catalan, Andalucian, or Mexican?
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska Tell me again how to pronounce that L, which is not really L.
Like "w" in "we". Always, no exceptions.
Or five ways to pronounce ą and ę.
There's only one. The others are artifacts of trying to speak too fast.
-
@Gąska Yes.
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Like "w" in "we"
For some reason other languages consider it L, because it looks like L, so it must be, even if it doesn't quack like L at all. Lodz and Wroclaw, for example. Obviously Polish can name their own places as they please; it's everyone else who's got it łrong. But it's still confusing.
There's only one
If you say so, goshka. Or ganska. Or gamska. Isn't it Dąbrowsky = Dambrovski? And Brzęczyszczykiewicz = Brenc... fffzzh... ch...
chshszwshprshMAUL HALTEN!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Like "w" in "we"
For some reason other languages consider it L, because it looks like L, so it must be, even if it doesn't quack like L at all. Lodz and Wroclaw, for example. Obviously everyone else has got it łrong, but it's still confusing.
Fun fact: in Russian, the "L" sound and the "W" sound are literally the same letter, Л. Pronunciation depends on accent and surrounding letters.
There's only one
If you say so, goshka. Or ganska. Or gamska.
Gonska.
Isn't it Dąbrowsky = Dambrovski? And Brzęczyszczykiewicz = Brenc... fffzzh... ch...
chshszwshprshMAUL HALTEN!As I said - artifacts of speaking too fast. You'll be fine pronouncing them as /ɔ̃/ and /ɛ̃/ every time, but it requires significant tongue gymnastics to pull off, so in many words it gets blended with the next letter.
-
@Gąska Ałright. Doesn't seem like proper 1:1 to me, is what I'm saying.
Fun fact: in Russian, the "L" sound and the "W" sound are literally the same letter, Л. Pronunciation depends on accent and surrounding letters.
Which Russian?
significant tongue gymnastics
I thought that was a prerequisite already
Edit: No, not ałright, actually. I still don't get it.
What the heck is the difference in, for example, Wrocław between the first w, the ł, which is w, and the final w?
It's Vrocwaf, isn't it? Three different W-s!
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Fun fact: in Russian, the "L" sound and the "W" sound are literally the same letter, Л. Pronunciation depends on accent and surrounding letters.
Wait, what? You can't tell me that вокзал and локзав (not a real word, tbh) sound even remotely similar to each other. Are you sure those are the sounds/letters you've had in mind?
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska Ałright. Doesn't seem like proper 1:1 to me, is what I'm saying.
That's why I said almost.
Fun fact: in Russian, the "L" sound and the "W" sound are literally the same letter, Л. Pronunciation depends on accent and surrounding letters.
Which Russian?
The one I was taught Maybe the teacher was wrong. But when you compare Polish and Russian words, the soft Л always corresponds to L, and hard Л always corresponds to Ł.
-
Paging @mott555. I know he loves Polish language.
E: Dammit, LAST ONLINE 29 DAYS AGO. Hope nothing bad has happened to him
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Which Russian?
The one I was taught Maybe the teacher was wrong. But when you compare Polish and Russian words, the soft Л always corresponds to L, and hard Л always corresponds to Ł.
My Russian is also school-only (and about decade older), but I am pretty sure there is no letter that corresponds to polish ł or english w. Maybe there is a similar sound in common speech, though...
The fact that ł corresponds to something else does not actually mean anything; it just reflects the historical shift when the original L changed in Polish language (to w), but remained the same (or almost the same) in other slavic languages.Since we already discuss that, please explain the difference between "u" and "ó"
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in The Raku Programming Language:
Since we already discuss that, please explain the difference between "u" and "ó"
My mother says her grandmother pronounced the two differently.
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Which Spanish? Castillian, Aragonian, Catalan, Andalucian, or Mexican?
The Catalan language isn't Spanish. It's quite distinct (it's much more closely related to Occitan) and mixing the two up is a good way to end up in trouble in Barcelona. That's a part of the world where language is a very political thing…
-
@dkf said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Which Spanish? Castillian, Aragonian, Catalan, Andalucian, or Mexican?
The Catalan language isn't Spanish.
I know. But Catalans still speak Spanish. And it's a different Spanish than down south.
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Kamil-Podlesak said in The Raku Programming Language:
Since we already discuss that, please explain the difference between "u" and "ó"
My mother says her grandmother pronounced the two differently.
Interesting. Was she also from Lower Silesia? That would make sense, with the dialect continuum blending with Sorbian and/orCzech (also, big influence of German).
-
@Kamil-Podlesak she was relocated there from Kresy. So I'd say it's more of an eastern thing than southwestern.
-
@dkf said in The Raku Programming Language:
That's a part of the world where language is a very political thing…
Is there actually any part of world where language is not a political thing? Maybe it's just a "little political" somewhere, but I dare to say that any such places are just temporary anomalies.
(Then again, my mother tongue is a political statement)
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in The Raku Programming Language:
Is there actually any part of world where language is not a political thing?
Not really. Language is a very large part of the identity of people, and is very closely related to how people think. Given that, it's absolutely no surprise that it's closely tied to politics, and has been for as far back as I can think of. (Or rather once you get into the middle ages, it's less key because the basis for politics was so different.)
-
@dkf said in The Raku Programming Language:
and is very closely related to how people think
A few days ago I've seen an article that debunks exactly this. Don't remember where I found it so can't link it - sorry.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
Like "w" in "we"
For some reason other languages consider it L, because it looks like L, so it must be
This kind of thing will always remain a problem until everybody switches to something like IPA for their spelling.
@dkf said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Kamil-Podlesak said in The Raku Programming Language:
Is there actually any part of world where language is not a political thing?
Not really. Language is a very large part of the identity of people, and is very closely related to how people think. Given that, it's absolutely no surprise that it's closely tied to politics, and has been for as far back as I can think of. (Or rather once you get into the middle ages, it's less key because the basis for politics was so different.)
I’ve not looked into this, but I suspect that languages became a much more important and defining thing in the early modern period, when nation-states as we know them first really began to develop. In medieval Europe nobody really seems to have had any problems being ruled by people who spoke a different language, for example, or for counties, duchies etc. to have two or even three languages spoken within their borders. But once you start to think of yourself as (part of) a people with a country, you’ll quite soon also start seeing those who speak a different language from you as “not us”.
Thinking about it, the 16th century seems to have been a turning point, at least where Western Europe is concerned (I don’t know enough about the history of, say, Southern or Eastern Europe in this respect, though). Bible translations around then, due to the Reformation, did a lot to unite people speaking the same language, for example.
-
@Gurth said in The Raku Programming Language:
until everybody switches to something like IPA for their spelling
Instructions unclear. Switched to IPA hours ago, spelling hasn't changed at all.
-
@dfdub said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gurth said in The Raku Programming Language:
until everybody switches to something like IPA for their spelling
Instructions unclear. Switched to IPA hours ago, spelling hasn't changed at all.
You clearly haven't had enough of it.
-
@topspin
I can't get drunk on IPA. After the second one, the bitter aftertaste becomes too much and I don't want any more.I consider that a feature.
(For the same reason, I often buy chocolate with >=80% cocoa. It tastes nice and the bitterness prevents me from eating too much sugar.)
-
@Applied-Mediocrity Wasn't that the day of the Troubles? Could be he was binned, or against binning, or against the reversal of the binning.
-
@TwelveBaud Yeah, that was the day. Maybe it's that then...
-
Lunacy bite: Despite the native calling interface being surprisingly painless, there is one piece of silliness. If you are passing a class
Foo
into a C function, that's marshaled as a pointer, how do you pass a null pointer? In what world would the answer not beNil
? This one, because it'sFoo.WHAT
instead. I feel like they just needed an excuse to keep the distinction betweenFoo.WHAT
andFoo.HOW
relevant. If you are having trouble keeping up with concepts, in C# the equivalent to this would be passing a null pointer not withIntPtr.Zero
but withtypeof(IntPtr)
.
-
Ambiguous bite: Speaking of
Nil
, it's actually a class of its own, whose constructor just returns the class again, i.e.Nil.new ~~ Nil
. Unlike every other language under the sun, calling a method or retrieving a field or using a subscript or anything else onNil
does not throw an exception, but instead succeeds and returnsNil
again. Unless, of course, it's an item thatNil
actually defines, such as.gist
which produces"Nil"
or.chrs
which produces \0. The only time you get errors withNil
is if you try to assign it to a type constrained with:D
, becauseNil
is an undefined value same asFoo.WHAT
is. Is this lunacy? You decide.
-
@pie_flavor Ah yes, the happy face operator, to make sure that the happy path has been followed, and any deviation from it -- after violently exploding and taking out the church and the elementary school and the orphanage, killing thousands -- can be detected.
Edit: Actually I take that back. Based on what I've seen is this thread, the happy face operator would literally be . Which makes this... the retro happy face operator?
-
@TwelveBaud I believe the D and U stand for 'defined' and 'undefined' respectively. For example
$x.DEFINITE
is the same as$x ~~ Mu:D
andnot $x.DEFINITE
is the same as$x ~~ Mu:U
. But they absolutely do refer to them as 'type smileys' in the documentation, and I have no doubt they made them that way explicitly.
-
In JS, if you want to get a boolean value out of a truthy value, you invert it twice:
!!varName
. Raku has an operator for precisely this purpose:so
, used likeso $var-name
. I assume the name is chosen for how often it's used in conjunction withsay
.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
the same as
$x ~~ Mu:D
My new head-canon name for
~~
is “is as clear as”. Prove that it should be otherwise…
-
@dkf The docs call it 'smartmatch'. And it's literally just
sub infix:<~~>($a, $b) { $a.ACCEPTS($b) }
.
-
One thing that I'm happy Raku has is a proper floating-point equality operator.
$a ≅ $b
(or=~=
) produces true if the relative difference between$a
and$b
is less than$*TOLERANCE
, which you can assign yourself but defaults to1e-15
. Dunno why it needed a dedicated operator and couldn't just be~~
, but no other language I know of has an operator for it at all and 99% don't even include it in their standard libraries, so I guess beggars can't be choosers.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
In JS, if you want to get a boolean value out of a truthy value, you invert it twice:
!!varName
.I prefer
Boolean(varName)
. Explicit about the intent of the code, typos are easier to spot due to likely erroring, and not too many more characters than the double not.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
One thing that I'm happy Raku has is a proper floating-point equality operator.
$a ≅ $b
(or=~=
) produces true if the relative difference between$a
and$b
is less than$*TOLERANCE
, which you can assign yourself but defaults to1e-15
. Dunno why it needed a dedicated operator and couldn't just be~~
, but no other language I know of has an operator for it at all and 99% don't even include it in their standard libraries, so I guess beggars can't be choosers.Is that global or thread-local?
Can't say I think that's a good idea.
-
@topspin said in The Raku Programming Language:
Is that global or thread-local?
This is Perl-ish so yes. Perl gets… strange there and Raku's probably inherited that.
-
@Gąska said in The Raku Programming Language:
@dkf said in The Raku Programming Language:
and is very closely related to how people think
A few days ago I've seen an article that debunks exactly this. Don't remember where I found it so can't link it - sorry.
The theory is known as the Sapir Whorf hypothesis, and there are vigorous arguments for and against it. Going towards the really strong interpretation gets into ideas like ancient Greeks not being able to see blue because they had no word for it (there's a famous story that talks about the bronze coloured sea), whereas rejecting it completely would suggest that using a derogatory term for a particular group wouldn't have any effect on how you see them. The truth, as usual, is going to be somewhere in the messy middle
-
@dfdub said in The Raku Programming Language:
chocolate with >=80% cocoa. It tastes nice
[Citation required]
-
@topspin said in The Raku Programming Language:
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
One thing that I'm happy Raku has is a proper floating-point equality operator.
$a ≅ $b
(or=~=
) produces true if the relative difference between$a
and$b
is less than$*TOLERANCE
, which you can assign yourself but defaults to1e-15
. Dunno why it needed a dedicated operator and couldn't just be~~
, but no other language I know of has an operator for it at all and 99% don't even include it in their standard libraries, so I guess beggars can't be choosers.Is that global or thread-local?
Can't say I think that's a good idea.It's scoped.
{ my $*TOLERANCE = 1; say 1 =~= 1.1; # true } say 1 =~= 1.1; # false
-
@pie_flavor but is the default read-only, thread-local, or mutable global?
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
@topspin said in The Raku Programming Language:
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
One thing that I'm happy Raku has is a proper floating-point equality operator.
$a ≅ $b
(or=~=
) produces true if the relative difference between$a
and$b
is less than$*TOLERANCE
, which you can assign yourself but defaults to1e-15
. Dunno why it needed a dedicated operator and couldn't just be~~
, but no other language I know of has an operator for it at all and 99% don't even include it in their standard libraries, so I guess beggars can't be choosers.Is that global or thread-local?
Can't say I think that's a good idea.It's scoped.
That's ... I honestly didn't even think of that possibility.
But then it's Perl-ish, so why did I expect anything.
-
@Gąska Yes.
-
@pie_flavor I genuinely believe combining all three behaviors at once wouldn't be beyond Raku. I bet that it usually refuses to overwrite the default but sometimes it doesn't and it's by design, and that sometimes changing it affects other threads and sometimes it doesn't.
-
@Gąska well, I've no incentive to try it and see. Anyway, the scoped behavior of
$*TOLERANCE
is possibly the best summary of Raku there can be. Perl-style stupidity, but with 21st-century capabilities.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
@Gąska well, I've no incentive to try it and see.
That's true of everything posted in this thread, yet here we are.
-
More on that: The
*
in$*TOLERANCE
means that scoping follows the call stack, not the code outside the function.sub foo { $^a =~= $^b } sub bar { my $*TOLERANCE = 1; say so foo(1, 1.1); # true }
If it were just
$TOLERANCE
, then the redefinition would not be in scope forfoo
. However, because of the*
, it is.my $foo = 1; my $*bar = 1; sub foo { $foo } sub bar { $*bar } sub baz { my $foo = 2; my $*bar = 2; say foo ~ 「 ≠ 」 ~ bar; }
baz
prints1 ≠ 2
.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
foo ~ 「 ≠ 」 ~ bar;
-
@topspin I mentioned
「」
was the default quoting construct in the OP. And~
is the string concatenation operator.
-
In JS you can monkeypatch classes and objects with new variables. Raku thinks this is for babies, and lets you monkey-patch the fucking language itself. To avoid a significant loss of sanity I will refrain from learning enough to explain it to you, but the docs offer this example code:
use MONKEY-TYPING; augment slang Regex { # derive from $~Regex and then modify $~Regex token backslash:std<\Y> { YY }; }
$~Regex
is the regex language,$~Quote
is the quoting language, and, yes,$~MAIN
is Raku itself.This is lexically scoped, of course.
-
@pie_flavor said in The Raku Programming Language:
@topspin I mentioned
「」
was the default quoting construct in the OP. And~
is the string concatenation operator.I know. It still looks like line noise.