Can anyone recommend a library extension for Standard ML with similar strength as, and preferrably looking like, Prelude for Haskell? Preferrably one that works for many ML implementations, i.e. built with only the existing standard library and itself.
One library I have found is MyLib, which does not resemble Prelude particularly.
The SML/NJ lib contains quite substantial functionality, most of which should be portable to any SML implementation. You can find the manual here.
Related
Julia doesn't support something like a switch-case a control structure, at least according to the current documentation of Control Flow?
switch case is a common Flow Control in imperative or object oriented languages, why not in julia?
Language supporting switch-case (not completed)
C/C++
Java
Pascal
PHP
Javascript
Typescript
Octave
The basic philosophy of julia is to provide most functionality as packages and keep the core (Base) ultra-lean. So the answer to "why doesn't Julia support X" is usually "Julia supports X via package Y". In this case, the Match.jl provides a switch-case like structure that is very powerful.
There is also a Switch.jl package that is very close to C's switch, but it is not actively maintained.
There is extensive discussion about including this in julia language. It will probably happen at some point but maybe not until after v1.0.
See here for the main discussion (includes links to other discussions): https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/18285
& this one is informative too (but now closed in favour of the above):
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/5410
edit
Also it is worth mentioning that julia need not offer syntax for switch-case because it might be best (in terms of features) to have it implemented as a macro (i.e. via metaprogramming) which need not be included in Base julia.
I'm trying to calculate a Student-t probability. I really need the incomplete beta function for this, but I can't find any good function in Lua. Does it exist?
I've ported over the code from Numerical Recipes in C, and it works, but it's not open source license. I need something with a real license, like GPL, MIT, etc.
There's also Apophenia, at http://apophenia.info/ . It doesn't yet have Lua bindings, but I'd even be willing to work with you on developing one. It's plain C and its only complication for binding is the setup for variadic functions. Even this is not especially complicated; just push a lot of extra nils onto the stack as needed.
Lua Fun is a high-performance practical programming library designed for LuaJIT tracing just-in-time compiler. The library affords a set of extra than 50 programming primitives usually determined in languages like Standard ML, Haskell, Erlang, JavaScript, Python and even Lisp.
I am a huge fan of source code comments but the comments in the Ada standard library are spartan at best. It is my understanding that the interface of the library is defined with the language definition, but the implementation is left to the compiler manufacturer. I often wondered how they do it, since the pure function names, parameters, and other definitions as I see them in the manual often don't explain what exactly the respective subprograms do and leave much to interpretation. I would expect some documentation along the line of the QT library.
Why is it there no definition of the library with extensive comments for every function?
It sounds like you are looking for the documentation in the wrong place.
The Ada standard library is described in great detail in the standard (the Ada Reference Manual) - and in even greater detail in the Annotated Ada Reference Manual.
The source files of the individual implementations of the Ada standard library are not the documentation of how the standard library should work.
For an example, the ARM section A.18.5 for Ada.Containers.Hashed_Maps says in paragraph 1 - which would normally be referred to as "A.18.5 (1)” -
The generic library package Containers.Hashed_Maps has the following declaration:
so I guess that implementors have read this as an instruction.
In the case of Hashed_Maps, you’ll see at A.18.5 (46) a link to A.18.4, which describes the common semantics of Maps; and Length, for example, is at (25).
GPS GPL from AdaCore Help > GNAT has links to a local copy of the ARM (GPS GPL 2014 only goes up to ARM2005); I don’t know what the Debian version does.
(This is how it is; that’s not to deny you have a point about how it might be better!)
I search for a programming language for which a compiler exists and that supports self modifying code. I’ve heared that Lisp supports these features, but I was wondering if there is a more C/C++/D-Like language with these features.
To clarify what I mean:
I want to be able to have in some way access to the programms code at runtime and apply any kind of changes to it, that is, removing commands, adding commands, changing them.
As if i had the AstTree of my programm. Of course i can’t have that tree in a compiled language, so it must be done different. The compile would need to translate the self-modifying commands into their binary equivalent modifications so they would work in runtime with the compiled code.
I don’t want to be dependent on an VM, thats what i meant with compiled :)
Probably there is a reason Lisp is like it is? Lisp was designed to program other languages and to compute with symbolic representations of code and data. The boundary between code and data is no longer there. This influences the design AND the implementation of a programming language.
Lisp has got its syntactical features to generate new code, translate that code and execute it. Thus pre-parsed code is also using the same data structures (symbols, lists, numbers, characters, ...) that are used for other programs, too.
Lisp knows its data at runtime - you can query everything for its type or class. Classes are objects themselves, as are functions. So these elements of the programming language and the programs also are first-class objects, they can be manipulated as such. Dynamic language has nothing to do with 'dynamic typing'.
'Dynamic language' means that the elements of the programming language (for example via meta classes and the meta-object protocol) and the program (its classes, functions, methods, slots, inheritance, ...) can be looked at runtime and can be modified at runtime.
Probably the more of these features you add to a language, the more it will look like Lisp. Since Lisp is pretty much the local maximum of a simple, dynamic, programmable programming language. If you want some of these features, then you might want to think which features of your other program language you have to give up or are willing to give up. For example for a simple code-as-data language, the whole C syntax model might not be practical.
So C-like and 'dynamic language' might not really be a good fit - the syntax is one part of the whole picture. But even the C syntax model limits us how easy we can work with a dynamic language.
C# has always allowed for self-modifying code.
C# 1 allowed you to essentially create and compile code on the fly.
C# 3 added "expression trees", which offered a limited way to dynamically generate code using an object model and abstract syntax trees.
C# 4 builds on that by incorporating support for the "Dynamic Language Runtime". This is probably as close as you are going to get to LISP-like capabilities on the .NET platform in a compiled language.
You might want to consider using C++ with LLVM for (mostly) portable code generation. You can even pull in clang as well to work in C parse trees (note that clang has incomplete support for C++ currently, but is written in C++ itself)
For example, you could write a self-modification core in C++ to interface with clang and LLVM, and the rest of the program in C. Store the parse tree for the main program alongside the self-modification code, then manipulate it with clang at runtime. Clang will let you directly manipulate the AST tree in any way, then compile it all the way down to machine code.
Keep in mind that manipulating your AST in a compiled language will always mean including a compiler (or interpreter) with your program. LLVM is just an easy option for this.
JavaScirpt + V8 (the Chrome JavaScript compiler)
JavaScript is
dynamic
self-modifying (self-evaluating) (well, sort of, depending on your definition)
has a C-like syntax (again, sort of, that's the best you will get for dynamic)
And you now can compile it with V8: http://code.google.com/p/v8/
"Dynamic language" is a broad term that covers a wide variety of concepts. Dynamic typing is supported by C# 4.0 which is a compiled language. Objective-C also supports some features of dynamic languages. However, none of them are even close to Lisp in terms of supporting self modifying code.
To support such a degree of dynamism and self-modifying code, you should have a full-featured compiler to call at run time; this is pretty much what an interpreter really is.
Try groovy. It's a dynamic Java-JVM based language that is compiled at runtime. It should be able to execute its own code.
http://groovy.codehaus.org/
Otherwise, you've always got Perl, PHP, etc... but those are not, as you suggest, C/C++/D- like languages.
I don’t want to be dependent on an VM, thats what i meant with compiled :)
If that's all you're looking for, I'd recommend Python or Ruby. They can both run on their own virtual machines and the JVM and the .Net CLR. Thus, you can choose any runtime you want. Of the two, Ruby seems to have more meta-programming facilities, but Python seems to have more mature implementations on other platforms.
I would like to easily implement a data classification project, so I'm looking for the language which provides the library for that. Could you suggest the proper language?
matlab is not exactly a programming language, but no doubt it's the easiest way to implementing math oriented programs. it has lots of toolboxes for classifications (e.g. MLP, SVM) optimization toolboxes.
There is a Python distribution called SciPy that has lots of tools for scientific programming and people have used it to do data classification. Some bioinformatics people have built Excel2SVM in Python.
If the focus of your work is on the data classification, not on developing software, then Python is a good choice because you can be more productive than with languages like java or C++.
I'd say you really need more information before choosing a language.
Where are you getting data from, what front end do you want to use (web / dedicated client) ?
C# could do just as good a job, or any Object oriented language.
Cheers
(A little late coming, but I thought this answer should be here for the record).
WEKA and MALLET are two useful libraries for data classification that I've come across. I've used WEKA in a couple of projects and can say that it is pretty mature. Both these libraries are Java-based.