home.social

#harlequin — Public Fediverse posts

Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #harlequin, aggregated by home.social.

  1. Oof, dozed off at the end and woke up to Stallone's Cobra. Now that's scary! See y'all next time.

    #FullMoonFrights #Harlequin

    static.klipy.com/ii/4e7bea9f7a3...

  2. Oh no!! Did Harlequin take her baby's soul? Is that why he sounded like a girl..?

    Oh movie you or I got lost somewhere along the way, but I always appreciate @[email protected]'s esoteric picks!

    Have a good night, #FullMoonFrights magician's assistants.
    #Harlequin

    Cainii Blestem - Rasputin

  3. Wow, the screenwriter also wrote Long Weekend ('77), Patrick ('78) and Roadgames ('81).

    #FUllMoonFrights #Harlequin

  4. It seems like they dubbed all the Australian accents with British and American ones?

    #FUllMoonFrights #Harlequin

  5. And they just start wailing on him immediately hahaha! That's obviously what they wanted from the get-go. Just any excuse to lay on their own hands.

    #FullMoonFrights #Harlequin

  6. Now that you've cut that poor bird in two with a cymbal for no reason, could you treat me too?

    #FUllMoonFrights #Harlequin

  7. So... he's giving her everything but the d? is that what's happening?

    #FullMoonFrights #Harlequin

  8. I cannot believe Broderick Crawford ended up in this somehow, in a helluva promotion from the Highway Patrol to boot.

    #FullMoonFrights #Harlequin

  9. Joining #FullMoonFrights for #Harlequin. Had to jump in the shower first but I pre-gamed so I don't think I've missed too much....

  10. #NowWatching

    #Harlequin (aka Dark Forces, 1980)

    Dir. Simon Wincer
     
    Oh, I can't wait to see what all THIS is about. #FullMoonFrights

  11. First artfight drawing this year, for KomorebiNugget ! Warhammer 40k fans should recognise this one :>

    #artfight #warhammer #40k #w40k #harlequin #solitaire #art #artwork #krita #gaertan #avian #bird #anthro #furry

  12. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  13. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  14. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  15. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  16. In going through some old papers, I ran across these very interesting documents from long ago that I can't seem to find public reference to. They seem to offer some important historical insight about the Dylan language. This is from back when Dylan was called Ralph as a working title. In those days, the still-being-designed Lisp-like language had not yet moved to an infix syntax, and it looked and acted more like Scheme with an object system similar in spirit to CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System).

    My understanding is that there were some fairly deliberate choices made to NOT target the Lisp or Scheme community as users, which is part of why the move to infix. I think they wanted to appeal to a disaffected C++ crowd, but ultimately lost out to Java for that bid, and then having left the Lisp user base behind, ended up with a very small community as a result.

    But I still think there could be things the Scheme community would want to glean from this snapshot of history.

    I've included a scan of an email proposal I got from Dave Moon while he and I were at Symbolics, with his proposal for how to add conditions to the language. Note that Dylan did eventually go public and did have a condition system, so you could also just study that design directly. But what's useful here is to see how all that looked syntactically in a Scheme-like syntax. But, in that regard, I recommend starting by looking at the language itself.

    [0] Ralph: A Dynamic Language with Efficient Application Delivery, by Andrew LM Shalit, July 25, 1991.
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [1] Ralph Conditions (part 1 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    [2] Ralph Conditions (part 2 of 2)
    nhplace.com/kent/History/dylan

    cc @sigue @ramin_hal9001 @screwlisp

    #DylanLang #RalphLang #ComputerHistory #Harlequin #Lisp #CommonLisp #ConditionSystem #ConditionHandling #ErrorSystem #Scheme #SchemeLang #CLOS #AppleHistory #KentsHistoryProject

  17. #heatedrivalry #gamechangers2 #rachelreid #harlequin #lecture #roman #vo #romancemm #ebook

    Shane et Ilya sont les personnages principaux de la série canadienne Heated Rivalry. Jacob Tierney, le créateur de la série, a retranscris assez fidèlement le roman. C'était chouette de retrouver ces deux personnages mais aussi d'avoir plus facilement accès à leurs pensées (ce qui est plus difficile à retranscrir dans une série télé).