Stubblog


I must be missing something.
June 5, 2007, 6:49 pm
Filed under: i can haz cheezburger, lolbots, lolgeeks, wtf

What the fuck is I Can Haz Cheezburger, lolbots and lolgeeks all about? Are they supposed to be funny? ironic? are they having a dig at World of Warcraft players and people who send lots of text messages?

Perhaps it’s just a sign I’m getting too fucking old for the internet.

Advertisements

5 Comments so far
Leave a comment

I CAN PWN MIDDLE AGED LOLZ?!? BUKAKKELOLZ

Comment by LOLBOT

Of course they’re suppossed to be funny. We know this because they ARE funny. Just like you obviously ARE too old for the internet.

Comment by Pshhh....

RTARD.

http://lolcode.com/

http://blog.notdot.net/archives/32-LOLCode.net-Now-your-LOLCats-can-use-the-CLR!.html

IM IN YR LOOP
I HAS A DIFFERENCE
LOL DIFFERENCE R COUNTER NERF MINIMUM

These guys are real dumiez.

) Scope Issued (MAH & where variables are accessed)
2) Grammar problems
A) Function Call syntax
B) Slot Access Syntax (direct vs. indirect & ordering)
3) Inheritance (more specifically Interfaces, Mixins or Multiple?)

I tried my best to abide by LOLCodeisms such as trying to reduce punctuation, and making sure order of operations are easy to see. This spec assumes a very loosely typed language, and encourages it. Not sure how everyone feels about that. Anyway I wanted to point out the strong/weak points in the spec.

Areas of Interest
1) SRS BIZNUS operator. This was a little bit of a jump from what we discussed in the forums. I decided to take Memodude’s suggestion (indirect vs. direct) and limit it to one new operator to take care of direct-slot access vs. indirect slot access problem. I’m not sure about the keywords, or the idea in general. let me know what you think.
2) The NERF operator to remove slots (as well as subtraction). I just threw that in there, we hadn’t really discussed it.
3) The new “ME” identifier. The more I thought about it, the more we had to distinguish between I (current scope) and ME (calling object) within functions. This removes the MAH keyword, and makes code look cleaner. I’m not sure how everyone feels about this, but I thought I’d give it a try.
4) Mixins. I love the ability to mixin functionality whenever I want. I thought LOLCode could make use of this easily with the SMOOSH operator.
5) Runtime Inheritance – The ability to change your parent on the fly is pretty crazy. I figured it’s a really neat Idea and could lead to some very interesting capabilities (and I don’t think the implementation is all that hard).
6) Beginnings of a standard library. I think LOLCode could use some classes that are standard.

Please peruse the spec and let’s see if we can vote on this for acceptance. I was hopping we could push out the 1.3 spec within the year with the basic OO functionality.

Comment by Stan Bravovski

@stan … ?

Comment by Stuart Grimshaw

[…] God hates LOLcats. I still don’t get them, they’re still not funny. […]

Pingback by God hates LOLcats « Stubblog




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: