2003-12-01: 07:34:28 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:30:32 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 22:10:27 -!- calamari_ has joined. 2003-12-02: 00:29:40 ++++++++++++++[>+++++>++++++++>+++++++>++>++++++<<<<<-]>+.>>+++.<--.>.<++++++.>++++.------.>++++.>.<<++.<++++.----. 01:21:53 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:22:09 -!- Taaus has joined. 01:30:35 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 05:26:50 -!- clog has joined. 05:26:50 -!- clog has joined. 05:28:44 -!- calamari_ has joined. 05:45:17 -!- deltab has quit (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:49:05 -!- deltab has joined. 05:52:59 -!- Taaus has quit (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:53:04 -!- Taaus has joined. 06:27:37 -!- lament has joined. 06:30:01 -!- Taaus has quit (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 06:30:01 -!- deltab has quit (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 06:30:27 -!- Taaus has joined. 06:32:59 -!- deltab has joined. 06:48:10 ++++++++[>++++++++++++>+++++++++++++>++++<<<-]>>.+.>.<+++.<+.>+.<++++.>+.++++++. 06:51:05 hi! 06:55:25 I should post my gp code.. it's much improved over the other day 06:57:11 what can it do? 06:58:07 I wanted to study a bit about genetic programming/algorithms. It tries to find the shortest program to display a given line of text 06:59:15 at frist I was hoping it could figure out all the loops, etc, but it was too hard a problem, so I gave it the multiply loo pand add structure 06:59:32 loo pand -> loop and 06:59:46 (like you see above) 07:01:07 as far as I've been able to determine, using that structure, the 111-byte Hello World!\n is optimal 07:02:00 ok.. java source up at http://lilly.csoft.net/~jeffryj/languages/textgen.java 07:33:08 oops, that version was messed up, it is reposted and works now 07:42:38 I'm going to bed, +++++++++++[>+++++++++>+++++++++++<<-]>-.>.<+++. 07:42:50 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:57:17 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 20:48:08 -!- calamari_ has joined. 20:53:11 -!- lament has joined. 20:57:30 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 21:39:47 -!- calamari_ has left (?). 2003-12-03: 00:11:24 -!- clog has joined. 00:11:24 -!- clog has joined. 01:08:10 -!- clog has joined. 01:08:10 -!- clog has joined. 02:10:10 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:39:35 -!- lament has quit ("a shoggoth is trying to break the wall... brb"). 22:11:39 -!- calamari_ has joined. 22:37:36 -!- lament has joined. 22:37:54 hi 22:40:01 hi 2003-12-04: 01:58:29 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 03:42:34 -!- lament has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 03:44:39 -!- lament has joined. 04:09:47 -!- deltab has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 04:09:47 -!- Taaus has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 04:09:58 -!- deltab has joined. 04:09:58 -!- Taaus has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:15:42 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 16:16:43 -!- fizzie has joined. 19:56:41 -!- calamari_ has joined. 19:57:19 hi 23:05:20 -!- lament has joined. 23:49:42 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 2003-12-05: 00:11:46 -!- calamari_ has left (?). 02:14:47 -!- lament has joined. 05:46:57 -!- calamari_ has joined. 05:47:13 hello 06:20:39 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:03:19 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 07:10:03 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:56:11 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 10:35:53 mmorning. 15:03:06 [off-topic] whee, participated in this lottery-like thing and won a sgi indy. I seem to be collecting stupid old unix workstations. 19:31:42 -!- lament has joined. 20:25:12 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 23:59:51 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-06: 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:30:35 -!- lament has quit ("Changing server"). 2003-12-07: 00:15:26 -!- lament has joined. 01:17:33 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 01:22:32 -!- lament has joined. 01:23:11 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 01:39:10 -!- lament has joined. 01:47:41 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 01:50:35 -!- lament has joined. 01:54:29 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 02:51:21 -!- lament has joined. 02:52:51 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 03:00:55 -!- lament has joined. 03:22:19 -!- arthur_dent has joined. 03:24:28 -!- arthur_dent has quit (Client Quit). 03:28:53 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 03:33:00 -!- lament has joined. 03:50:37 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 03:50:44 -!- lament has joined. 03:51:22 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 03:52:26 -!- lament has joined. 06:10:35 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 06:12:53 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:09:59 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 23:43:20 -!- lament has joined. 23:48:23 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 2003-12-08: 02:31:30 -!- arthur_dent has joined. 02:31:34 -!- arthur_dent has left (?). 03:46:18 -!- lament has joined. 07:13:18 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 13:01:51 [more off-topicy] eeh, they've installed irix-6.5 on this ~'93-released hardware I got. it's sloooooow. 20:12:54 -!- lament has joined. 21:23:02 -!- lament has set topic: Celebrate Afflux!. 22:22:07 does anybody actually celebrate them? :) 22:23:39 a discordian holiday? 22:23:58 yes. 22:25:00 haven't seen anyone celebrating around here, but haven't really been paying attention either. 22:32:28 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 2003-12-09: 00:32:34 -!- arthur_dent has joined. 00:33:56 -!- arthur_dent has left (?). 00:58:55 -!- lament has joined. 06:43:54 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:29:21 -!- lament has joined. 09:27:47 -!- lament has quit ("=)"). 22:17:14 -!- Taaus has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 22:17:14 -!- deltab has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 22:17:18 -!- fizzie has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 22:17:37 -!- fizzie has joined. 22:17:37 -!- Taaus has joined. 22:17:37 -!- deltab has joined. 2003-12-10: 01:00:27 -!- lament has joined. 04:50:25 -!- andreou has joined. 05:12:29 -!- andreou has quit ("hic sunt dracones"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:41:51 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 20:50:50 -!- lament has joined. 23:20:24 -!- fizzie has quit (Remote closed the connection). 2003-12-11: 00:36:57 -!- lament has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 00:36:58 -!- deltab has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 00:36:58 -!- Taaus has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 00:37:22 -!- lament has joined. 00:37:22 -!- Taaus has joined. 00:37:22 -!- deltab has joined. 01:13:21 -!- lament has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:13:21 -!- deltab has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:13:21 -!- Taaus has quit (tolkien.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:13:41 -!- Taaus has joined. 01:13:41 -!- deltab has joined. 06:02:49 -!- lament has joined. 06:09:36 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:19:22 -!- fizzie has joined. 15:01:18 -!- clog has quit (^C). 15:01:18 -!- clog has quit (ended). 15:01:34 -!- clog has joined. 15:01:34 -!- clog has joined. 15:37:44 -!- clog has quit (^C). 15:37:44 -!- clog has quit (ended). 15:37:52 -!- clog has joined. 15:37:52 -!- clog has joined. 22:31:07 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-12: 01:03:42 -!- calamari_ has joined. 01:03:48 hi 01:26:03 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 03:22:53 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 06:18:17 -!- StuffSoljah has joined. 06:18:23 -!- StuffSoljah has quit (Client Quit). 06:57:17 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:19:36 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 19:57:26 -!- mtve has joined. 20:41:28 -!- lament has joined. 20:54:29 wow, it's mtve 20:55:50 hello :) 20:56:07 ehlo, people. 20:56:25 fizzie: endianness issues? :) 20:57:24 no, smtp exposure. 20:57:54 2134 byte order doesn't sound very normal. 20:59:16 2135 or even 2145 in fact 21:00:49 er, assumed 'helo' as the original greeting. (more smtp.) 21:01:11 :) 21:03:16 2135 is even better byte ordering - saves 20% of memory space. 21:03:48 4132, maybe? 21:04:21 er, that doesn't work. 21:04:36 2431 i mean. 23:03:01 -!- fizzie has quit ("broken disk; switching to new."). 2003-12-13: 01:09:30 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 01:18:43 -!- fizzie has joined. 01:24:29 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:50:33 -!- lament has quit ("arrrr"). 17:34:18 -!- Taaus has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 17:34:29 -!- Taaus has joined. 21:58:09 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-14: 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:19:05 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 19:15:09 -!- Taaus has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 19:18:18 -!- Taaus has joined. 2003-12-15: 01:07:01 -!- lament has joined. 01:14:56 -!- Optim has joined. 03:01:35 Optim: wow, you're in a few channels. 03:01:45 hi 03:07:52 -!- Optim has quit (Client Quit). 06:21:33 -!- lament has quit ("Changing server"). 06:22:05 -!- lament has joined. 06:22:37 -!- lament has quit (Client Quit). 06:23:22 -!- lament has joined. 07:14:41 -!- lament has quit ("brb"). 07:57:31 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:59:39 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 22:11:13 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-16: 01:17:53 -!- lament has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:17:53 -!- mtve has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:17:53 -!- deltab has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:18:15 -!- lament has joined. 01:18:15 -!- mtve has joined. 01:18:15 -!- deltab has joined. 01:29:01 -!- mtve has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:29:01 -!- lament has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:29:02 -!- deltab has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 01:29:58 -!- lament has joined. 01:29:58 -!- mtve has joined. 01:29:58 -!- deltab has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:16:23 woo! I can play 2.4 fugues now 08:16:35 i'm a fugenius. 08:16:50 Now i just need to create Befuge. 11:45:07 -!- lament has quit ("John Sebastian Bach sat upon a tack, but he soon got up again with a howl..."). 21:42:02 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-17: 00:39:03 So... Which fugues can you play now? 00:40:54 g-minor 00:41:07 c-minor, sometimes stumble just in a few places 00:41:19 and the first half of c-major :) 00:41:43 still a long way to go to playing the c# fugues which is what i really want to do. 00:42:04 (all of this from WTC book I) 00:42:06 Hehe... The first half of C-major is the easy part! :) 00:42:21 yes, but 00:42:26 the second half is the hard part :) 00:42:44 it just doesn't make any sense. 00:42:54 i don't _hear_ those strettos, how am i supposed to play them! 00:43:03 i know exactly where they are and can't hear them anyway. 00:43:35 Really? 00:45:38 well, maybe i should just try harder. 00:45:58 Hearing or playing? :) 00:47:07 both. 00:47:16 i don't really like it, anyway. 00:47:24 it's a bit strained. 00:47:32 (because of those strettos) 00:47:50 it sounds like a dirty hack :) 00:48:03 Heh. 00:48:31 J.S.Bach - The fugue-hacker. 00:48:32 at least the parts i can't play :)) 00:49:47 Damnit... I can't seem to find my WTC book I. 00:49:55 i'm learning Fmaj now. 00:50:51 do you play the C# ones? 00:51:01 If you get the chance, try learning his F minor sinfonia... It's bizarre. 00:51:24 Nope... These days, I only play... Hmm... D-major, I think. 00:51:40 oh. 00:51:54 for a 4-voice fugue, that one's pretty lame. 00:52:06 Actually, these days I don't play a lot of Bach... I'm in a Scott Joplin period :) 00:52:17 Well... I like the ending of it :) 00:52:26 oh. I like the beginning :) 00:52:42 i would try to learn Entertainer if i had the score 00:52:50 but i only have a weird four-hands version 00:53:03 That would make it difficult. 00:53:14 Entertainers :) 00:53:17 Although you could learn both parts ;) 00:53:39 play one, return back in time to where i'm playing it and play the other one? 00:53:51 ok! 00:54:19 Yes! Time machines solve _everything_! 00:54:40 we've already established that time machines are impossible because they allow one to solve the halting problem 00:55:37 Um. Right. 00:58:25 oh, i don't think i can play entertainer on my keyboard anyway 00:58:28 not enough keys 00:58:44 all WTC fits in four octaves :) 00:58:48 O_o 00:59:07 Four octaves... I'd go crazy. 00:59:12 Well... More crazy. 00:59:30 i have five 00:59:48 i just don't use the highest one :) 01:00:26 I have... Seven. And I recently got my piano tuned! Whooo. 01:01:22 not well-tempered? :) 01:02:02 Nah, not well-tempered. I prefer modern tuning. 01:02:26 "prefer"? You actually tried well temperament? 01:02:59 Yes. 01:03:09 whoa. 01:04:22 there's a theory that everything in WTC is written specifically to show off the idiosyncrasies of the key it's in. 01:04:29 which i don't believe, but it's still a good theory. 01:05:11 Yeah... I have a mathematician/musician acquaintance who wrote a bachelor thingy on that subject. 01:05:24 And I don't believe it either :P 01:05:51 considering that the C#major fugue, for example, was originally written in Cmajor 01:05:58 it's rather hard to believe :) 01:06:17 also it makes me want to play it in cmajor... 01:06:45 Well... Maybe Bach lucked out when it turned out that it sounded better in C# major ;) 01:07:03 no, it's only in C# to annoy me. 01:07:50 at least it's not in Java :) 01:08:05 Come now... C# major is an _easy_ key... You just have to remember that every single note is shifted up half a note ;) 01:08:12 yes 01:08:21 Ew. Java... I have to use Java next semester... Pity me. 01:08:28 pity you! 01:08:34 i pity you. 01:08:37 i used java this semester. 01:08:43 but it was only an introductory course. 01:08:56 I pity you! Introductorially. 01:08:58 guess what stuff they teach in introductory courses (CS 111)! 01:09:14 why, of course they teach all that stuff that's basic to computer science 01:09:19 OO, data hiding, 01:09:22 applets, Swing, 01:09:27 threads... 01:09:28 Urgh. 01:10:42 Luckily, our first semester was SML... At least that's a halfway sane language. 01:10:46 nice 01:10:52 in our uni 01:10:59 they used Scheme for that introductory course. 01:11:02 until last year. 01:11:07 now it's all Java. 01:11:18 :( 01:11:25 Scheme is clearly a bad introductory language 01:11:30 you can't even create applets in it! 01:11:34 not easily anyway. 01:12:19 True, true. 01:13:51 AND it doesn't have OO 01:14:05 I've tried arguing with prof over OO terminology. 01:14:08 of course, it's useless. 01:14:14 s/prof/the prof 01:14:15 It usually is. 01:14:33 What's the disagreement? 01:14:34 bah! at least it's java, not C++ 01:14:37 several 01:14:43 encapsulation vs. data hiding, for one 01:14:50 Ah. 01:16:55 I wish we were using Smalltalk instead of Java. 01:17:31 i wish everybody were :) 01:17:50 Good point :D 01:18:09 but alas 01:18:13 smalltalk is too dynamic 01:18:28 Verily. 01:18:43 of course, to do anythnig useful in Java 01:18:49 you have to cast things from Object 01:18:56 which makes it about as dynamic as smalltalk 01:19:03 but rather more inconvenient 01:19:25 Come now... Casting makes you feel ALIVE! 01:19:27 (and not at all type-safe) 01:20:47 yes, but casting also makes me regret it :) 01:21:12 True, true. 06:40:55 our 'introductory course' is scheme, and up to last year it was taught using sicp as the course material and was a moderately challenging course, called (translated) something like 'programming T1', then in the next semester there's 'programming T2' which uses C and java and is utterly trivial. 06:42:34 (this year 't1' was changed to 'introduction to programming', half of the material was cut away and the book changed to htdp ( design programs), because they thought it was _too_ challenging. I'd disagree but no-one asks me.) 06:43:28 ht - "how to" 06:43:31 fizzie: MIT did the same 06:45:47 oh? well, our 't1' didn't even try to cover whole sicp, only about the three first parts. don't think that would've been too much. and htdp is _horrible_. they use non-standard scheme, too. it's filled with "local"s, which is an utterly useless form since there already are internal defines and all the let-forms. 06:46:47 and they talk about lambda only in the last few chapters of the book, and it's introduced as being a shorthand notation for (local ((define (foo ..) ..)) foo). 06:47:21 ugh 06:48:14 uh anyway there's this 'digital and computer technology, basic course' exam in 14 minutes, guess I should get going to the right building. 06:48:22 be being away now. -> 07:12:31 -!- lament has set topic: Celebrate Yuletide! It's never too early!. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:29:18 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 09:23:00 -!- mtve has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 09:23:00 -!- deltab has quit (orwell.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 09:23:34 -!- mtve has joined. 09:23:34 -!- deltab has joined. 11:00:17 that was rather trivial. 21:11:59 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-18: 06:51:55 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:37:40 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 16:27:08 -!- clog has quit (^C). 16:27:08 -!- clog has quit (ended). 16:27:22 -!- clog has joined. 16:27:22 -!- clog has joined. 20:12:56 -!- Serapis has joined. 20:16:45 -!- Serapis has left (?). 22:15:52 -!- lament has joined. 23:34:55 -!- lament has quit ("oy."). 2003-12-19: 00:15:18 -!- lament has joined. 02:07:26 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:39:16 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 07:39:17 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 07:39:29 -!- Taaus has joined. 07:39:29 -!- fizzie has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:23:34 -!- lament has joined. 10:44:37 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 22:56:53 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-20: 03:13:05 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 05:42:18 -!- lament has joined. 06:07:53 -!- picudo has joined. 06:07:59 -!- picudo has left (?). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:03:00 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 2003-12-21: 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 2003-12-22: 03:09:21 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 03:09:22 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 03:10:03 -!- fizzie has joined. 03:10:03 -!- Taaus has joined. 05:45:43 -!- pjb has joined. 05:45:47 Hello! 05:45:52 What is Yuletide? 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:32:34 -!- robertlaplante has joined. 10:32:39 lo 10:33:12 -!- robertlaplante has left (?). 13:50:22 -!- pjb has left (?). 2003-12-23: 06:48:19 -!- dbc has joined. 06:48:32 Hello. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:11:03 -!- dbc has quit ("you have no chance to survive make your time."). 23:27:21 -!- Optim has joined. 2003-12-24: 01:39:21 -!- Optim has quit ("Quit"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:09:52 -!- calamari_ has joined. 09:09:58 hi 09:24:37 -!- calamari_ has set topic: Why is there an 'L' in Noel?. 09:36:48 -!- calamari_ has quit ("<=K"). 11:44:11 -!- Taaus has set topic: Why is there an 'L' in Noel? | Because "Noël" is prettier than "Noë"?. 11:47:31 -!- Taaus has set topic: Why is there an 'L' in Noel? || Because "Noël" is prettier than an "L"? Errr.... 2003-12-25: 07:18:31 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:24:54 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 19:09:17 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-26: 04:36:29 -!- lament has quit ("Lost terminal"). 05:57:52 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:46:08 -!- lament has quit ("bach and sleep and stuff"). 18:17:21 -!- lament has joined. 21:07:55 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 22:25:48 -!- lament has joined. 22:34:51 -!- Taaus has quit ("Moving. Whee."). 23:54:20 -!- Taaus has joined. 2003-12-27: 06:20:00 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:02:52 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:28:38 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 20:35:51 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-28: 04:21:15 -!- Optim has joined. 06:09:31 -!- Optim has quit (Client Quit). 06:56:23 -!- dbc has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:22:36 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 10:23:15 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 10:23:16 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 10:26:18 -!- dbc has joined. 10:26:18 -!- fizzie has joined. 11:16:49 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:16:49 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:17:44 -!- dbc has joined. 11:17:44 -!- fizzie has joined. 11:46:53 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:46:53 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:47:15 -!- fizzie has joined. 11:47:15 -!- dbc has joined. 11:56:42 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:56:42 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 11:58:37 -!- fizzie has joined. 11:58:37 -!- dbc has joined. 12:07:27 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:07:27 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:15:33 -!- Taaus has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 12:22:43 -!- dbc has joined. 12:22:43 -!- fizzie has joined. 12:22:43 -!- Taaus has joined. 12:32:33 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:32:33 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:32:33 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:32:55 -!- Taaus has joined. 12:32:55 -!- fizzie has joined. 12:32:55 -!- dbc has joined. 12:32:57 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:32:57 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:32:57 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 12:33:15 -!- Taaus has joined. 12:33:15 -!- fizzie has joined. 12:33:15 -!- dbc has joined. 16:21:19 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:21:19 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:21:19 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:21:23 -!- Taaus has joined. 16:21:23 -!- dbc has joined. 16:21:23 -!- fizzie has joined. 16:21:59 -!- fizzie has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:21:59 -!- dbc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:21:59 -!- Taaus has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:22:09 -!- fizzie has joined. 16:22:09 -!- dbc has joined. 16:22:09 -!- Taaus has joined. 19:57:15 -!- lament has joined. 2003-12-29: 05:49:30 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 07:10:05 -!- calamari_ has joined. 07:10:15 hi 07:19:48 -!- calamari_ has left (?). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 11:02:50 -!- dbc has quit ("you have no chance to survive make your time."). 20:53:58 -!- lament has joined. 21:54:11 -!- phb has joined. 21:54:16 ^_^ 21:54:26 -!- maihem has joined. 21:54:30 :D 21:54:30 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 21:54:32 OOM? 21:54:39 Out of memory 21:54:50 wel 21:54:51 -!- Lars_G has joined. 21:54:52 *well 21:55:03 nice 21:55:10 ANd now everyone goes quiet, long live Murphy 21:55:15 when you consider the C language, you don't actually consider the possibility of the program dying at any time because of OOM 21:55:15 ofcaurse :P 21:55:31 cause noone want to discuss this anyway, it's just a way to pass time in #c :P 21:55:35 when you analyze programs written in C you don't do that either 21:55:48 lament, actually a program for a turing machine *can't* handle oom. It must simply stop until more tape can be found 21:56:07 maihem: why? 21:56:11 lament, when writing in C, I try to ask if memory is available 21:56:26 So it's basically an interrupt with a handler that takes a long time 21:56:30 well, it won't help you because the program might die at any time 21:56:40 any time you need more stack for example 21:56:41 * phb is so out of the loop on turing machines :( 21:56:43 a turing machine does not have a function. "is there more tape or should I fail" 21:56:57 neither does c, if you consider the stack 21:57:15 -!- woggle has joined. 21:57:26 but a good turing machine should have detectors on the tape roll not to burn the driver motors uselessly 21:57:33 ugh 21:57:40 we're not talking about physical turing machines 21:57:56 Ok then there are no detectors. :) 21:58:05 what driver motors? Turing machine is a programming language, for all intents and purposes 21:58:18 well, turing machines are programs in a certain language, anyway 21:58:33 anyway 21:58:34 The problem is then wethever the turing machine aknowledges the lack of tape.. in theory it should not, so it would engage in a very strange form of overflow 21:58:37 -!- phb has changed nick to phb-wifi. 21:58:45 either overwritting the last position or something else 21:58:46 nothing stops you from writing an implementation of a turing machine with unlimited memory 21:59:00 lament, C guarantees 32 KB of auto storage, I wonder what it guarantees on nested function calls. 21:59:02 if anything 21:59:04 lament: is it possible? 21:59:14 you just transfer the problem of getting more memory into the lower abstraction level 21:59:43 (lower than your interpreter) 21:59:53 for example 22:00:07 you can write an interpreter for turing machines as a turing machine 22:00:10 as a matter of fact I am not %100 up to day with Turnign machines (saw them long ago thou I admire Alan M. Turing) but the thing doesn't even has an index to current position, does it? it just has forward, back, read, write and react on data 22:00:15 by definition, it won't ever have memory problems 22:00:25 Lars_G: correct. 22:00:46 So the machine itself is oblivious to any form of OOM, possible or not 22:00:56 by definition, it also wont ever exist :/ 22:01:00 and thus has no way to react to such an ocurrence, the reaction is undefined 22:01:02 maihem: incorrect 22:01:19 maihem: turing machines aren't the only programming language which doesn't care about memory constraints 22:01:27 maihem: many others don't, either 22:01:37 and implementations for them exist. 22:01:45 so if you have such an implementation 22:01:49 and you run out of memory 22:02:01 I know, they suffer the same problem, or they terminate prematurely 22:02:02 that it's a problem of the underlying implementation, not a problem of your turing machine 22:02:07 s/that/then 22:02:31 (underlying implementation - implementation of language in which your implementation of the TM is written) 22:02:39 therefore, your implementation of TM is still valid 22:02:43 even though it breaks :) 22:03:02 an implementation of a turing machine that does not have enough tape will not complete a program that will complete on a real turing machine. Such an implementation is an inadequate reification 22:03:45 besides, nothing stops you from writing an implementation that _will_ stop and wait for more memory every time it runs out of it. 22:03:52 Getting more memory will be the user's problem. 22:03:57 heh 22:04:24 that's what many programs (not TM ones) do anyway 22:04:53 the question becomes a problem of, how much memory can be made from the constituents of our universe - and will it exist for long enough for the program to finish with it ;) 22:05:08 no, that's irrelevant for the implementation 22:05:15 it's only relevant for an actual running program 22:05:36 implementations are allowed to delegate their problems to something else 22:05:44 for example, C delegates memory problems to the OS 22:05:55 lament: there is also restricted tm 22:06:03 lament: the have a limited band 22:06:19 Hmmm afaik memory problems ARE the OS's competence 22:06:31 i don't see how C delegating memory problems to the OS is different from TM delegating them to the OS. 22:06:36 if an implementation cannot run any program that will run on a turing machine. it is not a correct implementation of a turing machine. if the user provably *cannot* obtain arbitrary quantities of tape, then the implementation is inadequate. The implementation here includes the user unfortunately :/ 22:06:59 hm 22:07:05 maihem: akkerman? 22:07:11 provably you say.... 22:07:25 lament: fibunatchi number 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 22:07:44 sorry for my english 22:07:52 * Lars_G enters a crissis and slaps sleon|tuX around with a picture of Bill Gates 22:07:52 sleon|tuX: what? 22:08:09 Do not mention Fibonacci on my presence, it has left scars from college 22:08:14 maihem: hm! 22:08:30 Lars_G: oh no! 22:08:35 maihem: nah, wrong 22:09:03 if you can prove that a user cannot get the tape, then the implementation (software + user) can be proved to not run all programs written for a turing machine 22:09:20 yes, but my implementation is just software, not software + user. 22:09:42 if you can prove the user can't get enough tape, then you have to get another user. But the implementation (software) is still correct. 22:11:01 This discussion is rapidly heading towards, if the nuke drops, the program doesn't complete when it should. I can see that on the horizon :) 22:11:18 what? 22:11:20 um 22:11:27 that's _not_ a problem of the implementation 22:11:41 but does the destruction of the computer consitute completion? or is it bottom? 22:11:42 your usage of the word "implementation" is simply incorrect 22:12:14 I consider implementation to be equivalent to reification. Do you think that is incorrect? 22:12:18 yes. 22:12:47 would do you see as the difference? 22:12:49 a program that gets source code as input and performs the actions specified by that source code is an implementation (an interpreter) 22:13:02 the existence of a computer to run that program is completely irrelevant. 22:13:54 So was I really talking about a reification of an implementation? 22:14:10 reification. 22:14:28 and yes, reification of turing machines is impossible as long as the universe is finite. 22:15:06 which really sucks :( 22:15:08 IMHO a turing machine is concrete. hence the name "machine" rather than "function" 22:16:12 it's called a machine becasue modern CS terminology didn't exist back when Turing invented it. 22:16:37 nowadays they'd be called "Turing programs" 22:17:50 function is not modern CS terminology. it dates back to before Turing. I think it was Church that examined computability with the function application. 22:18:00 IIRC 22:18:14 I haven't read my ntes in a while :) 22:18:20 s/ntes/notes/ 22:18:32 maihem: turing machines aren't functions 22:19:04 If they have infinite tapes they are. IMHO. 22:19:09 what!? 22:19:18 if something has an infinite tape, it's a function? 22:19:57 A turing machine has an infinite tape. a turing machine is a function that can be applied to a program 22:20:22 to "a program"? 22:20:39 Huh... 22:21:13 maihem: turing machines are'nt applied to any programs. Turing machines _are_ programs 22:21:25 the program is the argument to which the turing machine function is applied, lambda p.(turingMachine p) program 22:22:09 apply a turing machine to a program and you get an answer (or non-completion if the program is written thusly) 22:22:50 what? 22:22:54 apply an (approximate?) implementation of a turing machine to a program, and if may not complete when the turing machine would have 22:23:09 i'm afraid you don't understand the terminology 22:23:25 if turing machines are "applied" to anything, then only to tapes 22:23:27 you mean my lambda application above? 22:23:50 yes, the tape is the program 22:24:00 no, the tape is not the program. 22:24:04 the tape is data. 22:24:23 the "program" is the brain of the TM itself. 22:24:28 data which is a program. the turing machine takes that data (program) and computes the result. 22:25:18 Do you call the input of your C programs "program"? 22:26:16 yes. If I were analysing the correctness of my reification of a formal specification 22:26:23 anyway! turing machines do take input and produce output (unless they fail to terminate) 22:26:34 as do functions 22:26:45 as do all programs 22:27:03 i don't see this as a sufficiently strong argument to be calling turing machines "functions" 22:27:04 yes, but an implementation of a turing machine is an implementation of a different function to the true turing machine 22:27:22 so I believe you cannot have a turing machine 22:27:53 you're confusing implementation with reification again. 22:28:07 that you _can_ have an implementation of a turing machine was proved by none other than Mr. Turing himself. 22:28:20 the famous Universal Turing Machine, in fact. 22:29:13 I don't believe it was proved at all. Hence the difficulty in proving that one can compute the result of the same processes that occur in your brain. 22:29:31 That's why the AI question is still out 22:29:53 ahem 22:30:03 http://mathworld.wolfram.com/UniversalTuringMachine.html 22:30:42 -!- phb-wifi has changed nick to ph|Zzzz. 22:30:42 you're confusing universal turing machine with the church-turing hypothesis 22:30:49 the latter wasn't proven. 22:30:56 mostly because it was disproven. 22:31:04 but we're not talking about that. 22:32:30 Ah, I see. 22:32:50 I'm thinking that one must have infinite tape to be a turing machine 22:32:55 Is that wrong? 22:32:58 no. 22:33:31 by definition, turing machines have infinite tape. 22:33:59 -!- sleon|tuX has quit ("Leaving"). 22:34:08 if they didn't, there would be some things they couldn't compute 22:35:49 so.. where am I going wrong? 22:36:03 in confusing implementation with reification 22:36:22 and in thinking that "machine" implies a real machine with a real tape, apparently. 22:36:38 http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?query=machine&action=Search 22:38:18 So while a reification of a function when applied to data (ie a program) must compute the same result as that function. while an implementation only need do that when applied to a subset of that data 22:38:39 no 22:38:46 sorry, a subset of the domain of that function 22:38:48 no 22:39:32 so an implementation of a turing machine could actually just always print "Hello, World"? 22:39:38 an implementation is a program, that provably implements the language. 22:39:59 I think that is circular 22:40:03 no. 22:40:11 the key word here is _program_ 22:40:15 it isn't a process 22:40:31 "application" doesn't ever come into the picture 22:40:56 maybe you need another universe to be able to successfully apply your implementation. 22:41:06 that's irrelevant to the implementation. 22:41:07 I suppose a program is applied also to the time that it is executed, and to external events 22:41:37 not unless all that is in the language specification. 22:41:43 So an implementation only needs to implement a function as closely as possible under the constrains of nuclear war, etc... including only having 4 Meg RAM 22:42:04 an implementation is *NOT A PHYSICAL OBJECT* 22:42:08 it's a _PROGRAM_ 22:42:15 programs don't have a RAM 22:42:24 programs can't be destroyed in a nuclear war 22:43:58 programs are just a bunch of symbols conforming to a given algebra 22:44:08 *bunches 22:44:11 just as turing machines are. 22:44:38 so an implementation is something that when a computer is applied to it, can be applied to a time and unknown event sequence to profuce a function that can be applied to a program in the lanuage that it implements and can produce the same result as that language given some appropriate time and event sequence? 22:45:00 that makes sense. I see your point 22:45:07 -!- Lars_G has left (?). 22:45:45 the events can include the addition of RAM by the user if necessary 22:45:54 no 22:45:55 no 22:46:09 i don't know what a "computer" is 22:46:57 you have an implementation that is a program and not a thing, but that doesn't require a computer in order to compute the result of running that program on a program? 22:47:07 programs don't require computers. 22:47:46 programs specify the semantics of a certain virtual machine. 22:47:47 I think pen and paper with a strict set of rules to follow a program is a computer. I don't mean to suggest it should be made of doped silicon 22:48:08 babbage designed one of steel 22:48:25 so... I think the term computer is generic enough 22:48:26 do you need a computer to calculate 2 + 2? 22:48:33 no, you don't need a computer, you need _arithmetics_ 22:48:56 given an arithmetics, 2 + 2 _is_ 4, you don't need to calculate it 22:48:56 yes. I compute 2 + 2 so I am a computer (if not efficient at arithmentic computations) 22:49:02 No! We need axioms! :D 22:49:33 arithmetics includes axioms :) 22:49:41 and rules for their application 22:49:46 just as programming languages do... 22:49:56 :) 22:50:16 maihem: SEE!! Taaus agrees with me! 22:50:44 He's right. That is a rather unique event. 22:51:47 thankfully, it's being recorded even as we speak 22:51:56 i will present the logs on my trial 22:51:57 heh 22:53:40 do arithmetics produce physical output over time? If not then your implementation is indeed just a function, and is thus a reification of some formal specification. sorry, I'm dragging this on needlessly aren't I :) 22:54:01 no, you're just confusing yourself further :) 22:54:12 I find that happens a lot :) 22:54:28 anyway, i didn't understand what you said :( 22:54:32 I've never had arithmetics interact physically with anything... Apart from the time I accidentally divided by zero, and my paper burst into flames... 22:54:57 lol 22:55:05 Taaus: you were lucky you weren't dividing zero by zero - anything could have happened! 22:55:22 Too true. 22:56:15 I think computers should represent numbers in log_2 form. so there is noo zero. Also far fewer integers, but you can't have everything. 22:57:08 I know, log_2 (log_2 (1)) 23:02:21 * Taaus goes back to reading about the joys of fold/unfold 23:16:03 -!- clog has joined. 23:16:03 -!- clog_ has joined. 23:20:12 -!- clog has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 23:20:12 -!- clog_ has changed nick to clog. 23:31:39 -!- maihem has quit ("Client exiting"). 23:54:54 and thus they left. 23:55:26 Verily. 2003-12-30: 04:00:47 -!- lament has quit ("Changing server"). 04:08:20 -!- lament has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:38:48 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 10:05:14 -!- ph|Zzzz has joined. 10:05:36 -!- ph|Zzzz has changed nick to phearbear. 10:06:36 -!- phearbear has left (?). 10:29:16 -!- lament has quit ("leaving"). 10:48:23 -!- sleon_ has joined. 10:58:12 -!- sleon|tuX has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 13:00:29 -!- sleon_ has quit (Remote closed the connection). 13:53:16 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 15:52:59 -!- sleon|tuX has changed nick to sleon|away. 15:53:06 -!- sleon|away has changed nick to sleon|tuX. 19:21:28 -!- sleon|tuX has quit ("Leaving"). 19:31:02 -!- lament has joined. 20:51:20 -!- meme has joined. 20:56:59 now we have two logging bots. 2003-12-31: 02:53:32 -!- lament has changed nick to lameAFK. 04:48:16 -!- lameAFK has changed nick to lament. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:45:20 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 10:48:26 -!- sleon_ has joined. 11:06:36 -!- sleon|tuX has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 11:19:52 -!- lament has changed nick to lameSLEEP. 13:13:34 -!- sleon_ has quit ("Leaving"). 13:13:39 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 15:55:16 -!- lameSLEEP has quit ("Lost terminal"). 16:19:30 -!- sleon|tuX has quit ("Leaving"). 18:36:24 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 22:05:22 -!- lament has joined. 23:22:46 -!- meme has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 23:26:18 -!- cmeme has joined. 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 10:45:20 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 10:48:26 -!- sleon_ has joined. 11:06:36 -!- sleon|tuX has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 13:13:34 -!- sleon_ has quit ("Leaving"). 13:13:39 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 16:19:30 -!- sleon|tuX has quit ("Leaving"). 18:36:24 -!- sleon|tuX has joined. 22:05:22 -!- lament has joined. 23:26:18 -!- cmeme has joined.