00:01:36 <|wez|> I need to get the stroke of genious first, I am not sure how to incorperate it in to the language
00:02:29 <pikhq> Other than that, I *think* you've got +-><., done.
00:03:13 <lament> |wez|: and what's your native language?
00:03:24 <|wez|> norwegian
00:03:35 <lament> ouch
00:03:48 <|wez|> what?
00:03:49 <lament> is that the one that's like swedish but with a potato in your mouth?
00:03:55 <lament> no, i think that's dutch
00:04:16 <|wez|> it's like durch whitout the potato and beer
00:04:26 <|wez|> dutch
00:05:58 <|wez|> lament: swedish with a potato in my mouth would be danish
00:06:25 <lament> oh
00:11:03 <|wez|> in brainfuck how exactly does [] works? I guess it is a while loop, but what values does it check for?
00:12:33 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
00:12:47 <lament> the pink ones
00:13:37 <|wez|> oooh, i thought it was the ones colored #7f7f7f
00:24:34 <|wez|> hmm so [] only checks if current pointer is zero or not, if it is not continue the while loop, that shouldn't be to hard to implement in MonkeyCode
00:37:39 <lament> basically the intuitive definition of turing-completeness is:
00:38:02 <lament> if you can make it out of two apples, a roll of string and a piece of cardboard, it's turing-complete
00:38:29 <pikhq> lament: Wrong.
00:38:40 <lament> pikhq: no.
00:39:34 <pikhq> lament: I can create an abacus from that, but it wouldn't be Turing complete.
00:39:39 <Asztal> the 4 objects represent a binary value, which is an instruction. how they change over time defines the program!
00:40:21 <lament> pikhq: it's about how you use it
00:40:38 <|wez|> lament: soo, everything is turing-complete, since we have macGyver?
00:40:40 <pikhq> lament: Your definition is wrong, however.
00:40:52 <lament> pikhq: my definitions are never wrong. By definition.
00:41:10 <pikhq> One can create something that's not Turing complete from that; you said that if you can create something with that, then it's Turing complete.
00:41:32 <pikhq> Therefore, your definition is wrong. QED.
00:42:11 <lament> Prove your first premise.
00:42:14 <pikhq> And your definition was just wrong. Therefore, your definition of a "definition" is, itself, wrong.
00:42:32 <pikhq> |--O--O--|
00:42:39 <lament> Your FACE is wrong.
00:43:43 <pikhq> We have there a trinary abacus (the cardboard is in half, the string is drawn between its two halves and tied to it, and the string goes through the apples), with only one digit.
00:43:48 <pikhq> That is clearly not Turing complete.
00:44:13 <pikhq> Therefore, one can create something that's not Turing complete from 2 apples, a piece of cardboard, and string. QED.
00:44:35 <lament> there's a fault in your proof.
00:44:43 <pikhq> Which is?
00:44:47 <lament> I'm not sure.
00:45:15 <pikhq> Then you were wrong to say that there's a fault in my proof.
00:45:23 <pikhq> Welcome to elementry logic.
00:45:23 <lament> but it is obviously critical since it leads you to an incorrect conclusion.
00:45:38 <lament> Aha! You misspelled 'elementary'!
00:45:45 <lament> THAT'S it.
00:45:47 <pikhq> The "correct" conclusion itself wasn't proven correct.
00:45:58 <pikhq> And my misspelling wasn't part of the proof.
00:46:53 <lament> I can prove the correct conclusion.
00:47:14 <pikhq> Please, do so.
00:47:26 <lament> I'll prove the contrapositive, that is, anything which is not turing-complete is not made out of two apples, a roll of string and a piece of cardboard.
00:47:52 <pikhq> I just disproved the contrapositive.
00:47:58 <lament> It's a simple inductive proof.
00:48:15 <pikhq> Err. Allow me to disprove it.
00:48:21 <pikhq> You first.
00:48:21 <lament> You haven't seen it yet.
00:48:43 <lament> Consider any non-turing-complete object X.
00:49:05 <lament> By definition, X is of a lower computational class than a turing machine.
00:49:24 <lament> Therefore X can be emulated by a turing-machine.
00:49:41 <lament> Two apples, a roll of string and a piece of cardboard cannot be emulated by a turing machine.
00:49:51 <lament> therefore, X is not made out of aforementioned materials.
00:50:32 <pikhq> But one can emulate this in a Turing-complete machine.
00:50:39 <pikhq> Consider the universe.
00:50:53 <lament> The universe isn't Turing-complete, being finite
00:51:17 <pikhq> The universe's finite state hasn't been proven.
00:51:27 <pikhq> It could be either finite or infinite.
00:51:44 <pikhq> At least, it's finite existence in the dimension of time hasn't been proven.
00:52:07 <pikhq> Anyways, the universe fits the *practical* definition of Turing completeness.
00:52:41 <pikhq> It emulates many finite-state automata, which (except for the infinite memory requirement) are Turing complete.
00:53:02 <pikhq> These finite-state automata, you may know as "personal computers".
00:53:41 <lament> if you consider finite state machines to be turing complete, you are rather outrageously misguided and deluded.
00:53:42 <pikhq> So, the universe is clearly pratically Turing complete (which, BTW, is the definition we should be dealing with, as we are merely talking about practical devices).
00:54:11 <pikhq> lament: They are *practically* Turing complete; that is, if they had access to an infinite storage device, they would be Turing complete.
00:54:14 <lament> we're not talking about practical devices. I have never seen a practical device made from two apples, a roll of string and a piece of cardboard.
00:54:24 <pikhq> |--O-O--|
00:54:32 <pikhq> One-digit trinary abacus.
00:54:39 <lament> that's practical????
00:54:39 <pikhq> Surely it exists in practice.
00:55:06 <pikhq> lament: For this definition of practical (can actually be made in our finite universe and used), yes, it is practical.
00:55:19 <lament> you keep redefining things
00:55:24 <pikhq> No, I'm not.
00:55:31 <lament> you're not, but you do.
00:55:38 <pikhq> I merely paid attention in Computer Science 101. :
00:55:40 <pikhq> :p
00:55:42 <lament> You keep abusing grammar, too.
00:56:08 <pikhq> It's IRC; if you can understand it, don't give a fuck.
00:56:17 <lament> Perhaps English is not your native language. To make communication easier, I will switch to toki pona.
00:56:31 <pikhq> I see you failed Logic 101, as well.
00:56:47 <lament> toki ni li pona ala pona tawa sina?
00:56:59 <pikhq> You have so far not actually argued against my logic. You've argued against everything *but* my logic.
00:57:04 <pikhq> And I don't speak Toki Pona.
00:57:11 <lament> mi pilin e ni: sina sona ala e ilo Turing.
00:57:16 <pikhq> I'm a native English speaker, damn it.
00:57:41 <lament> ni li pona :)
00:57:51 <pikhq> Cxu vi parolas Esperanton?
00:58:16 <lament> toki Epelanto li ike tawa mi. toki Epelanto li kalama ike!
01:11:51 <pikhq> Koroshitai.
01:11:51 <Asztal> :(
01:11:51 <lament> :(
01:11:51 <lament> Asztal: what
01:11:51 <Asztal> It's a language!
01:11:51 <lament> :(
01:11:51 <lament> which one?
01:11:51 * pikhq has so far used 3 different languages
01:11:51 <Asztal> :( :) =|;{> :|
01:11:51 <Asztal> lament: Bulgarian.
01:11:51 <pikhq> I'm contemplating using a fourth: dumbass.
01:11:51 <pikhq> ;)
01:11:51 <lament> pikhq hates me :(
01:11:51 <lament> but that's okay, i would hate me too if i were him.
01:11:51 <pikhq> Don't hate you; I just think you're playing a fool for fun & profit.
01:11:51 <pikhq> I will hate you after a few more hours of this, though. :p
01:20:23 <ihope> Now, what was that?
01:20:29 <ihope> The... hmm.
01:39:43 -!- ihope has quit ("http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/06.08.09").
01:52:01 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving").
02:24:58 <|wez|> good night
02:25:04 -!- |wez| has quit.
02:55:40 -!- Sgeo has joined.
03:20:00 -!- CakeProphet has quit ("haaaaaaaaaa").
03:32:15 -!- pikhq has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
03:35:05 -!- lindi- has quit (kornbluth.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
03:35:24 -!- lindi- has joined.
03:53:26 -!- Arrogant has joined.
04:52:56 -!- calamari has joined.
05:10:04 -!- Sgeo has quit ("Ex-Chat").
05:37:36 -!- GregorR-L has joined.
05:54:09 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
06:12:38 -!- ivan` has quit (" Want to be different? HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <-").
06:39:18 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving").
07:24:43 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving").
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:08:33 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving").
20:06:19 -!- clog has joined.
20:06:19 -!- clog has joined.
20:42:16 -!- Sgeo has joined.
20:49:11 -!- CakeProphet has joined.
20:52:33 -!- ivan` has quit (" HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <- The future of IRC").
21:01:53 -!- ivan` has joined.
21:30:24 <SimonRC> hi and bye to the several of you
21:30:42 <SimonRC> (as appropriate)
21:39:12 -!- ivan` has quit (" HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <-").
21:51:01 -!- calamari has joined.
21:51:14 -!- jix has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht").
21:51:34 <calamari> hi
21:56:13 -!- CakeProphet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:56:46 <oerjan> de ho
21:57:14 -!- CakeProphet has joined.
22:14:01 -!- tgwizard has quit (Remote closed the connection).
22:27:28 -!- Arrogant has joined.
22:28:40 -!- Keymaker has joined.
22:32:38 <Keymaker> http://koti.mbnet.fi/yiap/programs/aura/hey.aura
22:32:45 <Keymaker> http://koti.mbnet.fi/yiap/programs/aura/loop.aura
22:33:38 <Keymaker> http://koti.mbnet.fi/yiap/index.php?page=langs&lang=Aura
22:34:54 <Keymaker> damn, should've linked only the last link, as it has the other two linked in it. oh well
22:37:42 <GregorR-W> http://www.donotputthebaby.com/index.php?s=Condom
22:41:07 <Keymaker> a lot folk here today. anyways.. termination..
22:41:09 -!- Keymaker has left (?).
22:45:21 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving").
22:45:30 <calamari> GregorR: hehe.. my wife is due in April... so I guess we followed that one ;)
22:46:32 <calamari> here was an ipod color test http://www.felixbruns.de/iPod/iPodLinux/M4100002.JPG
22:46:54 <GregorR-W> Wow, awesome 8-D
22:47:17 <calamari> well, in regular graphics mode it is fine.. but that was a console using ansi escape sequences
22:47:36 <calamari> so now I need to debug it
22:48:00 <calamari> also, underline, bold, low intensity, reverse video don't work properly
22:53:14 -!- ihope has joined.
22:55:35 -!- pikhq has quit ("leaving").
22:55:51 -!- pikhq_ has changed nick to pikhq.
23:15:34 * SimonRC wonders where a description of Aura is.
23:15:55 * oerjan is currently reading the interpreter
23:17:58 <oerjan> it seems more like a debugger - it prints the memory contents before each step
23:22:09 * pikhq has fun with Brainfuck Golf. . .
23:24:08 <RodgerTheGreat> nothing quite like the 'ol BFG.
23:24:28 <pikhq> Indeed.
23:24:40 -!- paparent has joined.
23:24:51 <pikhq> And there's the good man making it happen.
23:27:29 <RodgerTheGreat> I want to see your 42-instruction solution.
23:28:17 <paparent> pikhq: did you tell about the golf ?
23:28:26 <ihope> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.
23:28:30 <ihope> 42 instructions.
23:28:59 <RodgerTheGreat> we probably should've explained more.
23:29:00 <ihope> It outputs ")".
23:29:10 <ihope> Yes, good idea.
23:29:18 <RodgerTheGreat> the challenge: output the lowercase letters a through z
23:29:25 <RodgerTheGreat> my best: 45.
23:29:32 <paparent> my best: 44
23:29:32 <ihope> Oh, sheesh, it might be easy.
23:30:21 <pikhq> Hard part is getting a small solution.
23:30:31 <RodgerTheGreat> and thanks to feesh's score of 56, my ego remains intact
23:30:38 <paparent> hehe
23:30:49 <RodgerTheGreat> oh, yeah. My first try was 48, and I didn't really have any trouble *doing* it.
23:31:14 <RodgerTheGreat> it's interesting because you have to initialize two constants, and there are many ways to fiddle with things.
23:31:21 <ihope> Wrapping cells ranging from 0 to 255, infinite to the right, starting on the leftmost cell?
23:31:40 <RodgerTheGreat> the contest/reference interpreter are here: http://paparent.nonlogic.org/index.php/brainfuck)
23:32:21 <RodgerTheGreat> and I believe you're correct, ihope.
23:32:54 <RodgerTheGreat> I assumed with my solutions nonwrapping cells, but pikhq says they work.
23:34:09 <pikhq> Mine is a two-cell wrapping solution.
23:35:02 <pikhq> And, just for the hell of it, I rewrote it into BFM. . .
23:35:18 <RodgerTheGreat> I knew that was coming, sooner or later.
23:35:23 <pikhq> Well, duh.
23:35:42 <pikhq> Of course, I *could* be lazy and just use "brainfucktobfm.tcl". . .
23:35:47 <ihope> Now, is that "papa rent" or "pa parent"?
23:35:58 <pikhq> Produces inefficient BFM code, though.
23:36:01 <GregorR-W> I was thinking "pa parent"
23:36:25 <pikhq> And inefficient C code from bfmc. . .
23:36:50 <pikhq> Which, now that I've fixed the accidental pointer arithmetic issue, works quite nicely again.
23:36:51 <RodgerTheGreat> I'l be impressed when you can copy and paste the challenge description into BFM and then generate a solution that only takes 40.
23:37:19 * ihope does it in 48 commands
23:37:35 <ihope> Worse than Rodger but better than feesh :-)
23:37:52 <RodgerTheGreat> :D
23:38:08 <RodgerTheGreat> you probably did it like my first try- I had 48 originally.
23:38:11 * ihope rewrites certain things
23:39:23 <ihope> Down to 46.
23:39:36 <paparent> ihope: nice :P
23:39:43 <pikhq> Mine has two loops. . . :)
23:39:54 <ihope> Mine has three.
23:39:56 <ihope> Hmm...
23:40:02 <paparent> i've one
23:40:27 <calamari> ++++++(...)+++++.+.+.(...)+.+. ;)
23:40:45 * ihope gets confused by his code and scraps it, then starts over
23:40:52 <RodgerTheGreat> lol
23:40:56 <ihope> calamari: we have a winner!
23:41:10 <pikhq> calamari: That's 149 characters.
23:41:21 <pikhq> And valid Brainfuck Audio. :p
23:41:22 <calamari> pikhq: thanks, I was hoping someone would tell me
23:41:28 <calamari> haha true
23:41:29 <ihope> I thought it was 148.
23:41:37 <pikhq> 97 26 2*+pq
23:41:59 <ihope> ++++++(...)+++++ is 97 commands, no?
23:42:08 <pikhq> . . . Argh. It would be 148.
23:42:12 <pikhq> ihope: Yes.
23:42:13 <ihope> :-)
23:42:54 <pikhq> 97 26 2*1-+pq
23:43:12 <pikhq> That's the *right* solution. . .
23:43:40 <ihope> I can't say I understand your notation.
23:43:44 <ihope> Is it BFM?
23:44:01 <RodgerTheGreat> I think he's describing the cells.
23:44:25 <RodgerTheGreat> in which case it pretty much makes sense.
23:44:39 <pikhq> ihope: No, it's dc input.
23:44:55 <ihope> dc?
23:45:06 <pikhq> In infix notation, "97+26*2-1".
23:45:24 <pikhq> dc is a calculator on *n*x which uses RPN.
23:47:11 <ihope> "97 26 2*1-+pq" doesn't look reverse to me.
23:47:18 <ihope> Polish notation = suffix, no?
23:47:26 <Eidolos> Prefix
23:47:37 <Eidolos> (as in Lisp)
23:48:02 <ihope> "Polish notation, also known as prefix notation, is a form of notation for logic, arithmetic, and algebra." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_notation
23:48:09 <ihope> It's still suffix notation :-P
23:48:26 <Eidolos> Suffix is end, prefix is beginning..
23:48:42 <GregorR-W> Um ...
23:48:52 <GregorR-W> Polish notation is prefix notation, REVERSE polish notation is suffix notation.
23:49:10 <paparent> sorry guys, need to go now :P
23:49:12 <paparent> have fun !
23:49:15 <calamari> so 44 is the best so far?
23:49:20 <pikhq> calamari: 42.
23:49:28 <paparent> and lemme a PM if you got something
23:49:29 <pikhq> My solution. ;)
23:49:29 <calamari> pikhq: ok
23:51:52 <oerjan> argh. i have the implementer/designer of Aura under suspicion of not understanding C arrays start at index zero...
23:51:54 -!- RodgerTh1Great has joined.
23:56:27 <oerjan> actually i take that back, after some pondering.