00:01:40 -!- jix__ has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 00:02:12 how is cygwin fun? 00:03:47 it allows you to use bash on windows, for one. 00:04:12 why would you be using windows anyway? 00:15:04 -!- oerjan has quit ("Gah, I'm tired"). 00:16:43 work 00:17:10 ha ha work 00:31:21 lament: I installed Linux on my work machine 00:32:36 -!- atrapado has quit ("can you turing-complete me"). 00:35:18 -!- nazgjunk has changed nick to na[zZz]gjunk. 00:37:26 -!- ihope has joined. 00:37:32 Esoteric! 00:37:41 INDEED! 00:37:43 Say, that reminds me of something. 00:37:44 ciretose 00:38:02 It reminds me of the word "symbioses". 00:38:22 hmm synergy comes to mind 00:38:32 gonads come to mind 00:38:37 lol 00:38:44 I need to figure out how to model computation with genetics 00:39:04 I need to figure out J's computation model :S 00:39:07 its really hard.. 00:39:11 testicles and ovaries swapping their stuff 00:39:28 Wow. Apparently humans have thousands of species of bacteria living inside them. 00:39:44 Meaning... YOU'RE NOT REALLY HUMAN. (At least, not fully.) 00:39:57 D: 00:41:24 ah, e. coli, my close, close friend 00:41:49 Now, that's interesting. 00:41:52 It's also really gross. 00:41:55 Want me to share? 00:42:22 sure. I'm cool with biology. 00:42:57 Here we go, then: "Bacteria make up . . . 60% of the mass of feces." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gut_flora 00:43:43 wow 00:43:45 cool 00:43:51 Very cool. 00:44:02 What makes up the remaining 40%? 00:44:11 and it certainly shows that there's no such thing as "waste" 00:44:34 probably difficult to digest things like cellulose 00:44:56 Let's eat some cellulose-digesting bacteria! 00:47:24 we'd have to engineer it to survive in the very specific heat and ph conditions in the human intestinal tract 00:47:32 but then, we could eat wood. 00:47:35 it'd be awesome. 00:47:43 Yep. 00:48:22 Say, do you know how protein digestion works? Surely we don't have enzymes that go around breaking down every protein in sight. 00:49:33 well, in most cases, you have enzymes designed to lyse specific amino acid bonds 00:50:11 Only found in certain areas? 00:50:16 this happens after the proteins have been denatured by stomach acid, so they're in strands rather than complex folded shapes 00:50:37 long strands get cut into shorter, more manageable strands progressively 00:50:47 ihope: yes 00:50:51 Stomach acid denatures them... indeed, it would. Just what is denaturing? 00:51:06 it's when a change in ph alters the folding of a protien 00:51:11 heat can denature as well 00:51:48 Interesting. 00:51:58 this is why proteins have to be designed to operate in a very specific range, near which they operate at reduced capacity, and beyond which they completely cease functioning 00:53:58 that's related to why humans run fevers when we get sick 00:54:52 the nervous system reacts to infection by raising body temperature- running hot- in order to decrease the efficiency of or destroy invading viruses/bacteria 00:55:26 but if body temperature gets too high, it can start to damage human tissues 00:56:23 biology is something that just kinda clicks for me, so feel free to ask if you have any other questions 01:03:53 I'm good with biology too. 01:04:09 And with languages and math, for that matter. :-P 01:04:33 On the second day, did God also create bacteria? 01:05:32 I dont think god created anything.. 01:06:27 languages? 01:06:38 Both English and other. 01:06:47 spanish is my hardest class 01:06:48 Not that I'm actually fluent in any other languages. 01:07:12 on the first day, there was nothing. And from nothing came matter, energy, the forces of the universe. Long this universe was sterile and barren, until a chance arrangement of molecules began to self-replicate. That was the moment everything changed. 01:07:56 Earth changed plenty. I don't think the other planets noticed. 01:12:54 ironically, the two things the human mind is incapable of truly grasping are polar opposites- Nullity and Infinity. I hypothesize that these failings are the root of the perceived requirement for an initial moment, a "beginning of time". 01:14:02 we can manipulate these concepts symbolically, inferring their meanings from their connections to different ideas, but ultimately they just don't fit into people's worldviews. 01:16:04 -!- wooby has quit. 01:17:29 What's nullity? 01:18:51 zero in it's purest form. Nothingness. 01:23:26 Let's put "its" in it's purest form, eh? 01:23:50 pwnt. 01:23:51 Zero has a purest form? 01:24:13 Is it the empty set, then? 01:24:22 fer cryin' out loud, I was speaking figuratively! Can I wax poetic every once in a while? 01:24:33 :-P 01:24:38 Not unless you use proper grammar. 01:24:56 Infinity: that which is greater than every integer. 01:25:42 Errr, I would say "number" there. 01:26:01 It's feasible that one could define irrational numbers greater than the greatest integer but smaller than infinity. 01:26:24 Mind you, I don't know of any :-P 01:27:10 There is no good mathematical definition of "number". 01:27:38 Sure there is ... it's the union of the sets "rational number" and "irrational number" 01:27:48 That's "real number". 01:28:09 And besides, for every real number, there's a bigger integet. 01:28:11 Err, damn, that's what I was thinking X_X 01:28:13 Stupid i 01:28:13 s/integet/integer/ 01:29:30 My head is melting over my attempts to make sensible reference semantics for Plof :( 01:30:15 Reference semantics? 01:30:45 So that I can do things like: associativeArray.element(3) = foo; 01:31:07 I wonder how common lisp does that 01:33:14 GETHASH returns a regular value, but it's somehow a valid lvalue too 01:33:59 GregorR: make a function called element* or some such that returns a pointer, then have the function element automatically return what it points to? 01:34:07 I don't have pointers. 01:34:35 OH, are you talking about in the implementation? I'm not worried about the implementation, I'm talking about the language itself. 01:34:48 Make that statement equivalent to associativeArray.element*(3, foo);? 01:34:57 Essentially, have a "set" function. 01:36:09 make the assignment operator assign to whatever address the lhs returns 01:36:21 bsmntbombdood: that's pointers, isn't it? 01:36:29 What's wrong with pointers, now? 01:36:31 yeah, in the implementation 01:37:10 I don't want to do something special with assignment, I'd rather have a generally useful semantic for references ... if possible >_> 01:37:28 GregorR: so... pointers? 01:37:33 -!- Pikhq has joined. 01:37:41 Well, pointer (to me) imply pointer arithmetic. 01:37:58 * Pikhq returns. . . 01:38:04 *implies 01:38:41 How couldn't it? 01:38:53 You've lost a bit of context here X-P 01:39:00 Yeah. 01:39:15 Well then, call them references instead and don't allow pointer arithmetic. 01:39:25 ihope: That doesn't solve my original problem. 01:39:36 I'd like to be able to do: someobject.blah(3) = 4; 01:40:26 GregorR: references wouldn't allow that? 01:40:38 Not the ones you're describing, they'd need an explicit dereference. 01:41:12 You could make = always implicitly dereference. 01:41:36 Or do you want someobject.blah(3) to return an "assignable integer" or something like that? 01:41:39 Or you could make them real pointers. 01:42:11 Either you have an explicit dereference or you have an implicit dereference. Or set functions. 01:42:11 Here's the crux: I need to return a reference, and that reference needs to have different semantics as an rvalue than it does as an lvalue. However, returning involves passing a value into the return function, so it's an rvalue X_X 01:42:47 What's an rvalue? 01:42:56 Anything that isn't an lvalue :) 01:43:01 What's an lvalue? 01:43:10 GregorR: Return an object 01:43:10 Something which can be assigned to. 01:43:30 bsmntbombdood: I can't overload "=" because of the very nature of Plof. 01:43:32 when assigning to an object x, put the value in &x 01:43:53 That would make simple variable assignment ambiguous X_X 01:43:54 So it needs to have different semantics when it can't be assigned to and when it can? 01:44:18 My definition wasn't very accurate ... 01:44:39 Then give an accurate one? 01:44:42 s/?/./ 01:44:54 If you have a variable 'a' with the value 3, 'a' is a valid lvalue, but evaluated as an rvalue it's 3. 01:45:05 I'm tryin', I'm tryin' X-P 01:45:10 ihope: Join #plof 01:45:18 GregorR: Have them evaluate the same way, is what i'm saying 01:49:09 so lvalues are like... variables? 01:49:33 #plof! 02:10:09 Err, that's a valid question here :P 02:10:15 Variables are an example of lvalues. 02:10:25 Basically, if it /could/ appear on the left of a =, it's an lvalue. 02:13:56 Pff. 02:15:05 * ihope codes up the union of BF and vanilla regexes 02:16:19 Why not just the bastard child of Lisp and C? 02:17:17 That would be too complex. 02:18:41 Well, we've already got the child of Smalltalk and C++ going in #plof. . . ;) 02:25:41 -!- ihope has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 02:32:45 -!- sebbu has quit ("@+"). 03:17:19 -!- ShadowHntr has quit ("End of line."). 04:16:40 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 04:35:22 Pikhq: 自分の事を頼まれたか。 04:35:55 kinky 04:37:35 わからなかった。…… 04:38:30 ぼくは日本語でとても上手じゃない、よ。 04:39:07 heh, xterm knows how to render that, but xchat doesn't 04:39:26 おもしろい。…… 04:41:56 -!- Pikhq has quit ("Leaving."). 04:42:34 さあ、上手にななってみるねぇぇ。エレガントな気持だわ。 04:43:12 -!- Pikhq has joined. 04:43:22 Guh. 04:43:23 さあ、上手にななってみるねぇぇ。エレガントな気持だわ。 04:43:50 とにかく、昨日、アンタは私を聞いたいことがあった。何か、あの質問？ 04:44:41 英語で?エスペラントで？ 04:45:14 Sorry, but my Japanese really *isn't* that good. 04:45:58 En esperanto: Mi estas japana lingva komencanto. 04:49:46 日_日 04:50:01 You wanted to ask me something in Japanese yesterday. 04:50:04 What was it? 04:50:42 yo hablo espannol bien! 04:50:51 I just wanted to say that I got my IME working. . . 04:50:55 And that's all I said. 04:50:57 -_-' 04:51:01 not 04:51:34 Unless, of course, you think 「やった！」is a question. . . XD 04:51:48 no entiendo tampoco 05:00:43 Oh, I could've sworn you asked me something *shrug*. 05:11:33 YOU ALL GET A ROSE - http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j316/adamadamadamamiadam/rose.jpg 05:12:45 @>--- 05:13:57 -,-`-@ 05:14:48 oooh 05:17:43 --{--{@ 05:21:27 * lament changes the channel name to #flowers 05:23:39 mmmm.... C-like include stuff is kind of bad methinks 05:23:54 er... wrong channel... but we're all pretty much over on #plof too 05:24:49 I beg to differ. 05:24:57 i'm not. 05:25:18 Of course, my personal language has a #include-like "source" command. 05:35:18 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 05:55:10 -!- ShadowHntr has joined. 06:09:18 so I was working on the operator listing for Bullet, and this is really looking out of hand: 06:09:19 http://www.nonlogic.org/dump/text/1175749566.html 06:09:31 can anyone suggest good places to trim things down? 06:09:55 (or for that matter, anything I foolishly left out) 06:13:07 it actually looks just fine 06:13:07 I was kinda considering overloading the bitwise and logical operations on top of each other with some type of syntax to specify that the operations are working in a particular mode, but that doesn't simplify anything 06:13:13 hm 06:13:42 how bout using just a bitwise not as '!' 06:14:07 that might work 06:14:28 I'll consider that 06:15:44 I'm considering completely removing the assignment operator family in favor of a different way of structuring commands that are entirely assignments. 06:16:07 because when you really get down to it, they aren't conventional "operators" 06:16:23 that would pare it down a bit 06:16:24 yeah, though i think it still is 06:16:29 '=' should be left there 06:17:13 e.g. if((i=getidx())>=0){ printf("Name: %s\n",array[i]); } 06:17:25 trust me, i use that all the time 06:17:50 well, getting rid of =/== differences could dramatically reduce a number of types of coding errors. 06:18:37 and while that one-liner is clever, it doesn't really demonstrate good coding practice. It doesn't ultimately save any operations once it runs through a compiler. 06:19:02 hmm, i think it cuts out an instruction or two 06:19:21 doing i=getidx() on its own reloads i entirely, i think 06:19:51 I think reducing operator ambiguity is important 06:20:04 e.g. MOV [0x456789],eax | MOV ecx,[0x456789] 06:20:32 hmm, i find it still faily readable, and less cluttering 06:20:44 though i prefer if(){ oneline; } to if() oneline; 06:20:56 I always code like that 06:21:25 in fact, I'm definitely going to make block delimiters for one-liners required. 06:21:34 -!- Arrogant has joined. 06:21:49 it improves readability if tabbing gets fucked up or someone has odd whitespace conventions 06:22:52 with my old plan for tomato and new plan for potato, you had no choice because anything between {} is a function, and if was like if(cond,{stuff;}); 06:23:11 doing if(cond,stuff); would make stuff execute unconditionally 06:23:25 interesting 06:23:37 i think it's the same with plof 06:24:00 here's another thing- do you think powering should be a primitive operator? 06:24:04 for some weird-ass reason, stuff from plof seems to have seeped into tomato which potato is based on 06:24:13 i think XORing should be 06:24:15 Java abstracts it, and I think C does as well 06:24:28 hm 06:24:28 in C, the ^ operator is XOR 06:24:34 I know that 06:24:39 And you'd be right. . . 06:24:45 depends on what the lang is for 06:25:04 it's almost never used (and I'd say never necessary) for logical expressions, but a bitwise version would be handy 06:25:15 if it's algebra-intensive, it should be an operator 06:25:30 would it handle x^0.5 ? 06:25:37 dunno 06:25:39 cos that's sqrt 06:25:51 meh, leave it in for now 06:25:57 there are a lot of floating point things about that op that could get complex 06:26:02 saves having to go (x+y)*(x+y) 06:26:12 just do it as a loop multiplier 06:26:37 so, a bitwise XOR should be added for sure, and we'll see about powering 06:27:37 i think XOR should be ~ 06:27:43 GreaseMonkey: no that's not 06:27:46 NOT 06:27:51 and logical XOR should be ~~ for consistency 06:27:51 bitwise NOT 06:28:19 inc and dec aren't really *necessary* and once again don't act like most operators, (they're in the assignment family) but they would help the compiler along a bit 06:28:24 bsmntbombdood: "NOT" is declared as '!' - this ain't LUA 06:28:42 I don't know what you guys are talking about 06:28:48 but "INC eax" is faster and smaller than "ADD eax,0x00000001" 06:28:56 yeah 06:28:58 I know 06:29:02 that was my point 06:29:07 LUA uses "~" as its not. but this ain't LUA. 06:30:43 should bitwise shift right and left take parameters? 06:31:20 seeing as there's SHL eax,(param) , and it shouldn't be too hard, yes 06:31:29 ok 06:34:22 my idea for assignments is to do them in blocks like "set parameter as expression" or "set [parameters] as [expression]" 06:34:44 ok 06:34:52 yeah, go with that 06:35:04 which is consistent with function call syntax of "do [parameters] to [parameters]" 06:35:16 hmm, i should make an algebraic calculator 06:35:28 I did one of those a while back- it's pretty fun 06:35:45 C is based on BASIC, right? 06:36:01 in a way, yeah, but not very strongly 06:36:09 BASIC was around earlier 06:36:19 and BASIC influenced some basic syntax ideas 06:36:31 C also took a lot from FORTRAN, if I recall 06:36:37 i just love how i can just punch in a math function into C and BASIC 06:36:55 i think you can do the same in Pascal 06:36:56 yeah, their expressions are pretty similar 06:37:14 most good programming languages use standard math 06:37:31 BASIC one-ups C with the cool feature of being an interpreted language- eval(). 06:38:07 but most BASICs are lacking in bitwise operators- vital for a language that'll be compiling to machinecode 06:38:08 But Tcl one-ups Basic with the cool feature of having functions. 06:38:16 BASIC has functions 06:38:17 depends on the BASIC dialect though 06:38:33 QBASIC has functions but no eval() 06:38:35 function name(params) return 06:38:39 I assume, of course, traditional "burnt into microcomputer's ROM" BASIC. ;) 06:38:43 with a code block before the return 06:39:11 BBC BASIC had functions ("procedures") 06:39:34 . . . Fine. Tcl's got this funny thing called "a sane syntax". 06:39:44 BASIC has had functions nearly since it's conception, dude. TINYBASIC implementations for minicomputers with 4k of ram were what gave everyone a bad impression of the language 06:39:50 Dartmouth BASIC owned 06:40:04 as do a number of modern BASICs 06:40:16 -!- ShadowHntr has quit (Client Quit). 06:40:25 Call me up when they've got good list processing functions. 06:40:53 you have completely missed the point of BASIC. congratulations. 06:41:10 I'm being sarcastic. -_-' 06:41:27 * Pikhq started out on BASIC. . . Which is, of course, the whole point 06:42:09 hm. I'm not sure if the convenience of just "set parameter as expression" for single assignments outweighs its inconsistencey. 06:42:46 I might stick with simply "set [parameters] as [expressions]" at all times for that sake. 06:45:16 Any EE students here? 06:45:21 afk 06:45:31 * Sukoshi slaps GreaseMonkey with a trout. 06:45:56 I'm a CS, but I'm reasonably handy with electronics. Think I might be able to help? 06:46:28 When applying Kirchoff's Rules, is there one I per loop? 06:46:50 Electricity/magnetism has captured my heart. 06:47:01 Yes, I love it more than computers :P 06:47:10 :-O 06:47:15 <: O 06:47:27 what the christ? 06:47:47 He's named Jesus, not What. :p 06:47:47 Do I have to go to #esoteric-ee now ? :( 06:47:56 how can physics be more fascinating than a deterministic logic engine? 06:48:17 Sukoshi: do not feel shunned 06:48:22 I am simply puzzled 06:48:39 Because it is. 06:49:17 How can nondeterminism be more fascinating to a Vulcan mindset than determinism? 06:49:20 :p 06:50:09 Because you can mount a set of permanent magnets on the opposite sides of a doorknob, and place a wire loop connected to a switch to a battery surrounding the doorknob, in which one end perpendicular to a magnetic field is mounted inside of an insulator (but still allowing the magnetic field to exert the force), causing the wire to rotate and effectively causing a lock on the doorknob, if you have current running through the switch. 06:50:22 And you can make that lock with a few calculations, and $0.05 stuff. 06:50:28 That's why :P 06:50:58 I just like fiddling with things in my junk drawer and my multitool until they work properly. 06:50:59 Yes, but *I* can devise a simulation of that door and make a virtual room with a wall of locked doors. 06:51:10 Nondeterministic is far more fascinating to me 06:51:25 I dunno, I got the engineering bug. 06:51:38 I who've been interested with such impractical things all my life. It feels weird to even me. 06:52:08 physics are just mechanical systems to me, whereas a computer is a meta-machine that translates intangible information into action 06:52:12 Pikhq: But that virtual door won't stop your sister from turning off the lights while you're doing homework, or stop your parents from spying on you at night when you're supposed to be ``sleeping''. 06:52:28 Sukoshi: No, it won't. 06:52:37 It'll make them afraid of doing so. 06:52:41 Not mine. 06:52:55 back 06:53:02 Intellectually, I pwn everyone around here. . . 06:53:04 but engineering is a highly creative, yet productive process. It's not surprising your interests could move in that direction from programming 06:53:07 It'll stop your virtual sister 06:53:25 Were I really, truly angry, I would be able to exact revenge without hurting a single physical object. 06:53:29 My parents don't need to care about that. 06:53:49 My parents are electronics-dependant. 06:53:52 Gawrsh, those are pretty pictures. *Plugs out computer*. You're supposed to be a mindless Indian engineer who hates her job! Fool! 06:54:35 I could, if necessary, instate a ransom on all of their data. . . And they'd either follow through or be broke. 06:54:50 I've not done so simply because they're not jerks, and therefore not deserving. 06:55:13 * Pikhq has just gotten a cracker streak. . . Where the hell did that come from?!? 06:55:38 that's a nasty little superiority complex you have stewing there. You might want to get your antisocial tendencies looked at. 06:56:01 I blame my friend when I asked him to help me with < $0.05 easy to hide antenna designs. 06:56:06 He hooked me. 06:56:26 heheh 06:56:42 I might want to wonder WTF I'm thinking. 06:56:55 I like making robotic insects out of busted toys. 06:56:56 Brain, please synchronise with reality. 06:57:39 Or at least make intellectual arrogance less blatant. 06:58:05 there's nothing like spending 6 hours bringing life to a tiny machine only to have it stab you in the finger and then fall off the table. 06:58:30 they're usually tough little critters but not so much when I install solar cells. 06:58:50 It sucks breaking those things. 07:00:31 BEAM robotics really creates a new perspective on how complex a machine has to be to "survive" as insects do. Once you try making something with just a handful of transistors that you can just release in your yard and find alive weeks later you wind up having an epiphany. 07:02:01 Sukoshi: please tell me you'll try BEAMbotics. It's friggin' awesome. 07:02:23 * Pikhq goes to sleep in hopes of waking up a lesser idiot 07:03:11 the wiki article is a pretty good intro: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics 07:04:04 i might build a simulator 07:04:23 -!- CakeProphet has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 07:06:51 I'm really only a beginner with "bicore" analog neural networks, but I find them fascinating 07:11:39 good night everyone- I'm gonna turn in 07:11:54 afk food 07:18:16 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving"). 07:33:24 back anyways 07:53:58 " but then, we could eat wood." you can eat wood. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:13:43 -!- na[zZz]gjunk has changed nick to nazgjunk. 08:46:09 What's BEAMBotics? 08:46:16 Ah. 09:09:36 -!- sebbu has joined. 11:08:39 gonna go to sleep, oyasumi nasai 11:10:52 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("skoolz owt fank yu"). 11:26:18 bsmntbombdood: Common Lisp has a quite neat setters and getters system. Haskell has the cleanest system for mutable variables I have every seen, though it is rather verbose. You could also look at bash for ideas. (different name for varibles when setting than when getting) And False (esolang) has a good system too. 11:27:03 and RodgerTheGreat and GreaseMonkey were having a conversation that was seriously insulting to the intelligence of compiler-writers last night 11:27:06 bah 11:34:01 * SimonRC calculates the power density of the sun 11:34:18 it is humerously low: 0.27 W/m^3 11:34:59 No wonder the people building fusion reactors are having such a hard time. 12:00:14 -!- jix__ has joined. 12:35:01 hi 12:37:50 -!- Pikhq has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 13:56:59 -!- fax has quit (" "). 14:50:53 Sukoshi: you think you could create a strong enough force like that? 15:02:39 My gut tells me that it takes a lot of torque to stop a doorknob from turning 15:05:49 oh 15:06:37 do you mean the wire tightens onto the doorknob? 15:07:36 might be easier to just use a lock 15:07:49 unless i somehow misunderstood the point :) 15:08:59 oklopol: welcome to #esoteric 15:10:52 we can't "just use a lock" 15:14:15 yuu 15:43:52 'morning, folks 15:44:26 can you attain noticeable forces without using a month's worth of electricity? 15:45:08 with just making coils from the wire :P 15:45:25 -!- crathman has joined. 15:51:42 yuyu 16:46:20 -!- jix__ has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 18:15:49 -!- ShadowHntr has joined. 18:56:14 -!- atrapado has joined. 19:15:11 -!- CakeProphet has joined. 19:15:36 -!- ShadowHntr has quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)). 19:31:28 bbl 19:31:34 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit. 19:53:48 -!- dub__ has joined. 19:53:54 -!- atrapado has quit (Nick collision from services.). 19:54:03 -!- dub__ has changed nick to atrapado. 20:51:20 -!- crathman has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.78 [Firefox 2.0.0.3/2007030919]"). 20:55:48 Despite my general disdain for decentralized SCM, I'm starting to quite like darcs >_> 21:29:49 -!- sebbu2 has joined. 21:47:13 -!- jix__ has joined. 21:48:53 -!- sebbu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 21:55:22 -!- oerjan has joined. 21:58:13 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 21:58:14 -!- bsmnt_bot has quit (Read error: 131 (Connection reset by peer)). 22:03:12 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined. 23:07:58 -!- kbrooks has joined. 23:08:05 What is this? 23:08:20 it's about weird programming languages 23:08:23 Please leave this channel, and rejoin. 23:08:29 nope 23:08:43 Please, some one write the first 16 numbers of the Fibonacci Sequence. 23:09:06 oerjan, ok, so thats a exception... 23:09:27 Segmentation fault (core dumped) 23:09:38 heh bsmntbombdood 23:10:41 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 and why did i do this by hand... 23:10:46 Say hi. 23:10:58 /topic 23:11:06 oops 23:11:44 ho 23:11:58 Hmm. 23:12:11 Some code generation magic in IRP. 23:12:30 "Please show me the 'Hello World' program in C" 23:12:55 int main(){return *(int*)0;} 23:12:55 #include 23:12:57 -> int main() { printf("Hello World\n"); return 0; } 23:12:59 ^^ there it is 23:13:37 wow, parallel processing 23:13:55 just slightly buggy 23:15:14 hahahaa http://texas.clubsi.com/Aaron/ClubSi/CB.JPG 23:15:29 oerjan, meh 23:17:19 * oerjan wonders if you could make one for innumerates... 23:17:51 3.141592653589793238462643383279 and why did i do this by hand.... 23:19:17 lament: I know more than you 23:19:50 especially since no one asked... 23:20:08 bsmntbombdood: that's 30 digits i think 23:20:18 i couldn't be bothered to go to 50 23:20:22 and i do _not_ have fibonacci numbers memorized beyond 13 23:20:34 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105 23:20:44 51 decimal places 23:21:03 I don't have pi memorized to 51 decimal places, I just calculated it on the fly 23:21:13 oh, all right then. 23:21:26 :P 23:21:27 i thought you were a snob or something ;) 23:22:09 3.1415926 i don't know more digits 23:22:14 like when does one need more? 23:23:08