00:03:23 zbrown: Ah. 00:04:03 like I said before, I play when I can, but thats just 30 minutes at a time through the day 00:12:16 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 00:21:14 Sukoshi: whats the plan for development, are we separating into various aspects to handle? 00:24:01 zbrown: Well, the first thing on the list is for everyone to finish reading the Kawa docs. 00:24:20 And also going through the Scheme examples, assuming you know Scheme. 00:42:15 mmm that should be fun, I don't know scheme 00:42:19 more langauges to learn! 00:42:40 Well, then go through the JavaScript example? 00:43:01 Basically, understand the way Kawa works. 00:43:14 ah ok 00:43:26 i don't know javascript, but i suppose I could understand it 00:43:29 By the way, RMS told GST project leader that he wanted a shift in focus. 00:43:37 oh? 00:43:40 in what way? 00:43:53 While GST focused on scripting/headless ST before, now he wants it to go the other direction and compete with Squeak and VW. 00:45:00 oh thats cool 00:45:51 well I'm focusing on GST 00:46:06 Its the only one I've been able to get consistent results out of 00:48:37 Only thing is the GUI is a bit on the cumbersome side. 00:50:51 Sukoshi: true. does kinda suck, but i'll figure it out 00:50:59 I can live with that, Squeak bugs the hell outta me 00:51:05 Heh. 01:17:04 -!- sebbu2 has quit ("@+"). 02:41:02 -!- fax has joined. 02:41:03 hi 02:41:21 any news on the smalltalk front? :p 02:46:23 -!- kwertii has quit. 02:47:08 fax: Yo-z. 02:47:40 A) Get familliar with Smalltalk. B) Get familliar with Kawa (and read the Scheme implementation too). C) I wanna start maybe some time next week. 02:47:57 col 02:47:58 cool 02:48:04 Have you read much of Kawa? 02:48:13 because I was skimming it but I do not understand it at all @_@ 02:48:18 err... is proving a system turing complete itself subject to the decision problem? 02:48:53 i'll ask oerjan when he comes, though you are all welcome to answer as well 02:49:26 It doesen't look too hard so far. 02:49:31 Well, anime time. 02:49:36 (More anime time, rather.) 02:49:44 -!- Sukoshi has quit ("Leaving"). 03:10:59 -!- GregorR-L has joined. 03:16:56 hello GregorR 03:17:31 Hello Gre-whatever. 03:18:14 * GreaseMonkey sculls a Diet Cherry Vanilla Orange Grape Lemon Lime Mint Roast Chicken Mayonnaise and Cola Dr. Pepper 03:18:37 Mmmmmmmmmm 03:18:57 It's the chicken that gives it that savory goodness. 03:19:30 -!- sp3tt has quit (anthony.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 03:24:32 -!- sp3tt has joined. 03:26:30 -!- GregorR-L has changed nick to nanowattage. 03:27:09 cherry also sounds good 03:28:25 -!- nanowattage has changed nick to giantMaleOrgan. 03:28:55 -!- giantMaleOrgan has changed nick to GregorR-L. 03:36:09 http://www.qdb.us/97533 03:38:12 -!- mtve has quit (anthony.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 03:45:01 hehe, nice 03:47:39 http://www.qdb.us/97386 04:37:04 -!- oerjan has joined. 04:42:33 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 04:45:36 -!- oerjan has joined. 05:10:48 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 05:47:29 -!- mtve has joined. 06:29:43 -!- wooby has joined. 06:30:53 hi 06:34:00 -!- GregorR-L has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 06:35:35 -!- fax has quit (" "). 06:52:08 -!- GregorR-L has joined. 06:52:50 -!- wooby has quit. 07:16:02 -!- Sukoshi has joined. 07:38:59 -!- GreaseMonkey has changed nick to ^_`. 07:41:48 -!- ^_` has changed nick to N0body. 07:51:29 -!- N0body has changed nick to GreaseMonkey. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:02:19 getting off now, cya 08:03:12 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("bai bai"). 08:07:57 -!- RedDak has joined. 08:11:52 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving"). 08:14:53 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection). 10:00:10 -!- ttm has joined. 10:00:28 (this is dbc) 10:00:38 (still dicking around with old brainfuck programs) 10:01:07 (>>++++++[>++++++++<-]+[[>.[>]+<<[->-<<<]>[>+<<]>]>++<++]) 10:04:44 !egobot >>++++++[>++++++++<-]+[[>.[>]+<<[->-<<<]>[>+<<]>]>++<++] 10:04:47 Huh? 10:04:53 !bf >>++++++[>++++++++<-]+[[>.[>]+<<[->-<<<]>[>+<<]>]>++<++] 10:05:05 !ps 10:05:07 1 Sukoshi: bf 10:05:08 2 Sukoshi: ps 10:19:38 It outputs a nonterminating sequence, maybe that's the problem. 10:28:07 -!- ehird has joined. 11:42:59 Heh. 12:36:18 -!- ehird has quit ("Leaving"). 12:36:53 -!- ehird` has joined. 12:37:55 -!- ehird` has quit (Client Quit). 12:39:40 -!- ehird` has joined. 12:39:59 -!- ehird` has quit (Client Quit). 12:41:38 -!- ehird` has joined. 13:07:42 -!- RedDak has joined. 13:08:20 hmm... i wonder if a language that only operated on the program itself could be turing-complete 13:08:43 e.g. to read in an input string you'd change the part of the code defining a variable to include the characters read in, then jump there 13:09:18 and "jumping" is just modifying the program source code to be src+src 13:17:45 2-dimensional of course 14:01:25 -!- jix_ has joined. 14:56:46 -!- oerjan has joined. 15:06:57 -!- EgoBot has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 15:17:25 ehird`: If the source is taken to be infinite and (outside the code itself) filled with zeroes, maybe. 15:17:48 ehird`: If the source limits the size of the memory, no (though it could be TC within the limits of bounded memory) 15:19:37 this reminds me of the Dupdog hello world project 15:24:05 I have serious doubts about that language's TC potential, although it has more to do with the difficulty of doing conditionals than the more apparent insanity 15:56:21 -!- sebbu has joined. 16:11:46 GregorR, infinite, yes 16:12:08 commands like : for input would make the character right of themselves the ascii value of a character read in 16:12:16 so just : evaluates one command 16:13:59 hmm 16:14:03 maybe they should replace themselves 16:20:45 -!- jix_ has quit (Nick collision from services.). 16:21:01 -!- jix__ has joined. 16:25:28 -!- RedDak has quit ("I'm quitting... Bye all"). 16:29:53 -!- RedDak has joined. 16:30:38 Hmm. A 2d language like a game would be interesting. e.g. you can have little "cars" (>, <, v and ^) which move in that direction each cycle, and things like bouncers ((, ), -, _) which bounce the cars in the opposite direction 16:30:46 and special bouncers which run commands, or whatever 16:30:52 like a more specific Game of Life 16:31:32 e.g. with (> ) it'd progress into ( > ), then ( > ), then ( >), then bounce into ( <), ( < ), etc. infinitely 16:32:12 and you could have "planes" which carry objects, then you could make them crash into a special kind of bouncer to change its directions for conditionals, etc 16:32:17 -!- ihope has joined. 16:40:17 ehird`: have you looked at Rube? 16:40:30 yes - but it's not quite the same, relaly 16:41:31 Look at BBM! :-) 16:47:17 BBM? 16:47:45 Big Bad Mamas? 16:48:09 (also, constructions such as this are interesting: (> B-) - B is a breeder which when hit with another object, covers itself with a clone of that for one cycle) 16:48:22 so, it'd infinitely shoot cars downwards 16:48:26 Billiard ball model/machine. 16:48:53 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection). 16:50:41 (More precisely, when an object collides with B, it bounces it in the opposite direction, and covers itself with a clone of the object for one cycle, going in the same direction as before it was bounced off B) 16:51:59 http://pastie.caboo.se/78346 one cycle of the breeder 16:52:48 (>B-) is faster, actually, and probably preferable 16:53:04 -!- jix__ has changed nick to jix. 17:03:38 -!- lament has joined. 17:04:10 Hail Eris! 17:18:51 Hmm. Is a language with only first-class continuations which take 1 argument turing complete? 17:18:55 I mean, it's close enough to LC.. 17:19:16 hmm, Subtle cough 17:19:16 try it 17:19:23 which follows no 17:19:37 i don't think it would be TC 17:19:54 Just use unlambda with only the c operator and ` and see what you get 17:20:01 http://esolangs.org/wiki/Subtle_cough :) 17:20:39 ah, okay 17:20:42 Cool. I invented something which somebody then later independently invented. 17:21:01 heh 17:21:40 i wonder. given subtle cough, what is the minimum you can add to it to make it turing complete? 17:21:49 without using anything silly like the iota combinator 17:22:15 well, i doesn't help. 17:22:32 i as in I or i as in iota 17:22:41 because iota obviously helps, seeing as that you only need ` and i 17:22:43 I 17:22:54 well - yeah, I is pretty useless here 17:23:01 `ci == `cc iirc 17:23:44 maybe k? 17:25:10 at least k gives you infinitely many values 17:25:52 i doubt v would be very helpful 17:26:06 but i think k might. 17:26:25 depends. it is only c which makes v useful in Unlambda. 17:26:32 is [[MechaniQue]] actually esoteric? 17:26:39 lament, the author of it says yes 17:26:45 (without continuations, v cannot be escaped from) 17:26:47 but its a bit shaky yeah 17:27:03 oerjan, we are talking about v := \x. v right? 17:27:11 right 17:27:18 well - subtle cough has c 17:27:31 so c + v == turing complete? it seems unlikely, but then so does iota == turing complete 17:28:10 the author says: 17:28:11 "It's also esoteric because the language abandons the concept of variables. Instead it uses a lock and key system which could be compared with a global-space inventory that holds booleans." 17:28:51 `vv == `vc == v == `vx for any x which actually returns to its continuation 17:29:10 what about `cv 17:29:15 `cv = v 17:29:23 oh, yes... that is true =P 17:29:32 For some x, `cv = `vx = v 17:29:51 OK, what about c + k? It doesn't sound TC to me 17:29:56 as far as i can tell, "locks" are simply boolean variables 17:30:08 lament, look at some of the example code. 17:30:17 Or c + s! 17:30:32 Also http://esolangs.org/forum/kareha.pl/1148745423/l50 17:30:37 `ck returns k of the current continuation to the current continuation 17:31:13 oh man, forums 17:31:49 why are they so ugly :) 17:31:54 it's _rather_ slow for a forum :D 17:32:14 i like the forum 17:32:15 i think the forum is a bit redundant given the wiki 17:32:21 (and the channel) 17:32:23 i like anonymous forums 17:33:09 and yeah, the forums do seem a bit slow :) 17:33:34 i tend to check it once a month or so 17:37:30 ``cck -> `(`*k)k -> `kk 17:38:15 Wait, lemme... 17:38:52 1:``cck -> 2:``c1k -> ``12k -> `2k -> `kk 17:39:58 S wouldn't help, so... hmm.. *would* S help.. 17:40:26 ihope: i don't think your notation is precise enough 17:40:45 s + k is rather well known to help. :) 17:41:16 heh 17:41:26 i mean just c+s 17:41:59 even c+k is not proven. there may be a _lot_ of cases. 17:42:59 how about trying to convert the lambda expression in http://www.esolangs.org/wiki/S_and_K_Turing-completeness_proof to the languages? that would be a quick way to prove/disprove them 17:43:24 I think my notation is plenty precise. 17:43:39 Unlambda defines evaluation order. 17:43:49 Hmm, 1:`c`kk -> ``kk1 -> k 17:44:00 Try to make an infinite loop of any kind, eh? 17:44:07 `c``sss -> ```sss(*) -> ``s(*)`s(*) 17:44:26 um, ``cc`cc is an infinite loop 17:44:27 you can make an infinite loop with just ` and c, so. 17:44:30 heh. 17:45:03 You can? 17:45:07 Oh, that's... 17:46:13 1:``cc`cc -> 2:``c1`cc -> ``12`cc -> `2`cc -> 3:``cc`cc -> ... 17:48:07 s takes so many arguments it is easy to get stuck 17:48:16 (like with 0x29A) 17:48:48 (well, not _quite_ like it) 17:49:54 i think c + s has a chance of being TC 17:49:56 not sure though 17:53:26 -!- ihope has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 18:18:31 -!- lament has set topic: The core site for esoteric programming language design and deployment - map: http://www.frappr.com/esolang - forum: http://esolangs.org/forum/ - wiki: http://esolangs.org/wiki/ - logs: http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/ or http://www.ircbrowse.com/cdates.html?channel=esoteric - Pastebin: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:19:47 -!- lament has left (?). 18:19:50 -!- lament has joined. 18:23:38 -!- lament has set topic: The core site for esoteric programming language design and deployment | FORUM: http://esolangs.org/forum/ | WIKI: http://esolangs.org/wiki/ | LOGS: http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:23:51 (some stuff moved to channel entry message) 18:24:26 -!- lament has set topic: FORUM: http://esolangs.org/forum/ | WIKI: http://esolangs.org/wiki/ | LOGS: http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:24:30 what about the ircbrowse logs? 18:24:45 see my previous comment. 18:25:12 You can actually find that link from the tunes.org link. 18:26:17 actually, how about this: 18:26:29 -!- lament has set topic: FORUM: http://esolangs.org/forum/ | WIKI: http://esolangs.org/wiki/ | LOGS: http://ircbrowse.com/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:26:51 shorter! 18:27:01 you removed the description. remember that the topic is what shows up in /list. 18:27:19 true. 18:27:23 does anybody still use /list? 18:27:53 i do occasionally, to check out channels others are on. 18:28:07 -!- lament has set topic: Esoteric programming language design and deployment | FORUM: http://esolangs.org/forum/ | WIKI: http://esolangs.org/wiki/ | LOGS: http://ircbrowse.com/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:28:49 forum and wiki can be combined into one URL. 18:29:17 -!- lament has set topic: Esoteric programming language design and deployment | FORUM AND WIKI: http://esolangs.org/ | LOGS: http://ircbrowse.com/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/. 18:30:17 hm... the main page on esolangs.org is not exactly fashionable. 18:30:35 i like it much more than, say, the main page of the forums :) 18:30:54 it's as bad as my own homepage :/ 18:31:02 bad? 18:31:09 how is it bad? 18:31:17 ah, just boring 18:31:33 (in design) 18:31:40 not really having any 18:32:04 we could ask graue to put a flash intro there. 18:32:17 ok maybe not _that_ far :D 18:32:42 personally i think that page is an example of what's known as "good design" 18:33:18 also, do we need a link to the pastebin? 18:33:34 people put in in the url in programming-related channels because of flooding 18:33:38 i don't think we ever had that problem 18:33:52 and most people know where the pastebins are 18:34:32 and it's not an esoteric-specific link.... 18:34:48 maybe we just need an #esoteric page 18:35:11 what is this obsession with getting the topic short anyhow? 18:35:22 it's too long. 18:36:00 i know a good place for an #esoteric page... the wiki! 18:36:18 it seems that the wiki does not have a page about the channel... seems on-topic enough 18:36:53 it's under the community page i guess 18:37:58 right, which is almost impossible to find, and meant for editors. 18:38:22 or so it seems. 18:38:33 impossible? it's the second link in the menu. 18:38:53 oh, so it is, didn't notice :) 18:39:05 (see!) 18:39:11 bah! :D 18:39:32 -!- ehird` has set topic: .. 18:39:37 i shortened the topic for you 18:39:50 thanks. I wasn't brave enough to do that. 18:39:51 my compression algorithm is unbeatable 18:40:11 it is very easy to implement: just replace all occurences of . with Esoteric programming language design and deployment | FORUM AND WIKI: http://esolangs.org/ | LOGS: http://ircbrowse.com/ | PASTEBIN: http://pastebin.ca/ 18:41:02 i can beat it! 18:41:06 -!- lament has set topic: . 18:41:31 Just replace all occurances of "" with "." and then apply ehird`s algorithm. 18:41:33 um, how do i create a negative-length string? anyone? 18:41:37 -!- ehird` has set topic. 18:41:40 hah! 18:41:42 i removed the single space! 18:42:08 you win. 18:43:13 -!- lament has set topic: Too much free time + no life = esoteric programming!. 18:44:16 -!- ehird` has set topic: /topic. 18:48:28 -!- Sukoshi has set topic: 桃色の花の中で囲む。. 18:49:14 -!- oerjan has set topic: FOR A GOOD TIME CALL 555-123-6890. 18:50:02 * Sukoshi calls FOR A GOOD TIME. 18:53:08 -!- ehird` has set topic: while (topic) topic = "while (topic) .... 18:59:07 Why doesn't DoubleFuck have an instruction to interact between the two tapes? 19:03:17 it has loops for both. and in ordinary Brainfuck, you need loops to copy between two cells. 19:04:12 true, but still 19:05:47 -!- lament has set topic: добро пожаловать в канал эзотерического программирования!. 19:05:51 I wonder if anyone's taken malebolge's modulo-commands to the next level to produce something like (character + some value of a register, or something like that + position in program) % (some other program-related thing) 19:06:07 i.e. "AB" will not work the same as "A" followed by "B" as the meanings will change 19:06:17 something along those lines 19:06:53 check out [[Aura]] 19:08:24 Aura just does mod 8? 19:08:45 I mean, the way characters are turned into instructions depends on the position in the program, different register values, stuff like that 19:09:14 so if you write instructions "A" and "B" and you want to execute A then B, you can't do "AB" since the algorithm will have changed (in a predictable way, of course - no random numbers) 19:09:44 well, in aura you can't execute AB because A will modify B. 19:09:53 that's not the same, though. 19:10:06 "AB" will still be perfectly valid code, it'd just do something different because the translation would be different 19:10:48 fine then, check out Dupdog. 19:13:02 that's kinda similar, yeah 19:13:16 more malebolge-extending madness: instead of base-3, base-i 19:23:50 maybe: ins = ((chr + pos) * len(code)) % number-of-instructions 19:28:12 http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-malbolge-995.html the last comment here makes me weep 19:29:28 find some comfort in that the Java prints the wrong text :D 19:29:34 ehird`: don't forget phase of the moon. 19:30:10 lament, should i make the interpreter refuse to run any code on full moon? 19:31:07 no, just make phase of the moon one of the things affecting the semantics of the instructions 19:32:11 what about unix timestamp 19:32:39 see TMMLPTEALPAITAFNFAL 19:32:50 right, exists 19:33:32 i mean on top of evertything else. 19:46:40 i think i have devised an operation crazier than the crazy operation 19:46:44 using base-4 19:47:49 it almost looks like a random number generator. 332101 op 133112 = 31323 19:48:32 is that your evidence for it "looking like a random number generator"? 19:50:08 no -- but it produces equally absurd transformations on other numbers 19:51:32 so what's 1 op 1? 19:52:27 3 19:52:57 and 1 op 0? 0 op 1? 0 op 0? 19:53:15 1 op 0 = 2, x op y is always y op x, 0 op 0 is 3. 19:54:10 frankly that doesn't seem all that absurd. 19:54:26 since it sounds rather close to a generalization of SAT. 19:54:36 (wrong channel) 19:54:54 more absurd than crazy 19:54:56 although that fit in here as well :D 19:56:50 honestly, there are just 16 numbers, why not list the matrix? 19:57:37 8 19:58:04 4*4 = 16 19:58:26 op = Z for brevity. 0 Z 0 = 3, 0 Z 1 = 2, 0 Z 2 = 1, 0 Z 3 = 0, 1 Z 1 = 3, 1 Z 2 = 3, 1 Z 3 = 0, 2 Z 2 = 2, 2 Z 3 = 1, 3 Z 3 = 3 19:58:41 oerjan: commutative 19:58:50 er, wait 19:58:55 er, right. 19:59:34 oh, i did not see the commutativity 20:00:01 anyway, how's that interesitng in any way? 20:00:07 then it's 10 20:00:11 (any way, how's that interesting in anyway?) 20:00:14 lament, how's it not interesting in any way? 20:01:08 it looks... rather arbitrary. 20:01:39 And crzy isn't arbitary? 20:02:24 not any kind of _interesting_ crazy. 20:02:31 I mean the crazy operation 20:02:33 Malbolge's. 20:03:00 0 C 0 = 1, 0 C 1 = 0, 0 C 2 = 0, 1 C 0 = 1, 1 C 1 = 0, 1 C 2 = 2, 2 C 0 = 2, 2 C 1 = 2, 2 C 2 = 2 20:03:02 is very arbitary 20:03:13 sure. That one's not interesting either. 20:03:33 it does however have some properties that makes it hard to use. 20:04:19 oerjan, so does Z 20:04:39 oerjan: properties that a randomly filled matrix is not likely to have? 20:04:51 lament: i don't know. 20:05:28 also, that one isn't commutative, which is probably rather important 20:05:33 i _do_ notice however that (x Z 0) Z 0 = x, which means it is already more convenient than malbolge's operator 20:06:01 heh 20:06:02 hey, you're right 20:06:03 hmm 20:06:06 i didn't notice that, hah 20:09:05 for Malbolge you have ((x op 1) op 1) op 1 = x, so it is harder to get back the original value 20:09:22 er wait 20:09:59 misread, they are not that different, (x op 1) op 1 = x 20:10:11 heh 20:10:48 er, 1 op (1 op x) 20:11:43 however, for both only one value gives a permutation 20:13:47 ah, with your operator you cannot get 1 or 2 from starting with just 0 20:14:21 that might actually be _very_ awkward. 20:15:14 well, maybe not. 20:15:17 Is that a compliment? =)_ 20:15:21 of course. 20:16:28 however, having an extra digit does increase the risk that some more easily useful combination may arise. 20:17:59 maybe it'd be more interesting in base i 20:18:09 hmm: http://acm.uva.es/p/v111/11180.html 20:18:23 that looks like a nicely insane base 21:02:12 -!- sekhmet has left (?). 21:11:32 0Z0=3, 0Z3=0, 3Z3=3 21:11:58 that is, Z acting on {0,3} is XOR 21:12:21 that seems... useful :) 21:26:17 -!- jix has quit ("CommandQ"). 21:29:13 -!- RedDak has joined. 22:21:51 -!- sebbu has quit ("@+"). 22:25:47 http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/src/cmd/sh/mac.h.html <-- Ouch. 22:27:06 haha 22:29:55 -!- RedDak has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 22:31:54 -!- RedDak has joined. 22:39:15 what the hell, haha 22:39:18 what's that for 22:39:26 wait -- was that actually THE unix shell? 22:39:33 yup 22:39:34 like, it just compiled C with those macros? 22:39:40 yes 22:39:50 http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/src/cmd/sh/ i think you're wrong 22:40:03 There was no suc thing as an experienced C programmer back then. 22:40:18 http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/src/cmd/sh/main.c.html look, the sh code just uses those macros 22:40:24 that isn't actually the unix shell =) 22:40:30 ehird`: erm, yeah, that's what I meant 22:40:33 oh 22:40:42 i thought you meant that the shell just wrapped around cc using that header. heh 22:40:48 but - wtf, what is the point of thst 22:40:54 probably algol programmers... 22:41:03 "There was no suc thing as an experienced C programmer back then." 22:41:14 yeah but these guys >invented< C, for christ's sake 22:41:18 why would they hack around its syntax? 22:49:40 That was K&R, not Bourne. 22:49:55 ah, true. 22:50:24 TBH they all just merge into one bearded figure in my head. 22:50:32 As well as Ken Thompson. 23:44:25 -!- ehird` has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 23:53:27 it burns