01:04:48 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep").
01:33:13 -!- Sgeo has joined.
02:23:26 <Sgeo> /amsg BRB
02:27:28 -!- calamari has joined.
02:28:49 <Sgeo> HI calamari
02:28:56 <calamari> hi Sgeo
02:29:37 <Sgeo> So, did you poke around the alpha?
02:29:58 <RodgerTheGreat> http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/06/writestuff.html?page=0%2C0
02:37:10 <RodgerTheGreat> short version of the above: The software engineering firm with the lowest error rate in the world has that rate because they use some basic, sane concepts in their development process.
02:37:25 <RodgerTheGreat> Modern software engineering blows chunks, and these guys are awesome
02:50:58 <pikhq> Well, of course modern software engineering blows chunks.
02:51:08 <pikhq> It has the same rigor that I apply towards my hobby coding projects.
02:51:29 <pikhq> You know, the ones that I code just to figure something out. . .
02:51:37 <pikhq> There's something kinda sickening about that.
03:12:50 <pikhq> Hmm. That article has some really *obvious* measures in there.
03:14:28 <pikhq> 'Plan, have a good team, use revision control and a bug manager, fix whatever lets a bug through"
03:27:18 <Sgeo> I suppose my PSOX project doesn't exactly need that kind of rigour >.>
03:31:52 <calamari> pikhq: did you find the answer to the integration?
03:37:28 <pikhq> calamari: Nope.
03:57:30 -!- immibis has joined.
03:59:56 <calamari> pikhq: the answer is: x^2 * arctan(x) - (1 + x^2) * arctan(x) + x + C
04:00:06 <calamari> I guess that can be simplified
04:00:14 <calamari> but it works
04:05:09 <calamari> aha..
04:05:17 <calamari> here is the secret of it
04:05:46 <calamari> x^2 / (1 + x^2) can be simplified to  1 - 1 / (1 + x^2)
04:06:14 <calamari> because 1 = (1 + x^2) / (1 + x^2)
04:06:46 <calamari> so then you can integrate from there to x - arctan(x)
04:06:52 <calamari> out
04:06:59 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving").
05:59:57 -!- pikhq has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
06:03:36 -!- Sgeo has quit (Remote closed the connection).
06:07:14 -!- pikhq has joined.
06:18:32 -!- immibis has quit (Nick collision from services.).
06:31:21 <oklopol> integration is trivial unmath
06:41:43 -!- immibis has joined.
06:41:56 <immibis> did any of you notice google has mirc as a synonym of irc?
06:55:30 -!- immibis has quit (Nick collision from services.).
07:27:14 -!- immibis has joined.
07:40:33 -!- EgoBot has joined.
07:40:41 -!- GregorR has joined.
07:55:41 -!- immibis has quit (Connection timed out).
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:33:44 -!- cherez has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
08:45:30 -!- olsner has quit ("Leaving").
09:40:43 -!- MizardX has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
09:47:55 -!- Corun has joined.
09:48:31 -!- Corun has quit (Client Quit).
10:17:49 -!- sebbu has joined.
10:43:31 -!- puzzlet_ has joined.
10:44:00 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
11:32:27 -!- jix has joined.
13:57:07 -!- RedDak has joined.
14:06:37 -!- sarehu has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:06:47 -!- sarehu has joined.
14:29:45 -!- Hiato has joined.
15:50:50 -!- sarehu has quit (Remote closed the connection).
15:50:59 -!- sarehu has joined.
16:15:05 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection).
16:33:26 -!- timotiis has joined.
16:36:40 -!- Tritonio_ has joined.
16:46:02 -!- Hiat1 has joined.
17:01:28 -!- Corun has joined.
17:05:17 -!- Hiato has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
17:09:49 -!- puzzlet has joined.
17:10:13 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep").
17:22:14 -!- puzzlet_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
17:52:31 -!- slereah__ has joined.
18:02:01 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
18:14:19 -!- cherez has joined.
18:18:28 -!- RedDak has joined.
18:39:51 <SimonRC> hi
19:11:44 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection).
19:49:12 -!- oerjan has joined.
19:54:31 -!- RedDak has joined.
20:21:22 -!- Hiat1 has quit ("Leaving.").
20:33:50 -!- timotiis has quit (Remote closed the connection).
20:34:02 -!- SimonRC_ has joined.
20:35:46 -!- SimonRC has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
20:36:04 -!- SimonRC_ has changed nick to SimonRC.
21:19:35 -!- ehird has joined.
21:22:13 -!- timotiis has joined.
21:23:56 -!- ehird has set topic: HAT!! YOU'RE RUINING MY HAT! Also,.
21:24:45 -!- timotiis_ has joined.
21:26:24 -!- timotiis has quit (Client Quit).
21:26:24 -!- timotiis_ has quit (Client Quit).
21:26:33 -!- timotiis has joined.
21:37:31 -!- faxathisia has joined.
21:37:52 <faxathisia> This is totally mad http://www.basis.uklinux.net/ursala/seminar111207.pdf
21:38:17 <ehird> faxathisia: you are totally mad.
21:39:14 <faxathisia> At least I'm not a squiggologist!
21:39:54 <ehird> wait-- you're not?
21:39:54 <ehird> dispatch the stormtroopers
21:46:25 <oerjan> Haskell is no less verbose than OO? (O_O)
21:46:43 <ehird> oerjan: wait what?
21:48:04 <oerjan> ehird: one of the first slides of what faxathisia linked
21:48:15 <ehird> awkward quasi-imperative features (e.g., monads)
21:48:30 <ehird> written like a true amateur!
21:48:42 <ehird> obviously, monads are just so haskell can CHEAT out of being  IMPERATIVE!!!!!
21:48:47 <faxathisia> lol
21:49:22 <oerjan> although that document does seem to have a different standard of verbosity ... what is that language?
21:49:35 <faxathisia> I think it's called Squiggol..
21:50:03 <oerjan> oh the old one mentioned?
21:50:44 <ehird> no
21:50:45 <oerjan> um no it says "new"
21:50:46 <ehird> it's the new one
21:50:47 <ehird> that he made
21:50:51 <ehird> obviously
21:50:57 <faxathisia> OS
21:50:58 <faxathisia> :S
21:51:07 <oerjan> "Squiggolism (Bird and Merteens)"
21:51:14 -!- olsner has joined.
21:51:18 <ehird> it looks like apl
21:51:18 <ehird> i guess that guy was right when he said about verbosity.. it's hideously short!
21:51:50 <ehird> 'Brevity is a design goal.'    Paul? Is that you? Oh honey, please come back to Lisp... you do less harm there.
21:51:58 <faxathisia> hahaha
21:52:35 <ehird> oerjan: i knew it wasn't apl
21:52:36 <ehird> oh my god: report.fun
21:52:38 <ehird> that is..
21:52:41 <ehird> oh my god.
21:54:50 <ehird> faxathisia: oerjan: its called 'ursala'
21:56:24 <oerjan> ursAla?
21:57:08 <faxathisia> ZFC sucks :(
21:57:18 <faxathisia> someone should make a programming language out of it
21:57:29 <ehird> no, faxathisia
21:57:36 <ehird> we want naive set theory
21:57:38 <oerjan> isn't that almost what the Z specification language is?
21:57:40 <ehird> think of the paradoxical interpreter fun
21:57:41 -!- ehird has quit ("Leaving").
21:57:42 <SimonRC> I like the way that ~&farlthlriNCSPDPDrlCS2DlrTS2J, is an operator
21:57:52 <SimonRC> in that PDF
21:57:55 <faxathisia> You should be forced to do all this work http://us.metamath.org/mpegif/peano5.html , just to use recursion
21:58:10 -!- ehird has joined.
22:07:26 -!- RedDak has quit (Remote closed the connection).
22:08:04 <SimonRC> the occasional occurance of 10 identical chars in a row just adds to the zaniness
22:17:26 <ehird> SimonRC: technically,
22:17:34 <ehird> '~&farlthlriNCSPDPDrlCS2DlrTS2J' is merely a composition of operators..
22:17:38 <ehird> but seriously, aah.
22:18:19 <olsner> ooh, this language sounds interesting... link?
22:18:38 <faxathisia> ~:&:f:a:r:l:t:h:l:r:i:N:C:S:P:D:P:D:r:l:C:S:2:D:l:r:T:S:2:J is the arc equivalent
22:18:59 <ehird> olsner: no
22:19:01 <ehird> it's evil
22:19:03 <ehird> evil evil evil
22:19:11 * faxathisia *woops* http://www.basis.uklinux.net/ursala/seminar111207.pdf
22:19:13 <ehird> faxathisia: you're just another arc fanboy, aren't you..
22:19:16 <oerjan> ehird: sure, tempt him even more
22:19:23 <olsner> ehird: moar evil!
22:19:31 <ehird> you've defended it since it came out :P actually, before that you said it was crappy hype..
22:19:44 <faxathisia> me defend it?? no
22:20:16 <oerjan> but then olsner is evil too.  on another channel he blathers about evil secret swedish bacterial products.
22:21:31 <ehird> faxathisia: also, it's not what you said
22:21:33 <ehird> it's more like
22:21:47 <ehird> &:farl:thlr:iNCS:PD...:~
22:21:54 <faxathisia> lol
22:21:54 <ehird> 'ab' is not a . b
22:22:01 <ehird> and most of those ops are multi-char
22:22:08 <olsner> oerjan: sshh, the evil secret is supposed to be *secret*
22:22:21 <faxathisia> I haven't made an effort to understand squggol or whatever it is yet
22:22:30 <oerjan> of course it is.
22:23:02 <ehird> faxathisia: not worth it
22:23:02 <ehird> :D
22:23:15 <oerjan> i think squiggol was just another very old language mentioned in that slide show
22:24:01 <olsner> I thought quiggol was the bananas and lenses stuff
22:24:35 <oerjan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird-Meertens_Formalism
22:24:54 <oerjan> hm maybe it isn't _that_ old
22:25:16 <oerjan> the slide show mentioned it in the same breath as FP
22:25:30 <olsner> hmm, so, the bananas and lenses stuff is squiggol in a new notation with funny names for things?
22:26:19 <ehird> oerjan: yes
22:28:14 -!- Tritonio_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
22:30:01 <olsner> wtf, a 466 page manual? is this thing auto-generated?
22:31:18 <lament> All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
22:31:19 <lament> All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
22:31:19 <lament> All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
22:31:20 <lament> All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
22:31:54 <oklopol> o
22:31:54 <oklopol> o
22:31:54 <oklopol> o
22:31:54 <oklopol> o
22:32:25 <oerjan> lament is evil too.  i just saw him say that kids need speed.
22:32:59 <lament> oerjan: You're living in a bubble. But i'll sort that out.
22:33:25 <oerjan> LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU
22:33:51 <oklopol> my dentist is a mansion
22:34:13 <oerjan> Dr. House is your dentist?
22:34:36 <oklopol> yes you coded my crack
22:35:03 <lament> so Darwin was born today.
22:36:15 -!- jix has quit ("CommandQ").
22:36:40 <oklopol> ditto
22:46:32 <olsner> I'm starting to think haskell should grab some features from ursala
22:46:46 <faxathisia> hehehe
22:46:50 <faxathisia> What features?
22:46:54 <SimonRC> those big strings are rather like Forth stack-manipulation ops
22:47:10 <SimonRC> some of them are type specifiesr
22:47:45 <olsner> for example, deconstructors: ~(&lr,&lr) === (snd.fst) &&& (fst.snd)
22:48:17 <olsner> don't know how deep this rabbit hole actually goes, but it seems you can use the resulting constructor as a template and fill it in with deconstructors that are applied to the argument
22:50:35 <olsner> pointsfree haskell is too weak ;-)
22:56:45 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Connection reset by peer).
22:57:17 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
22:57:26 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
22:58:00 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
23:00:22 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Connection reset by peer).
23:00:56 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
23:01:51 -!- Corun has joined.
23:02:13 -!- danopia has quit (Client Quit).
23:02:22 -!- timotiis has quit ("leaving").
23:04:27 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
23:05:01 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined.
23:06:19 * SimonRC goes
23:06:44 <ehird> oerjan: BOO
23:07:30 -!- SimonRC has set topic: HAT!! YOU'RE RUINING MY HAT! Also, http://www.basis.uklinux.net/ursala/manual.pdf.
23:07:34 <oerjan> EEK
23:07:34 * SimonRC goes
23:08:20 <faxathisia> *g*
23:10:19 * olsner still learning ursala
23:10:30 * faxathisia grrr..
23:10:33 <ehird> olsner: it suckkkksss
23:10:43 <olsner> ehird: is that an executable program?
23:10:51 <ehird> probably..
23:10:53 <faxathisia> I am halfway through this damn massive paper but I want to read the thing...
23:10:54 * oerjan once again fails at recognizing any reference, using google
23:10:57 <faxathisia> haha
23:11:02 <ehird> you might need to add some more obfuscation
23:13:03 <ehird> omg
23:13:09 <ehird> the pointer expressions are an entire embeded language
23:13:11 <ehird> and they're tc
23:13:11 <ehird> :/
23:14:18 <olsner> heh, I was just thinking "hmm, maybe these pointer expressions could be extracted into a separate esolang" :P
23:15:43 <olsner> (x,y,z) = (reverse,init,last)
23:16:09 <RodgerTheGreat> I had an epiphany.
23:16:23 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: Did it hurt?
23:16:33 <RodgerTheGreat> on a quantum computer, bogosort is the most efficient sorting algorithm possible
23:16:55 <olsner> ehird: epiphanies are good for you, they're a sign of the deities liking you
23:17:17 <ehird> olsner: touched by his noodly appendage.
23:17:28 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: no -- only quantum bogosort, when following the many worlds theory
23:17:31 -!- sarehu has quit (Remote closed the connection).
23:17:33 <RodgerTheGreat> olsner: if we read the bible, so are sores, poverty and the death of your entire family
23:17:37 <ehird> it destroys the current world if the list isn't sorted after the first try.
23:17:39 <ehird> :)
23:17:46 -!- sarehu has joined.
23:17:51 <ehird> but you still have to go through the list to check for sorting
23:17:57 <ehird> so O(n)
23:18:02 <ehird> also, shuffling is basically the same
23:18:29 <faxathisia> Hey sarehu
23:18:36 <RodgerTheGreat> O(n) is by definition as efficient as any sorting algorithm could be
23:19:02 <RodgerTheGreat> even with an oracle, you can't sort a list of N items without N steps- it just wouldn't make any sense
23:19:12 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: well, sure.
23:19:15 <ehird> but still
23:19:17 <oklopol> O(n) on what operation
23:19:19 <olsner> many worlds + intelligent design sort
23:19:25 <ehird> olsner: brilliant
23:19:30 <ehird> O(5.4) sorting algorithm ;)
23:19:32 <ehird> (Yes, i know.)
23:19:33 <oklopol> sorting is O(1) if sorting is a primitive operation
23:20:03 <faxathisia> well it's O(0) to sort a sorted list
23:20:04 <oklopol> O(n) on reading input i guess, at least
23:20:18 <RodgerTheGreat> by that logic a foreach loop is O(1). that's ridiculous.
23:20:40 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: he means 'in the universe'
23:20:46 <RodgerTheGreat> oh
23:21:01 <RodgerTheGreat> well, in that case it makes an asymptotically tiny amount of sense.
23:21:10 <oklopol> you mean i don't make sense?
23:21:28 <RodgerTheGreat> I mean the probability of it making sense approaches zero
23:21:51 <oklopol> "<RodgerTheGreat> by that logic a foreach loop is O(1). that's ridiculous." <<< i meant was this for me
23:22:48 <RodgerTheGreat> "i meant was this for me" < This cannot be a coherent english sentence.
23:23:00 <oklopol> i just meant, when you start going oracle, you might wanna rethink what it means for something to be "O(n)"
23:23:04 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: yes it can
23:23:09 <ehird> that is perfectly ok english
23:23:11 <oklopol> "i meant, was this for me?"
23:24:00 <RodgerTheGreat> punctuation and capitalization make a difference. "I helped my uncle Jack off a horse" vs "I helped my uncle jack off a horse"
23:24:49 <oklopol> in this case, was there another way to parse my sentence?
23:25:28 <oklopol> anyway, that's a bit beside the pointzility
23:25:39 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: this is irc, stop being pretentious
23:26:18 <RodgerTheGreat> ehird: I'm not being pretentious, I'm being pedantic, and if you're telling me I can't be pedantic in #Esoteric, you've lost your mind
23:26:26 <oklopol> ehird: you're just jealous because he corrected me and not you.
23:26:30 <ehird> you can't be pedantic re: spelling and grammar over irc
23:26:31 <ehird> :/
23:27:06 <oklopol> if you think you can't have lost your mind at #Esoteric, you've also lost your mind
23:27:13 <ehird> quick! codify that
23:28:12 <RodgerTheGreat> pikhq: where the fuck is the nomic page for #Esoteric?
23:28:53 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: that would be too confusing. it must not exist
23:28:57 <ehird> also, this is #esoteric
23:28:58 <oerjan> we don't have any rules, we cannot be a nomic
23:29:28 <RodgerTheGreat> There's at least one rule we can all agree upon:
23:29:34 <RodgerTheGreat> "IRP is irritating"
23:29:57 <ehird> Please, say IRP is irritating
23:30:11 <ehird> my topic is STILL in #irp :|
23:31:13 <oerjan> at least the rule has a catchy acronym
23:32:15 <RodgerTheGreat> it's even a decent representation of the sound my brain makes every time someone joins for the exclusive purpose of using IRP
23:32:48 -!- ehird has set topic: iii.
23:33:10 <oerjan> The Rule of III
23:33:56 <RodgerTheGreat> iIi!
23:34:08 <RodgerTheGreat> haha, that looks great in courier
23:35:19 <oerjan> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_Three
23:35:21 <sarehu> the only O(n) sorting algorithm I've seen is the one that requires O(n) processors located within the array and numbers represented in unary form
23:35:28 * oerjan didn't know there were that many of them
23:36:00 <RodgerTheGreat> oerjan: the CS one is also known as "three or more, use a FOR"
23:36:16 <RodgerTheGreat> in one form, at least
23:36:22 <sarehu> excuse me, I meant O(n^2) processors, and that's with small numbers
23:37:16 <oklopol> err, aren't all slot-based ones O(n)?
23:37:21 <sarehu> with a single CPU you will never beat O(n log n)
23:37:30 <ehird> O(n) processors?
23:37:31 <ehird> :/
23:37:36 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: TWO or more, use a for.
23:37:41 <oklopol> O(n lg n) is for binary comparisons
23:37:52 <ehird> sez dick-stra
23:37:59 <sarehu> no, O(n log n) is for anything with a single CPU, where n = # elts in array
23:38:03 <RodgerTheGreat> nah, you generally need three to make the loop overhead worthwhile
23:38:10 <ehird> n processors.
23:38:12 <sarehu> or more specifically, O(n log k) where k is the number of distinct elements
23:38:13 <ehird> not O(n).
23:38:15 <RodgerTheGreat> dijkstra--, me++;
23:38:27 <oklopol> sarehu: based on what?
23:38:42 <sarehu> oklopol: input size
23:38:51 <oklopol> i mean, based on what is it O(n lg n)
23:39:02 <oklopol> lezzay you have a binary string
23:39:03 <sarehu> the number of bits you need to look at in n-element arrays with k distinct elements to simply distinguish the elements is O(n log k)
23:39:07 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: i think dijkstra is probably better at this crap than anyone here :P
23:39:08 <ehird> well, was.
23:39:08 <oklopol> just count ones and zeroes
23:39:13 <oklopol> and you're ready
23:39:18 <ehird> sure, he might have been crazily elitist, but hey :D
23:39:49 <RodgerTheGreat> bullshit. dijkstra made some good algorithms, but he was completely off base on a number of things
23:40:06 <oklopol> i've just seen the O(n lg n) proof for n-ary comparisons
23:40:08 <RodgerTheGreat> and some of his "inventions" (like mutexes) are a patently obvious concept
23:40:09 <faxathisia> Have you read, A Discipline of Programming?
23:40:12 <ehird> i like dijkstra :|
23:40:14 <oklopol> trivial proof based on the decision tree
23:40:19 <ehird> also, RodgerTheGreat, nothing is obvious.
23:40:30 <RodgerTheGreat> dijstra can go fuck himself
23:40:38 <faxathisia> He makes imperative programs and their correctness proofs beautiful
23:40:50 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: why can he?
23:40:56 <faxathisia> which is bizarre since imperative programs are generally awful
23:41:02 <RodgerTheGreat> and I will gladly go into a detailed discussion of his failures and personality problems at a later time, but I need to go do homework
23:41:09 <ehird> maybe you just don't like that most of mathematics and CS is codifying the 'obvious'
23:41:10 <faxathisia> but yeah, it's a great book to read
23:41:18 <ehird> and it's only obvious because they're so common today i must add.
23:41:34 <faxathisia> RodgerTheGreat: You just like goto!
23:41:40 <faxathisia> and that's why you hate him
23:41:46 <RodgerTheGreat> ehird: one reason: Dijstra KILLED BASIC. He gave Dartmouth BASIC a bad name and ruined its reputation, along with GOTO forever, and his reasoning was flawed
23:41:52 <faxathisia> lol
23:42:04 <RodgerTheGreat> most of his attacks on GOTO are only valid for numbered gotos, rather than labeled gotos anyway
23:42:10 <ehird> goto is pretty much awful unless you're implementing a state machine or similar
23:42:22 <ehird> also, I am all for killing BASIC
23:42:22 <RodgerTheGreat> and now people blindly follow the "anti GOTO" idea without understanding why it even exists!
23:42:30 <faxathisia> seriously though, his work is amazingt
23:42:32 <ehird> it's cool to play about with as a kid -- really cool
23:42:35 <ehird> but beyond that?
23:42:38 <ehird> please, god, kill it
23:42:42 <faxathisia> read A Discipline of Programming
23:43:30 <RodgerTheGreat> ehird: This is most likely because you're ignorant about the history of BASIC. Read up on Dartmouth BASIC, and get back to me
23:43:36 <RodgerTheGreat> I'll return later.
23:44:45 <faxathisia> btw that's complete nonsense
23:44:47 <ehird> RodgerTheGreat: i'm well aware
23:44:49 <ehird> faxathisia: i agree
23:44:53 <faxathisia> EVERYONE uses goto ALL the time!
23:44:59 <faxathisia> I know because I try to stop them :P
23:45:03 <ehird> heh.
23:45:09 <ehird> only complete idiots..
23:45:18 <faxathisia> anyway, it's fine for compiler output ...
23:45:23 <ehird> a goto does have some kind of usecase in imperative languages though...
23:45:36 <faxathisia> but whatever, goto is totally irrelevant to the work Dijkstra did
23:45:52 <faxathisia> that's just one contraversial thing..
23:45:53 <ehird> if you have a few nested flow structures, and a few of the branches and levels have an error case, 'goto fail' is useful
23:46:13 * faxathisia *scowl at ehird*
23:46:25 <ehird> faxathisia: give a more elegant way to do that example
23:47:10 <faxathisia> I have no idea, I've never had the need for goto in years of C programming
23:48:16 <ehird> faxathisia: well, exactly -- you havent come across one of them
23:48:21 <oklopol> a pretty elegant way is to USE C++ AND THROW ;;;)
23:48:23 <ehird> sometimes, they can't be refactored nicely, either
23:48:31 <ehird> oklopol: exceptions are evil, totally evil
23:48:36 <oklopol> really?
23:48:42 <ehird> imo yes
23:49:29 <oklopol> i don't use 'em much
23:49:57 <faxathisia> ehird, other than compiler output, I conjecture that there is no use
23:50:28 <oklopol> faxathisia: you can do call/cc with them, if you can fuck the stack too
23:50:57 <oklopol> you can definately do useful stuffzorz
23:51:04 <oklopol> uuuhsuf. i'm tired
23:51:09 <ehird> oklopol: only downwards-only call/cc.
23:51:17 <ehird> faxathisia: see my example.
23:51:28 <faxathisia> http://james.fabpedigree.com/lesson9.htm#p93
23:53:09 <faxathisia> It's a shame that all people think about when Dijkstra is mentioned is goto though..
23:54:59 <ehird> i don't
23:55:00 <ehird> but still
23:55:06 <ehird> he wasn't entirely right, but mostly
23:55:12 <ehird> goto should be considered harmful, most of the time.
23:55:32 <ehird> faxathisia: where are you from, anyway? just curious :)
23:55:36 <faxathisia> I like that he uses a nondeterministic languague to describe everything
23:55:56 <faxathisia> because he uses a lot of ideas that are valid in Logic programming too
23:56:02 <faxathisia> ehird: Scotland
23:56:16 <ehird> cool
23:56:18 <ehird> england here
23:58:59 <ehird> faxathisia: I wonder if this will make any sense to you since I know nothing of Scottish TV (but i'm pretty sure you get ch4..), but I was watching Countdown one day and there was a maths board that I couldn't solve (nobody else did, either) and I decided I would write a simple program to solve them. I just remembered today. I still haven't wrote it :p
23:59:08 <faxathisia> :D
23:59:25 <faxathisia> Are you interested in program derivation at all?
23:59:27 <ehird> intuition tells me it's probably a Really Hard problem, mathematically
23:59:50 <ehird> faxathisia: well, i just looked it up, and that's pretty cool :P
23:59:59 <ehird> and would also be a neat way to write that program, haha