00:03:00 -!- TheCorun has changed nick to Corun. 00:04:48 -!- AnMaster has quit ("ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)"). 00:06:14 -!- atsampson has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 00:08:08 -!- atsampson has joined. 00:50:34 I should really whip up that XKCD language 00:51:06 Slereah: what 00:51:43 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalophone 00:51:59 tusho : Don't you remember? 00:52:08 Slereah: No 00:52:20 The language with Ackerman, inverse Ackermann, McCarthy 91 and the Look and Say function. 00:52:27 Or something. 00:52:43 lament: I want one. 00:52:50 Slereah: What's that got to do with xkcd 00:53:08 http://xkcd.com/207/ 00:53:40 Well yes. 00:53:42 The xkcd number. 00:56:45 I wonder if I could write something useful with that 00:57:32 Well, it would have a way to do ++ and --, and some sort of conditional, so I suppose so. 00:57:39 Slereah: Loops? 00:57:56 Well, you can define functions in it 00:58:08 At least that's the idea so far 00:58:16 If you have a sillier one, do tell. 01:03:13 Is a > b (> a b) in Scheme? 01:03:50 Slereah: Yah. 01:06:46 Ah shit 01:06:51 My Ackermann no work 01:06:55 Slereah: Show it. 01:07:02 (define (A m n) (cond ((= m 0) (+ 1 n))((> m 0)(cond ((= n 0) (A (- m 1) 1)) (> n 0) (A (- m 1) (A m (- n 1))))))) 01:07:11 Slereah: lern2indent 01:07:16 :((( 01:07:17 also 01:07:19 why are you nesting conds 01:07:26 the whole point of cond is that it supports arbitary amounts of forms 01:07:29 Because conds are AWESOMe 01:07:43 Oh, I remember 01:07:51 I didn't want to use and in it 01:07:56 What you have their there can trivially be expressed by a nested if 01:08:05 (if (= m 0) ... (if (= n 0) ...)) 01:08:20 Making code unreadable because 'conds are AWESOMe' = silly 01:12:02 conds are so awesome 01:12:09 Slereah: add a few more pls 01:12:42 (define (A m n) (if (= m 0) (+ 1 n) (if (= n 0) (A (- m 1) 1) (A (- m 1) (A m (- n 1)))))) 01:12:46 Seems to woik. 01:14:15 well it's a syntactic conversion 01:14:31 from math 01:15:41 That's what I thought of my first version! 01:16:27 the more confusing the better 01:16:33 so people don't try to ready your code 01:16:37 *read 01:16:38 also ready 01:16:50 I like it when people ready my code. 01:17:02 It's always good to have ready code. 01:17:21 I'd like it even more if I could ready other people's code, of course. 01:17:32 if someone finishes my code, i might as well not even have contributed 01:17:39 it's no one's work then 01:22:46 Here be inverse Ackermann : (define (a n) (define (a2 x) (if (= n (A x x)) x (a2 (+ x 1)))) (a2 0) ) :D 01:22:50 And it works 01:22:53 I are happy. 01:24:20 it doesn't work 01:24:46 you need to traverse the cartesian product (Int, Int) 01:24:49 A is binary 01:25:18 (define (a n) (define (a2 x) (if (= n (A x x)) x (a2 (+ x 1)))) (a2 0)) 01:25:21 Parenthesis problem 01:25:47 what did you change? 01:25:59 I forgot 01:26:03 But it works here. 01:26:18 what's (a (A 1 2)) 01:26:30 is it (list 1 2)? 01:26:44 no 01:26:51 uh 01:26:52 maybe 01:27:05 a is inverse Ackermann. 01:27:09 correct answer afaik: it should be, but it isn't 01:27:26 Well, it doesn't work for all value 01:27:27 Slereah: for A(a,b) where a=b 01:27:33 not for generic A 01:27:39 I know 01:27:44 you need to traverse the cartesian product (Int, Int), because A is binary 01:27:46 That's inverse Ackermann. 01:27:51 is that so 01:27:56 it's an actual function? 01:27:58 Well, according to Wikipedia 01:28:08 ah, okay, i assumed it was... well, inverse ackermann 01:28:12 There's another inverse Ackermann, but it looks like a pain in the ass. 01:28:21 http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/d/9/ad9f370fbae7057bc3c62c50624a40ea.png 01:28:43 hmm 01:28:57 I like function pairs (f,g) where you can have f(g(a,b,c)) = (a,b,c) 01:29:09 I call them Ctrl-Zable. 01:29:17 Square roots of unity. 01:29:30 hmm 01:29:47 -!- puzzlet has quit ("leaving"). 01:30:01 wtf, if ackermann is the binary A(m,n), why is the inverse ackermann the inverse of f(n) = A(n,n)? 01:30:28 Because otherwise, it wouldn't be a function 01:30:31 It would be a graph. 01:30:42 -!- puzzlet has joined. 01:30:54 because a function can't return a tuple? 01:31:03 Because A(1,0) = A(0,1) 01:31:26 It wouldn't even be a function. 01:31:26 right, so it doesn't have an inverse 01:31:43 Well, it has an inverse. But not in function form. 01:31:49 yeah 01:31:59 so why is its inverse the inverse of a different function 01:32:02 all i was wondering 01:32:26 Well, I suppose because it was the easiest way to make something that's sort of the inverse 01:32:27 [01:29] I like function pairs (f,g) where you can have f(g(a,b,c)) = (a,b,c) 01:32:29 Anyone have some neat ones? 01:32:37 identity! 01:32:39 Like the square root is the inverse for the square on 0+ 01:32:42 Actually, I think I'll call them Recoverable instead. 01:32:44 oklofok: Well, yeah. 01:32:49 (id,id) is a Recoverable. 01:33:23 Slereah: not a good analogy 01:33:36 Actually, it is 01:33:43 that's like saying "the inverse of ackermann for which m is as small as possible" 01:33:45 It's an inverse function on a restriction of the original function 01:33:49 is the inverse of ackermann 01:33:55 which i would be fine with 01:33:58 Such that the restriction is a bijection 01:34:12 hmm 01:34:23 okay, you make sense 01:34:43 Ooh. 01:34:48 (reverse,reverse) is another pair. 01:34:56 reverse(reverse(a) = a 01:34:58 reverse(reverse(a)) = a 01:35:10 tusho: (permutation, permutation^-1) 01:35:12 So my idea for look and say is this : L(n,m) -> Look and say of the string n (in decimal) at step m. 01:35:36 But I'm not sure how to proceed. Should I turn n to a string to operate on it? 01:35:48 Slereah: Yes 01:35:49 And if so, how the hell does that work in Scheme. 01:35:50 Or.. 01:35:55 Just use divide and modulo 01:35:59 To extract the digits 01:36:12 Yeah, it's another possibility 01:36:18 Which one would be easier in scheme? 01:36:25 it doesn't make much sense to use bignums for the strings 01:36:27 *string 01:36:35 use a string or a list 01:36:35 Slereah: divmod 01:36:37 Because the string thing would totally fly by in Python 01:36:44 oklofok: It's not a string, it's a number 01:36:46 But in Scheme, I dunno 01:36:47 Slereah: Do divmod. 01:36:49 It's more elegant. 01:36:54 I'm so confused! 01:37:00 Which one should I believe! 01:37:26 tusho: it's a string, you just insert numbers into it as their n-base for 01:37:28 *form 01:37:43 it's clearly a cellular automaton 01:38:05 Good idea. I'll make a game of life in Scheme and go from there. 01:38:06 Slereah: DIVMOD 01:38:20 I dunno. It's true that it would grow very quickly. 01:38:27 How big can Scheme handle? 01:38:36 very big, that's not the issue 01:38:39 do game of life in the type system 01:38:47 it's just it has nothing to do with numbers, that's a bad representation 01:38:47 ...in Scheme 01:39:14 i agree with lament actually 01:39:17 oklofok : Except the language in question would only take numbers 01:39:18 lament: lol 01:39:28 Slereah: scheme can do numbers 01:39:31 as big as your memory will allow 01:39:33 (bignums) 01:39:35 And the look and say would return numbers 01:39:41 oklofok: it has plenty to do with number 01:39:42 s 01:39:45 that's what the look and say is 01:40:37 well it's a moot point to argue what's the most sensible way to store it 01:40:43 but string / list is the easy way 01:40:47 no 01:40:48 its not 01:40:52 is too 01:40:53 divmod will be easier in scheme 01:41:17 k 01:41:26 What does divmod return, a pair ? 01:41:44 Slereah: dunno if scheme actually HAS divmod 01:41:48 but just use /, and modulo 01:41:50 seperately 01:41:51 Oh. 01:42:40 (define (divmod a b) ((/ a b) . (modulo a b))) shouldn't be that hard to make yourself if you want it 01:42:46 ) 01:42:50 *cons 01:42:55 *not ) 01:42:57 that won't work oklofok 01:43:08 i know 01:43:13 that tries to execute 01:43:16 i know 01:43:18 ((/ a b) modulo a b) 01:43:30 (define (divmod a b) (cons (/ a b) (modulo a b)) 01:43:31 or better: 01:43:35 (define (divmod a b) (list (/ a b) (modulo a b)) 01:43:37 well no, it tries to execute ((/ a b) . modulo a b) 01:44:22 oklofok: wrong 01:44:24 oh 01:44:28 no 01:44:29 wrong 01:44:39 oklofok: ((/ a b) . (modulo a b)) is ((/ a b) modulo a b) 01:44:45 (a . b c) makes no sense 01:44:48 (EXPR . EXPR) 01:44:51 err 01:44:52 (EXPR+ . EXPR) 01:45:12 i thought (a b) == (a . (b . nil)) 01:45:26 yes 01:45:34 (modulo a b) = (modulo . (a . (b . ()))) 01:45:38 so 01:45:41 ((/ a b) . that) 01:45:41 is 01:45:46 ((/ a b) modulo a b) 01:46:15 Is there a way to convert numbers to lists? 01:46:29 Or possibly number->string->list 01:46:50 i thought ((/ a b) (modulo a b)) = ((/ a b) . ((modulo a b) . nil)) and ((/ a b) . (modulo a b)) = ...well what it is 01:46:53 Slereah: Ssh. 01:46:54 Use divmod. 01:47:00 oklofok: it's not ((/ a b) (modulo a b)) 01:47:04 it's ((/ a b) . (modulo a b)) 01:47:13 which is 01:47:19 ((/ a b) . (modulo . (a . (b . ())))) 01:47:23 ah 01:47:24 ergo 01:47:26 Divmod seems like trubba 01:47:28 now i see what the problem is 01:47:31 ((/ a b) modulo a b) 01:47:35 Slereah: No. It doesn't. 01:47:42 ((/ a b) modulo a b) <<< read this as ((/ a b) (modulo a b)) 01:47:43 How can you even say that if you don't know scheme? 01:47:48 oklofok: ah 01:48:05 and thought i'd forgotten the parens in my copy paste :D 01:48:14 which was kinda stupid 01:48:20 because it was... copy paste 01:50:50 -!- puzzlet has quit (Remote closed the connection). 01:50:54 -!- puzzlet has joined. 01:51:09 yay i has drscheme 01:51:37 I has it too 01:51:42 Let's be Scheme friends. 01:51:46 ::) 01:51:47 let's 01:52:00 nah, i was thinking owning you @ look-and-say 01:52:08 not that i remember anything about scheme anymore 01:52:22 Heh. 01:52:31 It's like a gayer Lisp 01:55:05 when on a line, how do i get it to jump on the ...current line? 01:55:06 i mean 01:55:12 when i want to retry a statement 01:55:19 What? 01:55:22 there was a keyboard trick 01:55:23 like 01:55:26 if i do 01:55:27 7 01:55:32 and it says 7 01:55:38 but i wanna try that again 01:55:42 so i go to the 7 01:55:44 press X 01:55:45 bye for today :) 01:55:49 -!- tusho has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 01:55:55 and the 7 is on the downmost line 01:56:14 hard to explain, it seems :) 02:00:14 what was cond's default thingie? 02:00:52 Wot? 02:01:29 sorry, i'm not able to communicate today 02:01:37 the default case of cond 02:01:51 You mean syntax mehby? 02:02:19 (cond ((= a 0) 0) (default + a 1))) 02:02:22 asd 02:02:29 i have some issues atm 02:02:34 (cond ((= a 0) 0) (default (+ a 1)))) 02:02:53 still wrong, but readable already 02:03:04 Well, anything that doesn't evaluate to #f is considered true 02:03:26 So if a isn't 0, it will be a+1 02:03:40 well yeah syntax mehby 02:03:43 If a isn't 0 and default is #f, it will evaluate to undefined 02:04:04 what am i supposed to use 02:04:14 For what 02:04:21 i can use #t, i just recall there was a standard practise 02:04:22 but nm 02:04:37 Well, as said, you can use anything. 02:04:48 yes yes 02:13:10 okay 02:13:14 esc + p 02:13:19 that was hard 02:28:02 okay, one 02:28:03 *done 02:28:53 used pretty much all that time to search for certain functions i ended up making myself 02:29:42 Slereah: here's the code if you wanna peek: http://www.vjn.fi/pb/p625132161.txt 02:30:07 a good deed a day 02:30:33 owning a less experienced programmer is the best, nothing tops the feeling 02:30:46 Slereah: you there? 02:31:22 No 02:31:27 I'm on the moon. 02:31:46 ah, nm then 02:32:01 give me more codables 02:32:03 i wanna code 02:32:06 random shit 02:32:08 in scheme 02:32:54 oklofok : Do a function that will find out if a function terminates. 02:34:28 i don't feel like it 02:34:59 Where you HALTED in finding the solution to that PROBLEM? 02:35:01 WINK WINK 02:36:11 :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 02:36:20 How subtle. 02:36:37 :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD 02:36:40 cockwoffles 02:36:58 codables 02:36:58 gimme 02:37:01 codables 02:37:22 Write a function that will find if two lambda expressions are identical 02:37:40 Or write a Lazy Bird interpreter, I dunno 02:37:56 interps need all that parsing hassle 02:38:03 which requires thought 02:38:14 parsing is the greatest mental task i know 02:38:17 Write a function that will give you the sum of two numbers 02:38:19 i mean hardest 02:38:24 okay! 02:39:05 I suggest the following procedure : convert the numbers into Church numerals 02:39:18 Use the successor operator by recursion 02:39:36 Then, use another function that will convert back to numbers. 02:39:56 alright, i'll be doing that 02:40:04 hmm 02:40:23 The easiest way for addition! 02:43:51 Or maybe 02:44:09 Maybe you could do it with the a + 0 = a, a + s(b) = s(a+b) 02:44:14 okay, it seems i remembered churches a bit wrong 02:44:14 But instead of numbers 02:44:19 but i've got them now 02:44:28 You use Von Neumann ordinals 02:49:24 okay, i have the conversions now 02:53:57 http://www.vjn.fi/pb/p623225644.txt 02:53:59 next, please 02:54:30 Cure cancer. 02:54:40 pass! 02:54:52 Cure the halting problem 02:55:04 MY BODY IS HALTING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO! 02:55:46 * oklofok passes Slereah a monad 02:56:10 Are you trying to kill me? 02:57:49 yes 02:58:01 because you're not providing me codables! 02:59:26 Code something to convert a graph into another graph, using an active part and all that shit 03:31:23 -!- ihope has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 03:36:58 -!- boily has joined. 03:40:27 -!- boily has quit (Client Quit). 03:46:37 codables? 03:46:42 dables and codables? 03:47:05 nversions and converions of graphs and cographs 03:48:00 i say, we should develop a programming language that's based either off the mad ramblings of the hybrids from BSG or something thats cylon-ish 03:49:15 let's do both 03:50:56 we'll call the first one Hybrid, and the second one .. ?? 03:52:38 cylon 03:52:38 did i win? 03:56:06 -!- Corun has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 03:56:39 okokokokokokokokokokokoko 03:56:39 hmmhmm, wonder if i should actually do something 04:26:00 -!- oklofok has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 04:26:31 -!- oklopol has joined. 04:48:46 -!- puzzlet_ has joined. 04:57:27 -!- augur has changed nick to SecretRoadRunner. 04:57:43 -!- SecretRoadRunner has changed nick to augur. 04:59:31 -!- augur has changed nick to psygnisfive. 05:00:10 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 05:04:43 o.o 05:04:45 no not cylon :P 05:12:43 so im really getting into the idea of reactive programming 05:13:12 coooool 05:13:30 i wanna create a reactive language 05:14:38 dude in javascript try to envision how many lines of code it'd require to do something like make some element el track the mouse, right? 05:14:41 you'd need something like 05:15:14 document.onmousemove = function(ev){ 05:15:15 el.x = ev.mouse.x; 05:15:16 el.y = ev.mouse.y; 05:15:18 } 05:15:21 or something like that 05:15:36 well why not just have a global mouse object, and be able to do something like 05:15:53 mouse.x -> el.x 05:15:53 mouse.y -> el.y 05:16:16 or event something like just mouse.x, mouse.y -> el.x, el.y 05:16:38 or my personal favorite, since i love queer shit like this 05:16:44 mouse.(x,y) -> el.(x,y) 05:17:06 i love that too 05:17:10 and thats it. none of this onmousemove blah blah blah 05:17:13 mouse -> el tho. 05:17:16 hmm 05:17:18 well 05:17:20 noooooooooooo 05:17:21 i know 05:17:25 that would push the value of mouse into el 05:17:36 making el just another name for mouse 05:17:52 and we're assuming el is some page element 05:17:52 i knooooooooooow 05:18:19 :p 05:19:04 dude ok 05:19:10 so since we'd have decompositions like that 05:19:12 where stuff like 05:19:18 a, b -> c, d 05:19:28 the _entire_ program could be written with a single -> 05:19:48 a single one oh god now tell me more 05:19:53 :) 05:19:59 :D 05:20:01 god i'm tired. 05:20:02 kind of getting into esoteric territory now aint we 05:20:03 :X 05:20:17 hmm, what do you mean you can do it with a single ->? 05:20:18 ofcourse the interpreter would just decompose it into multiple ->s 05:20:22 well 05:20:24 since we allow this: 05:20:33 a, b -> c, d 05:20:38 to be an abbreviation for 05:20:41 a -> c 05:20:43 b -> d 05:20:58 ALL such pairings could be folded into a single -> 05:21:03 so if you have a hundred of them 05:21:08 you'd just have one -> 05:21:36 a, b, c, d, ... -> a', b', c', d', ... 05:21:38 instead of 05:21:41 a -> a' 05:21:42 b -> b' 05:21:44 c -> c' 05:21:47 d -> d' 05:21:47 ... 05:22:04 right, right 05:22:17 add into that the fact that you can do stuff like 05:22:33 obj.(prop1, prop2) -> obj2.(prop1, prop2) 05:22:35 in place of 05:22:40 obj.prop1 -> obj2.prop1 05:22:45 obj.prop2 -> obj2.prop2 05:22:51 and you can get really confusing code 05:23:28 mouse.(x,y), 0.5*mouse.(x,y) -> el.(x,y), el.(width,height) 05:23:34 or something silly like that 05:23:41 but with _all_ the relationships 05:23:59 it's a trivial thing to decompose back into readable form, mind you 05:23:59 but 05:24:04 oooh how about this too: 05:24:15 x -> -y is permissable 05:24:24 setting x to 1 sets y to -1 05:24:28 and so on 05:24:29 ey? 05:24:38 x -> sqrt(y) 05:24:49 cool declarativity 05:24:52 yeah 05:24:52 :o 05:24:54 well 05:24:55 sort of 05:24:57 so cool. 05:25:09 i figure the way it might work easily is by just inverting it 05:25:13 if x -> sqrt(y) 05:25:16 and 5 -> x 05:25:35 then 5 -> sqrt(y) so invert it to get 5*5 -> y 05:25:38 but ooh what about like 05:25:46 sqrt(25) -> y 05:25:50 inversion is basically declarativity 05:25:52 would y be a pair? i think so. 05:26:01 declarative reactance! :o 05:26:34 hm 05:26:37 what else should we have 05:30:58 how about implicit understanding of multiple values? 05:30:59 so like 05:31:07 if we said something like x -> y*y 05:31:10 5 -> x 05:31:15 y == (5,-5) 05:31:16 right 05:31:19 but then if we did 05:31:28 y + 2 -> z 05:31:34 z == (7,-3) 05:31:46 so its kind of an implicit map function 05:32:13 maybe even implicit filters with guards 05:32:23 y | y > 0 -> w 05:32:25 w == 5 05:34:01 or maybe 05:34:08 y -> w | y > 0 05:34:17 or something like that 05:34:21 either is valid 05:38:52 or even y > 0: y -> w 05:38:59 whatchu think oklopol 05:41:27 lemmesee 05:42:09 let's have all that 05:42:25 :) 05:42:34 now 05:42:46 so what else tho 05:42:46 if you have 05:42:49 yeah 05:42:51 x -> y 05:42:55 y -> x 05:43:01 err 05:43:02 well 05:43:12 i was trying to beat you to it :p 05:43:13 did i? :p 05:43:14 is x->y equal to y->x? 05:43:37 no 05:43:38 nevermind 05:43:41 forget it said it 05:43:46 just wondering it's semantics 05:43:56 is it kindof a value implication 05:44:28 er 05:44:44 its the reverse of defining y() = x() :) 05:44:57 reactive programming, as i see it, is the reverse of functional programming 05:45:07 where in functional programming you can functions to get values 05:45:19 in reactive programming you set values which pushes to other depending variables 05:45:24 so like 05:45:55 5 -> x // x == 5 now 05:45:55 x -> y // y == 5 05:45:57 10 -> x // x == 10, y == 10 05:46:15 yeah but 05:46:22 what if you have 05:46:32 5->x; x->y; 10->y; 05:46:34 what's x? 05:46:41 x is still 5 05:46:43 ah 05:46:49 okay 05:46:53 x -> y says that y is always equal to whatever x is equal to 05:46:54 i like it 05:46:55 or more accurately 05:47:01 the value of x gets put into y 05:47:06 so whenever you put something into x 05:47:10 it then gets put into y 05:47:13 so you can do stuff like 05:47:45 5 -> x 05:47:45 3 -> y 05:47:46 x + y -> z // z == 8 05:47:48 1 -> x; // z == 4 05:47:53 so... evaluating a -> b means evaluate a, put result in b; if the result of a should ever change, re-evaluate a -> b 05:48:35 well, evaluating a -> b really establishes a relationship that says b = a whenever you evaluate b 05:48:46 but since its push-like... 05:48:51 errr? 05:48:55 any change causes cascading change down the line 05:49:04 a -> b is more like a function definition 05:50:07 its like saying 05:50:12 b(){ return a(); } 05:50:16 "evaluating a -> b really establishes a relationship that says b = a whenever you evaluate b" <<< so if i have 5->x;x->y;10->y, 10=5 whenever i evaluate 10? 05:50:35 no :p 05:50:50 5 -> x just puts the value 5 into x 05:50:53 10 -> y the same 05:50:54 perhaps my imperative definition then? 05:51:00 and not your incorrect one 05:51:09 x -> y, because both sites are variables, is a relationship. 05:51:24 you could think og it like re-evaluating, i guess 05:51:36 but its not reevaluating a -> b 05:51:46 its updating the value of b, given the current value of a 05:51:57 a -> b is just a -> b 05:52:07 just like b(){ return a(); } is always b(){ return a(); } 05:52:18 even if a() == 5 one moment, and a() == 10 the next 05:52:32 you never reevaluate b(){ return a(); } 05:52:43 when you call b(), you just return the new value of a() 05:52:46 same thing with a -> b 05:52:55 only its not when you ask for b, its whenever a changes. 05:53:12 so that whenever a changes, everything defined in terms of it changes. 05:53:26 so my definition? 05:53:30 sure 05:53:36 but you're not reevaluation a -> b 05:53:45 you're just updating b, given the new value of a. 05:53:51 i defined that as the evaluation of a->b 05:54:05 it's a recursive definitionation 05:54:05 because this for instance would _change_ the relationship: 05:54:13 a -> b 05:54:14 a*a -> b 05:54:29 definitionation? :) 05:54:36 a nation of definitions? 05:54:45 sometimes i cute words up when i'm tired 05:55:10 you encuten words? :P 05:55:10 anyway, i wanna see what happens when you 5->a 05:55:17 yeah, i'm a cutinator 05:55:20 5 -> a just puts the value a into 5 05:55:23 er 05:55:25 5 into a 05:55:25 haha 05:55:33 but i wanna see b blow 05:55:43 ?? 05:56:09 5 -> a 05:56:09 a -> b 05:56:10 b == 5 05:56:12 10 -> a 05:56:14 there's a lang based on setting new values to constants btw 05:56:14 b == 10 05:56:16 3 -> b 05:56:18 a == 10 05:56:20 b == 3 05:56:21 4=5 05:56:27 lisp lets you do that ;) 05:56:31 well, maybe not with numbers 05:56:34 but you can do 05:56:37 (define + -) 05:57:15 in ruby i think you can do the same, because + is just a method on numbers: 5 + 3 == 4.+(3) 05:57:17 .. 05:57:19 5.+(3) 05:57:28 so if you redefined + on numbers.. 05:57:44 some existing languages, and especially implementations, let you reset constants, because they are actually allocated, and can thus be mutable 05:57:47 i m ean 05:57:49 *mean 05:57:54 allocated @ compile time 05:57:57 but 05:58:15 in this lang, the name of which i cannot remember, you actually set the number to some other number 05:58:21 hm. 05:58:30 not just numbers that exist @ source 05:58:31 hmm 05:58:36 well lisp theoretically would let you do that if it had numbers like mccarthy originally designed it 05:58:40 in case i recall correctly i have to check now i need to 05:58:45 but church numerals are blegh 05:59:06 so the language you're looking for is (inadvertently) Lisp-1 05:59:08 :) 05:59:23 i think what you MEAN you want to see is somthing like 05:59:25 5 -> 4 05:59:34 i doubt any lisp has ever allowed something like that 05:59:39 what i wanna see? 05:59:43 i wanted to see b blow 05:59:44 i mean 05:59:46 a->b 05:59:49 a*a->b 05:59:49 well earlier you were asking about making 5 == 10 05:59:52 5->a 05:59:54 what's b? 05:59:57 25 06:00:00 ah 06:00:08 because whatever a is 06:00:10 b is a*a 06:00:27 these -> expressions set up relationships between their sides 06:00:38 thats why i said they're sort of like functions 06:00:44 hmm 06:00:56 a*a -> b is roughly equivalent to b(){ return a*a; } 06:01:01 or a()*a() 06:01:06 Y->Z overrides and thus removes all earlier constraints X-Z? 06:01:15 hmm 06:01:16 yeah it'd have to. 06:01:19 no, that's not possible 06:01:21 i mean 06:01:25 if you did 06:01:33 only if Y is a superset of X that can happen 06:01:35 a*a -> b 06:01:36 c -> b 06:01:39 so, in the general case 06:01:46 then changing a has no effect on b 06:01:53 you have to say "a->b happens first, then a*a->b, so b is 25" 06:02:00 no :) 06:02:03 you can do a*a -> b first 06:02:08 and then 5 -> a 06:02:12 ... 06:02:22 this is about the order of a->b and a*a->b 06:02:22 just like you can do 06:02:26 right 06:02:28 i know 06:02:36 oh yes sorry 06:02:36 haha 06:02:40 yeah if you did a -> b 06:02:43 and then a*a -> b 06:02:45 then b is just 25 now 06:03:16 if you did the reverse, b would be 5 now. 06:03:37 hm. interesting question: 06:03:45 if we allow declarativity and more than one symbol on the right 06:03:50 5 -> a 06:03:54 6 -> b 06:03:58 7 -> c 06:04:02 but what if we do 06:04:08 c -> a + b 06:04:08 ? 06:04:26 a and b would have to change, perhaps 06:04:34 maybe to an abstract relationship? 06:04:41 a == a | a+b == c ?? 06:04:50 hm hm hm 06:06:10 :) 06:07:35 i think thats how it shoul work 06:07:40 if you have a and b defined 06:07:45 and then you redefine them like that 06:07:47 c -> a + b 06:07:51 where theres no single solution 06:07:58 then a and b should be a relationship 06:08:02 and if you then later say 06:08:07 1 -> a 06:08:15 then a == 1 and c == 7 06:08:25 and b == b | a+b == c 06:08:39 therefore b = 6 now 06:08:45 (not that it wasnt already but :p) 06:08:57 if 5 -> a, then b == 2 06:08:59 and so on 06:09:03 does that work for you? 06:09:17 but b is still defined internally as b | a+b == c 06:09:35 so if you again changed a or c, b would also change 06:12:28 hmm 06:12:36 yeah, that's nice 06:12:51 how about this, since we'redoing declarative stuff 06:12:54 declarative variables 06:13:11 x | x+2 = 5 06:13:13 x == 3 06:13:18 in this context 06:13:34 (x | x+2 == 5) being just an expression like from earlier 06:14:42 obviously this is slightly different than the -> use 06:15:02 x -> y | x > 0 is a guard on the x -> y reaction 06:15:41 hm.. actually 06:15:45 | shouldnt be a guard 06:16:29 5 -> x+2 06:16:29 x -> y | x > 0 should REALLY mean that x is bound variable in this expression, and y now countains the value all x such that x > 0 06:16:39 e.g. all real numbers > 0 or something like that 06:17:13 the guard should look different i think 06:17:22 maybe :? 06:17:35 or ? 06:17:35 ? 06:17:41 x -> y ? x > 0 06:17:49 or something like tht 06:17:51 ! maybe 06:17:55 x -> y ! x > 0 06:18:22 -!- oklopol has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 06:18:34 -!- oklopol has joined. 06:18:37 o.o 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:15:02 -!- AnMaster has joined. 08:27:30 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 08:44:00 -!- olsner has quit ("Leaving"). 08:44:21 -!- Judofyr has quit. 08:56:56 -!- Judofyr has joined. 08:57:11 -!- Judofyr has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 09:15:03 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("brb"). 09:27:35 -!- jix has joined. 09:36:08 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 09:50:49 -!- oklopol has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 09:51:06 -!- oklopol has joined. 09:53:26 -!- puzzlet_ has changed nick to puzzlet. 10:28:29 -!- Corun has joined. 10:34:57 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 10:38:26 -!- psygnisfive has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 10:38:57 -!- augur has joined. 11:15:38 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("Saliendo"). 11:51:38 -!- Hiato has joined. 12:10:37 -!- Corun has joined. 12:35:35 -!- Sgeo has joined. 12:45:59 -!- Sgeo has quit (Remote closed the connection). 12:48:58 -!- Sgeo has joined. 12:55:15 -!- Slereah7 has joined. 12:55:15 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 13:37:06 -!- Hiato has quit ("Leaving."). 13:50:01 -!- Zatvornik has joined. 13:50:09 helo from russia 13:50:16 heyy people 13:50:22 Hello sir 13:50:42 esoteric interesting tipo? 13:50:55 Karlos Kastaneda forever 13:51:46 Wat 13:52:21 bliat 13:52:36 i from russia i m bad understad you 13:53:02 loh ebaniy 13:53:10 you loh 13:53:32 you american loh 13:53:45 american piderast 13:53:49 you 13:54:18 I'm not American. 13:54:18 russia rape usa!!!!!!! 13:54:46 english land? 13:55:45 you from? 13:55:51 No. 13:56:13 so..... europa? 13:56:38 -!- pikhq has joined. 13:57:21 go to the russia in maunting bashkiria 13:57:55 -!- Zatvornik has left (?). 13:59:04 Sal'. 14:00:07 Saluton pikhq kaj cxiu 14:00:25 Nu. . . 14:00:41 I'm at work, and haven't the foggiest *clue* what I need to do today. 14:03:43 My boss doesn't come in for another couple of hours. 14:04:03 You could pick your nose 14:04:13 -_-' 14:29:40 -!- Polar has quit (Remote closed the connection). 14:33:28 hello! :D 14:34:09 Hello, world! 14:36:29 so oklopol and i are designing a reactive programming language :) 14:38:02 oklopol, i had some more ideas. 14:38:05 well, one. 14:39:00 x -> \blah: ... 14:39:12 Reactive? 14:39:21 would set values of x into the lambda bound to the varible blah 14:39:26 reactive languages are like.. hm 14:39:30 how can i describe them 14:39:36 the inverse of functional languages. 14:40:05 What, imperative? 14:40:09 no no 14:40:10 Only side effects? 14:40:16 well, almost ;) 14:40:26 You feed an argument to a reaction and you get back a function? 14:40:28 and yet only no side effects 14:40:36 so the way it works is sort of like this 14:41:00 where in functional programming you have some function f defined in terms of some other functions g and h, like say 14:41:07 f(x) = g(x) + h(x) 14:41:16 (if we were doing this in haskell) 14:41:27 in reactive programming you would just say something like 14:41:32 g + h -> f 14:41:48 Isn't that still functional? 14:41:52 Looks to me like that's just reversing the syntax 14:41:58 in functional programming, where you call a function to get its current value, which calls the functions in its definition 14:42:00 I mean, you can do (define f (+ g h)) 14:42:20 in reactive programming whenever something changes, all things that are defined in terms of it also change 14:42:26 so for instance 14:42:30 if i said 14:42:33 x*x -> y 14:42:37 and then i say x to be 5 14:42:41 y would be 25 14:42:58 on the surface it is quite functional, in many respects, yes 14:43:29 but consider: a functional program doesn't let you do something like 14:43:35 f(x) = g(x) + h(x) 14:44:08 OR DOES IT 14:44:10 and then, say, print() = f(x) 14:44:34 and then constantly have that print new values of f(x) whenever x itself changes 14:44:41 in a functional language, if you set up those relationships 14:44:49 doing an assignment on x, like x = 5 14:44:56 does not cause f(x) to be printed 14:45:19 you have to CALL print() to make f(x) print to the screen 14:45:27 Oh. 14:45:38 whereas with a reactive language, any change is immediately pushed through the reaction network 14:45:47 so suppose you had some box on the screen 14:46:02 in our language, if you want to make the box follow the cursor 14:46:04 you just do 14:46:10 mouse.(x,y) -> box.(x,y) 14:46:26 That's interesting 14:46:32 and the value of the mouses x and y coordinates will always be pushed into the box's x and y coordinates 14:46:51 if you wanted to have the box follow the mouse but half a second later than the mouse itself 14:47:13 delay(0.5, mouse.(x,y)) -> box.(x,y) 14:47:49 we're also going to have implicit mapping, so that if you have a collection of multiply values in some variable 14:47:51 like say 14:48:01 x = 1 2 3 4 14:48:03 then doing 14:48:07 x*x -> y 14:48:14 y == 1 4 9 16 14:48:28 and implicit filtering 14:48:46 even(x): x*x -> z 14:48:52 z = 4 16 14:49:40 mind you, these arent data structures being stored, these are multiple values being assigned to a single variable 14:49:57 we're also thinking of having it be declarative 14:49:59 e.g. 14:50:02 x -> y*y 14:50:08 is also permissible 14:50:22 so if you said 25 -> x 14:50:26 y == 5 -5 14:51:06 tho im not so sure that we should actually do that ;) 14:52:43 its sort of like event based programming in many respects 14:53:00 except you dont have events that represent changes, nor handlers to handle events 14:54:19 the reason i say its the inverse of functional programming, tho, is that functions have to be called, which then calls further nested functions, which has the effect of pulling data towards the end of the change, the function that you called 14:54:53 s/change/chain 14:54:56 whereas in reactive programming, its reactions that are triggered, pushing data forward to the end of the chain 14:55:38 butt 14:55:42 sex 14:55:58 SEXBUTT 15:12:53 -!- Hiato has joined. 15:20:36 -!- ihope has joined. 15:27:23 we also decided that statements like 15:27:30 x, y -> z, w 15:27:31 is equivalent to 15:27:34 x -> w 15:27:36 y -> w 15:27:50 which means your entire program could be written with a single -> 15:27:51 :) 15:28:28 and then combine that with decomposition and like 15:29:44 mouse.(x,y,foo.(bar,quux)) -> box.(x,y),baz,garply 15:30:38 x -> z, you mean? You said x -> w. 15:30:53 yeah, x->z 15:30:55 :p 15:45:42 -!- ais523 has joined. 15:47:14 http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?wwlzdmylykd 15:47:15 You see what exams do to me?? 15:50:37 what do they do to you? 15:50:40 This file is currently set to private. This error has been forwarded to MediaFire's development team. 15:50:50 err.. 15:51:01 lemme fix it :P 15:51:41 http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?wwlzdmylykd 15:51:47 there we are :) 15:53:57 (not that it's much to be proud of :P ) 15:54:52 Is it in MIDI? 15:55:09 nope 15:55:18 sounds like it though 15:55:42 well, actually, you'd have to ask Image-Line about that one 16:03:18 -!- Sgeo has quit (leguin.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:03:18 -!- augur has quit (leguin.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:03:18 -!- GregorR has quit (leguin.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:05:28 -!- Sgeo has joined. 16:05:28 -!- augur has joined. 16:05:28 -!- GregorR has joined. 16:07:45 -!- Corun has quit ("Leaving"). 16:15:33 -!- MichaelRaskin_ has joined. 16:15:56 -!- MichaelRaskin_ has left (?). 16:16:04 augur: delay(0.5, mouse.(x,y)) -> box.(x,y) <<< a bit practical and impure imo, but i guess you invented that on the run 16:16:26 -!- tKolar has joined. 16:19:10 ... 16:19:17 MORTAL KOMBAAAAAAAT! 16:21:39 -!- Corun has joined. 16:25:11 -!- Corun has quit (Client Quit). 16:30:16 -!- Corun has joined. 16:31:53 hey there, anyone speak german? 16:32:04 not very well 16:32:14 nur ein bisschen 16:32:17 I dropped it after an one unsuccessful year at GCSE 16:32:25 do you know what a quine is? 16:32:29 ya 16:32:42 Who doesn't here. 16:32:43 I mean in german :-P 16:32:52 Quine is named after a guy. 16:32:55 So probably "quine" 16:33:28 k, thanks 16:38:49 -!- ihope has changed nick to cuain. 16:40:58 -!- ehird has joined. 16:42:28 ais523: is Lunatic_Lester spamming to you? 16:42:34 [16:42] Hello ehird. Do you love tasty treats that can be enjoyed at any time? Well #WaferLafer has all you need. We deal in the most tasty, delicious flavored wafers in the world. We serve wafers of all styles and flavors, such as cherry and cabbage. There will not be a disappointed tastebud on your tongue after eating one. So come to #WaferLafer for a tasty treat your tongue won't forget. 16:42:47 that looks like fake spam to me 16:42:56 indeed 16:42:59 there's only one person in there 16:43:04 you? 16:43:07 no 16:43:09 an op 16:43:12 Well, I do enjoy tasty treats. 16:43:27 e's not in any channels that I can see 16:43:45 ais523: someone told my anarchy board that the server was in GMT+0 16:43:50 it's reporting times like 'Yesterday 59:21:04' 16:44:02 oddly fitting 16:44:46 -!- oklopol has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 16:45:58 i don't think anyone actually said any of the posts there any more 16:46:16 -!- oklopol has joined. 16:46:36 heh, 16:46:36 http://www.hugeurl.com/?NDJmZDdmM2Q2NTBmNWE0MzgxNTVhZmE5MDhhNzQ2NTMmMTImVm0wd2QyUXlVWGxXYTJoV1YwZG9WVll3Wkc5alJsWjBUVlpPV0Zac2JETlhhMUpUVmpGYWMySkVUbGhoTWsweFZqQmFTMk15U2tWVWJHaG9UVmhDVVZadGVGWmxSbGw1Vkd0c2FsSnRhRzlVVjNOM1pVWmFkR05GZEZSTlZUVkpWbTEwYTFkSFNrZGpTRUpYVFVad1NGUlVSbUZqVmtaMFVteFNUbUY2UlRGV1ZFb3dWakZhV0ZOcmJGSmlSMmhZV1d4b2IwMHhXbGRYYlVaclVsUkdXbGt3WkRSVk1rcElaSHBHVjJFeVVYZFpWRVpyVTBaT2NscEhjRlJTVlhCWlZrWldhMVV5VW5OalJtUllZbFZhY1ZscldtRmxW 16:46:36 bVJ5VjI1a1YwMUVSa1pWYkZKRFZqQXhkVlZ1V2xaaGExcFlXa1ZhVDJOdFNrZFRiV3hYVWpOb1dGWnRNSGRsUjBsNFUydGthVk5GV2xSWmJHaFRWMVpXY1ZKcmRGUldiRm93V2xWb2ExWXdNVVZTYTFwWFlrZG9jbFpxU2tabFZsWlpXa1prYUdFeGNGaFhiRnBoVkRKT2RGSnJhR2hTYXpWeldXeG9iMWRHV25STlNHaFBVbTE0VjFSVmFHOVhSMHBJVld4c1dtSkhhRlJXTUZwVFZqRmtkRkp0ZUZkaWEwcElWbXBKZUUxR1dsaFRhMlJxVWtWYVYxWnFUbTlsYkZweFUydGthbUpWVmpaWlZWcHJZVWRGZUdOSWJGZFdSVXBvVmtSS1RtVkdjRWxVYldoVFRXNW9WVmRXVWs5Uk1rbDRWMWhvWVZKRlNtRldha1pI 16:46:39 VGtaYVdHUkhkR2hpUlhBd1ZsZDRjMWR0U2toaFJsSlhUVlp3V0ZreFdrdGpiVkpIVld4a2FXRXdjRWxXYlhCS1pVWkplRmRzYUZSaE1sSndWV3RhUzFZeFVsaE9WemxzWWtad2VGVXlkR0ZpUmxwelUyeHdXbFpXY0hKWlZXUkdaVWRPU0U5V1pHaGhNSEJ2Vmxod1MxUXhXWGhqUld4VllrWmFjRlpxVG05a2JGcEhWbTA1VWsxWFVucFdNV2h2V1ZaS1JsTnRSbGRpV0U0MFZHdGFXbVZIUmtoUFYyaHBVbGhCZDFac1pEUmpNV1IwVTJ0b2FGSnNTbGhVVmxwM1YwWnJlRmRyZEd0U2EzQjZWa2R6TVZZeVJYaGhNMlJYWWxoQ1MxcFZWWGhUUmtweVdrWm9hV0Y2Vm5oV1ZFSnZVVEZzVjFWc1dsaGliVkp6V1d0 16:46:44 ais523: old 16:46:44 YWQyVkdWblJOVldSV1RXdHdWMWt3Vm1GV01VbDZZVVpvVjJGcmNFeFZNVnBIWXpKS1IxcEhiRmhTVlhCS1ZqRmFVMU14VVhsVVdHaGhVMFphVmxscldrdGpSbFp4VW10MFYxWnNjRWhXVjNSTFlUQXhSVkpzVGxaU2JFWXpWVVpGT1ZCUlBUMD0= 16:46:47 and, uh 16:46:48 stop 16:46:50 What is this, a malbolge program? 16:46:53 Slereah7: no 16:46:53 umm... that's http://www.hugeurl.com 16:46:56 hugeurl.com makes urls huge 16:46:56 I didn't realise it was more than one line long... 16:47:06 ais523: the line was too long 16:47:08 I didn't get the usual C&P warning 16:47:08 so your client split it 16:47:14 ah, wait 16:47:18 ais523: no, its' actually multiple lines 16:47:20 it has
s 16:47:24 I meant more than one IRC line long 16:47:28 yeah 16:47:35 ais523: go to hugeurl.com 16:47:40 look at the src 16:47:40 yes, I have done 16:47:48 it's in a 
16:47:48  JS, presumably?
16:47:54  ehird: I didn't copy the URL
16:47:55  so there are real newlines
16:47:57  I copied the anchor href
16:48:01  which doesn't contain real newlines
16:48:03  ais523: odd then
16:48:13  it was just too long then
16:48:15  I guess it's just line length
16:48:31  yes
16:48:33  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
16:48:35  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
16:48:37  it's a great concept, anyway
16:48:37  hmph
16:48:39  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
16:48:40  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
16:48:42  there
16:48:44  xchat split it into two
16:48:55  ais523: it is, but it was in 2007 when it was on reddit's front page :)
16:49:02  ah, I don't read reddit
16:49:31  ais523: I don't blame you, it's mostly crap nowadays
16:49:41  It was better before they rewrote it in Python (from Lisp) :P
16:49:46  hugeurl is like 10 years old
16:49:48  Lisp?
16:49:56  it's so old i didn't realize that was the point of pasting the url
16:49:57  unusual choice to power a website
16:50:04  ais523: not really
16:50:08  lisp is popular again
16:50:12  with great open source impls - SBCL
16:50:13  for websites, though?
16:50:18  ais523: yes
16:50:21  the hunchentoot web server is very good
16:50:22  and modern
16:50:22  I thought it was better at computational stuff
16:50:28  nope
16:50:31  nowadays it can do just about anything
16:50:36  except quick scripts, due to its nature
16:50:56  ais523: anyway, Lisp is multiparadigm, really
16:51:03  Common Lisp isn't really functional much in practice
16:51:08  functional as in the paradigm
17:03:52 -!- olsner has joined.
17:10:42 -!- ais523 has quit (Remote closed the connection).
17:10:59 -!- ais523 has joined.
17:11:07 -!- timotiis has joined.
17:15:20 -!- ehird has changed nick to tusho.
17:19:10  oklopol, yeah i dont know what the delay would actually look like
17:19:14  but it would be roughly like that
17:21:19  perhaps more like
17:21:35  x{-5} -> y
17:21:36  or something
17:21:52  x from -5 seconds offset or whatever
17:24:43  perl -wlne'END{print$n}eof&&$n++;/([^<]+)/i&&$n--' *
17:24:46 <tusho> what does that do again?
17:25:46 <ais523> tusho: let me try to figure it
17:25:50 <Slereah7> It prints a number, IIRC
17:26:08 <ais523> the regex looks for the first <title> tag in an XML document
17:26:17 <ais523> and $n increments iff it doesn't find one
17:26:19 <tusho> ais523: um
17:26:24 <tusho> isn't <title> a special character set thing
17:26:25 <tusho> in perl?
17:26:33 <ais523> no, that would be [:title:]
17:26:35 <tusho> ah
17:26:48 <ais523> <> are literal in regexen, I think
17:27:52 <oklopol> that doesn't look complicate
17:27:53 <oklopol> d
17:28:26 <olsner> depends which kind of regexp you're talking about, some use <> for word beginning/ending, some use \<\> for the special meaning
17:28:34 <olsner> and some, I guess, don't have that feature at all
17:28:48 <ais523> olsner: it's backslash followed by some letter in Perl for that
17:28:51 <ais523> forget which one
17:29:49 <ais523> tusho: so in other words, the Perl program prints the number of files in the current directory that don't contain <title> followed by a character other than <
17:30:01 <tusho> ais523: so what use is it
17:30:06 <ais523> sorry, /files/lines in files/
17:30:27 <ais523> tusho: I don't see an obvious use for it
17:30:42 <ais523> no, wait, I missed something
17:30:49 <ais523> it is files it counts
17:31:01 <ais523> but if multiple <titles> are found, the count goes down below 0
17:31:13 <ais523> i.e. no titles = +1, one title = +0, two titles = -1, etc.
17:31:31 <ais523> maybe it's looking for files in the current dir that aren't HTML?
17:31:37 <tusho> http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-ruby-1272.html ruby 99bob in ruby. With continuations, open classes, singleton classes, and blocks.
17:31:39 <ais523> although that's a poor way to determine it
17:32:07 <olsner> how can you use that many features for 99bob?
17:32:34 <tusho> olsner: crazily
17:32:39 <olsner> ah, it's on purpose ... nm then :P
17:33:11 <tusho> "Uhm, wtf, how can it recompile itself? That's like...writing PHP5 in PHP5. Impossible."
17:33:17 <tusho> Yeeeessssss...
17:33:40 <olsner> *unpossible
17:33:46 <ais523> or like writing Feather in Feather?
17:34:29 <augur> continuations confuse me :(
17:34:57 <Slereah7> augur : Welcome to my world
17:35:06 <augur> i mean, i get CPS
17:35:11 <augur> but i dont get the POINT of CPS.
17:35:14 -!- puzzlet_ has joined.
17:35:15 <Slereah7> Child Pornographies?
17:35:27 <augur> continuation passing style :P
17:35:43 <ais523> augur: because you don't have to maintain a call stack
17:35:50 <tusho> & you get continuations for free
17:35:54 <ais523> if functions never return, you don't have to worry about what happens when they return
17:35:54 <tusho> no consing
17:36:05 <augur> oh is that what it is?
17:36:10 <augur> i see.
17:37:16 <augur> well i still dont the point in languages that already have value returning. :P
17:37:18 <augur> like lisp
17:37:45 <ais523> I've always seen CPS as a tool for language implementors
17:37:54 <tusho> that's because it is
17:38:10 <ais523> like if you're writing an Unlambda interp in C, compiling the Unlambda into CPS and then interpreting that is much easier than trying to interpret it directly
17:38:23 <ais523> your program isn't CPS, but you want the program you're interpreting to be
17:38:32 <augur> hm
17:47:44 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
17:50:27 <Slereah7> Hm.
17:50:45 <Slereah7> I'm thinking of doing output as greek numbers, which are also greek letters.
17:51:04 <Slereah7> But that would mean I can only do three letters per number.
17:51:17 <Slereah7> Or n letters, depending on the system
17:51:30 <Slereah7> Since there's no system that goes to INFINITY
17:55:45 -!- oklopol has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
17:56:09 -!- oklopol has joined.
18:04:40 <tusho> ais523: https://www.osmosian.com/
18:04:45 <tusho> most elaborate and unfunny joke ever
18:04:54 <tusho> or perhaps not a joke, and it will actually mine your CC no
18:05:45 <tusho> ais523: well holy shit.. https://www.osmosian.com/cal-3037.zip
18:05:54 <tusho> I wonder if it actually works?
18:05:57 <tusho> that compiler is a bit too long to be aj oke..
18:06:54 <Slereah7> Heh. Plain english programming.
18:07:02 <Slereah7> Invite them to the esowiki!
18:07:05 <tusho> Slereah7: quite
18:07:08 <tusho> they're complete idiots:
18:07:13 <tusho> [[Let me put it this way. The CAL-3037 is the most advanced Plain English
18:07:14 <tusho> compiler ever made. No 3037 compiler has ever made a mistake or distorted
18:07:14 <tusho> information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof
18:07:14 <tusho> and incapable of error. Nevertheless...
18:07:14 <tusho> ]]
18:07:17 <tusho> but..
18:07:20 <tusho> their compiler looks real
18:07:27 <tusho> anyone with windows want to run it?
18:07:30 <tusho> I mean, 4000 lines of compiler...
18:07:34 <tusho> Nobody would do that for a joke.
18:07:39 <tusho> Esp. since it looks, well, like it'd work.
18:07:51 <tusho> LOLZ
18:07:52 <tusho> [[When you start me up, I will quickly take over your screen so you no longer
18:07:52 <tusho> have to look at that painted whore of an interface that comes with the kluge.
18:07:52 <tusho> Instead, you will see my plain but honest face, like this:
18:07:52 <tusho> ]]
18:07:59 <tusho> PAINTED WHORE OF AN INTERFACE THAT COMES WITH THE KLUDGE
18:08:16 <Slereah7> I want to see some Plain English machine code.
18:08:42 <Slereah7> "Remove x86 from common usage within the next ten years" would be much funnier
18:09:29 <tusho> Slereah7: download that zip
18:09:32 <tusho> and read 'the compiler'
18:09:40 <tusho> it's the compiler source code, written in the language itself
18:09:42 <tusho> painful.
18:09:48 <tusho> if you want, run cal-3037.exe
18:09:51 <tusho> it'll take over your screen but maybe it works.
18:09:55 <Slereah7> Well, I'm reading the manifesto.
18:10:45 <Slereah7> The problem with plain english programming language is, the "plain english" used tend to make no sense
18:10:55 <tusho> Slereah7: but this stuff actually kinda does
18:11:02 <tusho> to add the built-in byte pointer type:
18:11:02 <tusho>   add a type to the types given "byte pointer" and "byte pointers" and "pointer".
18:11:02 <tusho>   put "byte" into the type's target name.
18:11:02 <tusho>   index the type.
18:11:19 <tusho> to add a monikette to some monikettes given an expression:
18:11:19 <tusho>   create the monikette.
18:11:19 <tusho>   append the monikette to the monikettes.
18:11:19 <tusho>   put the expression's phrase into the monikette's string.
18:11:19 <tusho>   put the expression's variable into the monikette's variable.
18:11:19 <tusho>   if the expression's variable is not nil, put the expression's type into the monikette's type.
18:12:14 <Slereah7> "It should be noted that all this functionality is embodied in a single,
18:12:14 <Slereah7> stand-alone, native-code executable less than one megabyte in size.
18:12:25 <Slereah7> One megabyte? For what, the compiler?
18:12:31 <ais523> looks like ORK
18:12:31 <tusho> Yeah.
18:12:33 <tusho> Slereah7: This manual is actually complete, though, if crazy.
18:12:38 <tusho> ais523: download the zip
18:12:40 <tusho> it contains real sources
18:12:42 <tusho> over 20k lines of them
18:12:46 <tusho> I doubt it's a joke
18:12:48 <tusho> nobody is _that_ determined
18:12:51 <ais523> well, neither is ORK
18:13:02 <tusho> ORK is a joke
18:13:10 <tusho> but this seems to be made for _real_ things
18:13:18 <tusho> and if I had windows i'd try it
18:13:21 <tusho> i'm betting on it actually working
18:13:24 <Slereah7> It might be good as a teaching language.
18:13:28 <tusho> ais523: just read 'the compiler'. it's suprisingly legible./
18:13:33 <Slereah7> But I doubt it would be that nice otherwise.
18:13:59 <ais523> tusho: busy right now, trying to catch up on several month's worth of Notarying
18:14:05 <Slereah7> There's usually a catch with readable languages
18:14:11 <Slereah7> Boy did I learn that with Python!
18:15:53 <Slereah7> ...
18:15:56 <Slereah7> My god.
18:16:02 <tusho> what
18:16:05 <Slereah7> Those guys are such crooks.
18:16:08 <tusho> why
18:16:18 <Slereah7> "What our customers COULD be saying"
18:16:23 <tusho> Slereah7: Yeah. :P
18:16:32 <tusho> They want $100 for the compiler..
18:16:35 <tusho> BUT, my link works.
18:16:38 <tusho> So, uh, yeah.
18:16:42 <Slereah7> I'm sure Noam "C" is totally into Plain English
18:17:28 <tusho> ais523: are you brave enough to run that exe?
18:17:32 <tusho> it seems genuine
18:17:50 <ais523> tusho: what, on Linux?
18:17:51 <Sgeo> What exe?
18:17:56 <Slereah7> I ran it
18:17:58 <ais523> when doing something else?
18:18:01 <tusho> Sgeo: lern2readlogs
18:18:03 <ais523> I could boot up Wine to run it, I suppose
18:18:05 <tusho> Slereah7: what happened
18:18:12 <ais523> but it might not work
18:19:03 <Slereah7> tusho : There's a big ugly grey interface with my folders in it
18:19:11 <Slereah7> And ugleir still option buttons
18:19:21 <Slereah7> I'm not too sure what I'm supposed to do with it
18:19:24 <tusho> Slereah7: That's what it said it would do.
18:19:38 <tusho> There's a folder 'documentation' in your Plain English folder.
18:19:42 <tusho> Open 'instructions.pdf'
18:19:46 <tusho> It's a bigg manual about it.
18:20:22 <Slereah7> http://membres.lycos.fr/bewulf/Divers4/PE.jpg
18:20:35 <tusho> Slereah7: did you totally miss my last message
18:20:44 <augur> tusho, whats that thing at osmosian??
18:20:54 <tusho> augur: lern2readlogs
18:21:01 <augur> NEVAR!
18:21:24 <augur> oh i see
18:21:29 <augur> plain english programming? lol
18:21:39 <tusho> augur: it reads pretty nicely though
18:21:41 <Slereah7> I am the CAL-3037. My primary function is to compile Plain English text files
18:21:41 <Slereah7> into executable programs compatible with the Windows/Intel operating kluge.
18:21:42 <tusho> not like AppleScript
18:21:43 <Slereah7> Holy shit
18:21:50 <tusho> Slereah7: told you they were pretentious
18:21:51 <augur> ill take a look
18:21:52 <Slereah7> The compiler is so smart that it can talk!
18:21:56 <tusho> 'whore' is on the next page
18:22:04 <Slereah7> ...
18:22:04 <tusho> it's whoralicious
18:22:06 <Slereah7> I wonder
18:22:13 <Slereah7> Can it compile any English sentence?
18:22:18 <Slereah7> I'll try "Suck my dick"
18:22:52 <augur> is for windows :(
18:23:10 <tusho> augur: Expert log-reader!
18:23:49 <Slereah7> "Suck my dick" won't compile.
18:24:15 <tusho> Slereah7: Useless!
18:24:30 <Slereah7> I wonder if I'd get a grant with my ancient greek language.
18:24:38 <Slereah7> Sure, it's not *plain* ancient greek.
18:24:38 <augur> looks fairly applescript like
18:24:54 <tusho> augur: yeah, but more legible
18:25:05 <augur> eh.. not that much so.
18:26:26 <Slereah7> "to transmogrify a fragment"
18:26:27 <Slereah7> Dude
18:26:31 <Slereah7> That's not English.
18:26:37 <Slereah7> That's from Calvin and Hobbes.
18:26:38 <tusho> Slereah7: quite
18:26:39 <augur> yes it is
18:26:42 -!- cuain has changed nick to ihope.
18:26:48 <augur> calvin and hobbes DEFINE english
18:27:15 <Slereah7> Gaiz
18:27:20 <augur> gays
18:27:27 <Slereah7> We should make a Brainfuck interpreter in that.
18:27:32 <augur> hahaha
18:27:42 <Slereah7> Sort of like the opposite of what it's supposed to be
18:28:16 <tusho> To interpret brainfuck:
18:28:19 <tusho>   Interpret brainfuck.
18:28:20 <tusho> Done
18:28:23 <augur> lol
18:28:34 <tusho> actually
18:28:36 <tusho> thinking about its grammar
18:28:37 <Slereah7> PIME TARADOX
18:28:38 <tusho> I think it'd need
18:28:52 <augur> To interpret brainfuck:
18:28:52 <augur> bash your head against the wall.
18:28:53 <tusho> To interpret a peice of brainfuck code:
18:29:01 <tusho> it'd then be referred to as 'peice of brainfuck code'
18:29:16 <tusho> http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net/language-plain-english-1056.html <-- lol
18:29:26 <Slereah7> I wonder if you could obfuscate it
18:29:38 <Slereah7> I mean, is function definition limited to English words?
18:29:59 <augur> one of the problems of plain english programming is that .. you're programming in plain english. lol
18:29:59 <tusho> Slereah7: it uses words like 'a' to pick out arguments, I think
18:30:34 <Slereah7> I wouldn't do math in plain English, why would I program in it?
18:30:47 <augur> english is confusing enough
18:30:59 <augur> programming requires some sort of rigid formalism
18:31:07 <augur> the interface between the two is hard.
18:31:19 <augur> because by programming in english, you assume the computer understands what you mean
18:31:24 <augur> or that words mean such and such
18:31:41 <Slereah7> Plus, technically, it's the same rigid formalism
18:31:47 <augur> ??
18:31:50 <Slereah7> You can't compile suck my dick or whatever.
18:32:02 <Slereah7> You have to follow the specs.
18:32:04 <tusho> What about a language called SuckMyDick?
18:32:15 <tusho> 'Suck my dick.' means 'Interpret the rest of the program as Plain English.'
18:32:15 <Slereah7> INPUT PENIS
18:32:19 <tusho> Anything else is a syntax error.
18:32:23 <Slereah7> Heh.
18:32:56 <Slereah7> "attach $8995 and the fragment's other variable's offset to the fragment's code"
18:33:05 <Slereah7> That's not plain english you negro.
18:33:25 <Slereah7> What's that $8995 doing here?
18:33:29 <tusho> Slereah7: It's a string.
18:33:32 <augur> dollars, nigga
18:33:35 <augur> dollas!
18:33:47 <tusho> Slereah7: After all, that compiler IS generating assembly.
18:33:51 <Slereah7> ...
18:33:56 <tusho> (Or machine code. Whatever.)
18:34:00 <Slereah7> There's actually a lexicon.
18:34:06 <Slereah7> aardvark
18:34:06 <Slereah7> aardvarks
18:34:09 <Slereah7> MY GAWD
18:34:11 <tusho> AHAHAHAHA
18:34:11 <Slereah7> AAAAAH
18:34:14 <augur> o.O
18:34:16 <Slereah7> This is SO STUPID
18:34:17 <tusho> Take off every zig.
18:34:24 <tusho> ERROR: 'zig' not in lexicon.
18:34:29 <tusho> Please correct program sources and resubmit.
18:34:48 <Slereah7> tusho : Replace by "aardvark"
18:35:24 <Slereah7> "Note that there are no unintuitive, distracting, space-consuming scroll bars
18:35:24 <Slereah7> anywhere in my interface. To scroll, press the right mouse button and shove.
18:35:34 <Slereah7> Yeah, you wouldn't want scrolling quickly, would you
18:39:53 <Slereah7> Now I know that right about here most programming books would drum up
18:39:53 <Slereah7> some dippy little "Hello, World" program — and expect you to be impressed —
18:39:53 <Slereah7> but I'd like to suggest that we skip the kid stuff and start makin' babies.
18:39:54 -!- ais523 has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
18:40:00 <Slereah7> I don't like where this is going.
18:40:08 <Slereah7> I see you're trembling. Don't be afraid. This may be the first time for you,
18:40:08 <Slereah7> but I'm an old hand at this. I'll lead you through it. Gently.
18:40:28 <Slereah7> Man, I never thought it would be possible to find a compiler creepy.
18:40:39 <Slereah7> But this is the first time one tried to sexually assault me.
18:41:13 -!- puzzlet has joined.
18:41:55 -!- puzzlet_ has quit (Remote closed the connection).
18:43:27 <Slereah7> The first program example is to use the compiler on something that already exist.
18:43:45 <Slereah7> Yeah, we know your shit works, but we want to see how it does.
18:46:56 <Slereah7> To subtract a byte from another byte:
18:46:56 <Slereah7> Intel $8B85080000000FB6008B9D0C0000002803
18:46:58 <Slereah7> Heh.
18:48:06 <tusho> Slereah7: That's from the compiler sources, no?
18:48:16 <Slereah7> No.
18:48:16 <tusho> That's just hardcoded internal machine code, then.
18:48:18 <tusho> Oh.
18:48:21 <tusho> What's it then?
18:48:45 <Slereah7> It's in the Noodle
18:50:08 <Slereah7> Heh.
18:50:11 <Slereah7> Noodle.
18:50:32 <tusho> Slereah7: That's the kernel.
18:50:37 <tusho> Like, the stdlib. But. More primitive.
18:51:14 <Slereah7> But, then everything is a lie!
18:51:32 <Slereah7> Plain English does not only contain plain English!
18:52:04 <Slereah7> I don't do nested IFs. Nested ifs are a sure sign of unclear thinking, and
18:52:04 <Slereah7> that is something that I will not countenance. If you think this cramps your
18:52:04 <Slereah7> style too much, read my code to see how it's done. Then think again.
18:52:16 <Slereah7> Oh fuck you Osama.
18:52:42 <tusho> Slereah7: xD
18:53:01 <Slereah7> I don't do REAL NUMBERS. I do ratios, very elegantly, but I don't do reals.
18:53:01 <Slereah7> My page editor reduces and enlarges and sizes shapes proportionately in and
18:53:01 <Slereah7> out of groups and it does it all without real numbers. Master Kronecker was
18:53:01 <Slereah7> right when he said, in German, "The dear God created the whole numbers; all
18:53:01 <Slereah7> else is the work of man." I'm not interested in menschenwerk.
18:53:11 <Slereah7> I'd usually agree, but still, fuck those guys.
18:53:41 <Slereah7> I don't do EQUATIONS. I do a little infix math, and I support "calculated
18:53:41 <Slereah7> fields", but almost all the code you write will be strictly procedural in nature.
18:53:41 <Slereah7> As the Osmosians always say, "The universe is an algorithm, not a formula."
18:53:41 <Slereah7> Words you should take to heart. Especially if you're a math-head.
18:53:44 <Slereah7> My god.
18:53:50 <Slereah7> We must stop that man.
18:53:52 <Slereah7> *compiler
18:54:42 -!- Polar has joined.
18:54:45 <Slereah7> Polar.
18:54:50 <Slereah7> Here's a gun.
18:54:53 <Slereah7> Go kill Osama.
18:55:08 <Polar> Is that in Japan?
18:55:41 <Slereah7> Here's the Osama : https://www.osmosian.com/
18:55:42 <tusho> Slereah7: Gah, the universe is SO a formula!
18:56:23 <augur> the universe is a mathematical structure. :T
18:58:47 <tusho> augur: combined with a formula
18:58:52 <tusho> but anyway
18:58:54 <tusho> data is code
18:58:59 <tusho> mathematical structures are just formulae
18:59:21 <augur> data is nature.
19:00:49 <Slereah7> Most comments are either useless, or worse. Useless, if they merely reiterate
19:00:50 <Slereah7> what the code already says. Worse, if they attempt to clarify unclear code
19:00:50 <Slereah7> that should have been written more clearly in the first place.
19:01:03 <tusho> Slereah7: I agree with the sentiment partly, but it's stated in such an idiotic way.
19:01:16 <Slereah7> I know.
19:01:23 <Slereah7> you just can't agree with him on anything.
19:01:32 <Slereah7> You just want to fill his mouth with spiders.
19:01:54 <Slereah7> "\ This is a useless comment that occupies an entire line of the source"
19:01:58 <Slereah7> *rimshot*
19:03:42 <Slereah7> "Error in fuck. I was hoping to find a definition, but all I found was "ream""
19:03:43 <Slereah7> Kekeke
19:04:23 <tusho> Slereah7: Lmao.
19:04:40 <Slereah7> I tried to compile this :
19:04:40 <Slereah7> To fuck :
19:04:40 <Slereah7>  Insert your ponos into my vagooo
19:04:40 <Slereah7> Jam it in
19:05:06 <augur> god i love declarative programming
19:05:08 <tusho> Slereah7: YOU MISSED YOUR INDENTATION.
19:05:10 <tusho> To fuck:
19:05:14 <tusho>   Insert your ponos into my vagooo
19:05:16 <tusho>   Jam it in
19:05:28 <augur> JAM IT JAM IT JAM IT
19:06:00 <tusho> To jam it in:
19:06:00 <tusho>   Jam it in.
19:06:00 <tusho> To insert a thing into another thing:
19:06:00 <tusho>   I'M NOT HELPING YOU ANY MORE
19:06:11 <Slereah7> LET ME SHOW YOU HOW I REAM
19:06:27 <tusho> To ream:
19:06:29 <tusho>   Ream.
19:06:44 <augur> oh noes! infinite recursion! :(
19:06:50 <Slereah7> Assreamanallyintheanalass
19:06:50 <olsner> LETS ALL WRITE INFINITE LOOPS IN ENGLISH!
19:07:09 <augur> like shampoo bottles?
19:07:12 <augur> Rinse, repeat.
19:07:15 <Slereah7> What would happen if I wrote "this sentence is false"? :o
19:07:23 <augur> rinse, rinse, rinse, rinse, rinse, rinse, rinse, ...
19:07:31 <augur> lather, rinse, repeat.*
19:07:32 <augur> :(
19:07:44 <augur> slereah: its not declarative
19:07:46 <augur> nor philosophical.
19:08:01 <Slereah7> Too bad
19:08:06 <Slereah7> I just want it to die.
19:08:12 <Slereah7> Shouting "DOES NOT COMPUTE!"
19:08:12 <augur> it already is dead.
19:08:16 <augur> it just wont admit it.
19:08:25 <Slereah7> And then, boom!
19:08:28 <Slereah7> The head explodes.
19:08:31 <augur> mudd
19:08:58 <tusho> I AM WRITING A BLOSXOM CLONE IN HASKELL IT IS CALLED BLOHSOM
19:09:09 <olsner> THIS IS AWESOME
19:09:10 <augur> o.o
19:09:15 <augur> blosxom?
19:09:19 <tusho> olsner: s/^/IS /
19:09:22 <augur> blohsom cock.
19:09:24 <tusho> s/$/? (Y/N)/
19:09:41 <tusho> s/^/YOU HAVE BEEN TURNED INTO A WHALE BY A WIZARD. /
19:09:57 <augur> you have been eaten by a grue.
19:10:01 <olsner> s/^.*$/SILENCE!/
19:10:49 <Slereah7> IS THIS AWESOME? (Y/N)
19:11:27 <olsner> nah, my statement was meant as an affirmative statement of the awesomeness of the thing at hand
19:11:59 <olsner> not as an object on which to apply substitution expressions
19:12:20 * olsner is almost slightly offended by this misuse of his words
19:13:57 <Slereah7> The traditional term is "infinite loop", but since it is not large in size but long
19:13:57 <Slereah7> in duration, I prefer the term "eternal loop".
19:14:00 <tusho> olsner: I apologise.
19:14:11 <tusho> olsner: Blohsom will contain a word protector, I promise.
19:14:13 <Slereah7> You can almost imagine the compiler, with a top hat and a monocle.
19:14:31 <Slereah7> "A halting problem? What a crude way of saying it!"
19:15:14 <Slereah7> "Especially if you were fool enough to run it when I told you not to."
19:15:21 <Slereah7> Fuck you Osama.
19:15:44 <augur> noone with a top hat and monocle would talk like that.
19:17:25 <Slereah7> Even it if was a compiler?
19:17:33 <augur> even if it was a compiler.
19:17:37 <augur> well, let me rephrase that
19:17:55 <augur> a person with a top hat and monocle would never be so lowly a thing as a compiler
19:19:35 <augur> but even if he WERE a compiler
19:19:39 <augur> he wouldn't talk like that
19:19:49 <augur> because people with top hats and monocles dont talk like that
19:19:57 <Slereah7> My god.
19:20:01 -!- tKolar has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.82.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.14/2008041816]").
19:20:06 <Slereah7> I don't want to be judging and all.
19:20:36 <Slereah7> But my opinion so far is that it has the same kind of rules as any old language, except a lot more restrictive to remain "readable"
19:20:56 <Slereah7> And tries to weasel out of those flaws by saying "You should learn to program better!"
19:21:19 <Slereah7> "Nested conditionals? But you could do it with only one, if only you knew!"
19:21:41 <Slereah7> "Real numbers? Equations? But you could do everything with integers!"
19:21:51 <augur> :)
19:22:05 <Slereah7> ...
19:22:12 <Slereah7> I think it's an esolang in denial.
19:22:30 <Slereah7> He's not out of the BrainCloset.
19:23:35 -!- Sgeo has quit (Connection timed out).
19:29:43 <Slereah7> Is there a tutorial of that language that isn't infuriating?
19:30:57 -!- ais523 has joined.
19:31:35 <tusho> Slereah7: WHo uses it apart from them?
19:31:37 <tusho> (Guess: Nobody.)
19:32:32 <Slereah7> "And is robust enough to recompile itself. In less than three seconds."
19:32:38 <Slereah7> Why do they always say that?
19:32:48 <Slereah7> Is that even something so impressive?
19:33:25 <lament> what language you talks about?
19:33:39 <ihope> My Unlambda quine is robust enough a C compiler to recompile itself, in less than three seconds.
19:33:46 <tusho> heh
19:33:52 <Slereah7> lament : "Plain English"
19:34:00 <ihope> Not that I have an Unlambda quine. I should have said HQ9+ quine.
19:34:20 <lament> there's a programming language called plain english? Now that's confusing.
19:34:50 <Slereah7> https://www.osmosian.com/
19:35:02 <Slereah7> I wouldn't advise reading it, it's terribly infuriating.
19:35:24 <Slereah7> https://www.osmosian.com/cal-3037.zip for the manual and compiler
19:35:34 <lament> i won't read it.
19:35:59 <Slereah7> I want to find a manual that isn't (terribly infuriating)
19:36:08 <Slereah7> So that I may write a BF interpreter
19:36:11 <Slereah7> Just out of spite.
19:41:10 <ais523> ihope: there are Unlambda quines available on the Internet
19:41:26 <ihope> True, but I don't know if any of them take less than 3 seconds to run.
19:41:35 <Slereah7> heh
19:41:40 <ihope> "Q" certainly does take less than 3 seconds to run.
19:43:08 <Slereah7> I don't even know what he uses as data
19:43:14 <Slereah7> Tell me Osama!
19:46:25 <tusho> Oh, and welcome back ais523.
19:46:49 <ais523> ah, I was having internet trouble and decided not to reconnect to IRC while I was doing Notary stuff
19:46:55 <ais523> I'm still doing Notary stuff now, though
19:47:05 <ais523> I'm up to 18 May
19:47:12 <ais523> ihope really ended up quite a way behind...
19:57:24 <tusho> I'm glad coming up with a name for blohsom wasn't hard. That's normally hard. :P
19:58:53 <Slereah7> Also, what's with that full screen GUI?
19:58:57 <Slereah7> Aaaargh
19:59:04 <Slereah7> Everything about Osama is infuriating.
19:59:05 <tusho> Slereah7: It's because the kludge has a whore GUI of evil.
19:59:07 <tusho> Duh.
20:02:53 -!- Judofyr has joined.
20:04:26 <Slereah7> "By the way, the Plain English Compiler is written entirely in Plain English and can recompile itself - with all of its development tools - in less than 3 seconds on a bottom-of-the-line Dell."
20:04:34 <Slereah7> Oh fuck you "The Grand Negus".
20:04:43 <Slereah7> Osama is the new EsCo.
20:04:55 <Slereah7> Maybe we could hook them up.
20:04:56 <tusho> Slereah7: Rewrite EsCo in Osama!
20:05:01 <tusho> We think ailke.
20:05:02 <tusho> And alike.
20:08:29 <Slereah7> Aaaaargh
20:08:41 <Slereah7> No scroll bar = horrible for long texts
20:08:48 <Slereah7> I hate you Osama.
20:09:19 <Slereah7> Fuck that, I'm closing it
20:10:45 <ais523> how do you cast an integer to a real value in Haskell?
20:11:43 <tusho> ais523: fromInteger
20:11:55 <tusho> fromInteger :: (Num a) => Integer -> a
20:12:15 <ais523> thanks
20:15:44 <ais523> and how do you output a number without a newline after it?
20:18:44 <tusho> ais523: #haskell
20:18:47 <tusho> and putStr is putStrLn without the Ln
20:18:53 <ais523> that's for strings
20:19:03 <tusho> ais523: #haskell and type @src print
20:19:08 <tusho> you will gain enlighten.
20:19:27 -!- Judofyr has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
20:19:33 <ais523> ah
20:19:54 -!- Judofyr has joined.
20:45:03 -!- RedDak has joined.
21:02:00 -!- Judofyr_ has joined.
21:03:17 -!- Judofyr has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:03:26 -!- Judofyr_ has changed nick to Judofyr.
21:08:20 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:09:15 -!- puzzlet has joined.
21:11:55 -!- pikhq has left (?).
21:12:41 -!- cherez has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:15:00 -!- cherez has joined.
21:15:07 -!- cherez has left (?).
21:31:32 -!- Hiato has quit ("Leaving.").
21:37:39 <tusho> ais523: ihope: Slereah7: I need theories.
21:37:49 <tusho> why do non-internet-experienced people SOMETIMES ASK QUESTIONS IN ALL CAPS?
21:37:56 <ihope> Newton's gravi--oh.
21:37:58 <tusho> I mean, all caps isn't very nice in the real world, so why would they do it on the internet?
21:37:58 <ais523> TO MAKE THEM MORE VISIBLE?
21:38:14 <tusho> ais523: BUT SURELY THEY CAN SEE IT LOOKS RIDICULOUS
21:38:16 <ihope> To make them more visible, to show that they really want help, etc.
21:38:21 <ais523> and writing letters in allcaps in the real world is often done to make them more readable
21:38:26 <ihope> tusho: nope!
21:38:27 <ais523> like filling in forms in block capitals
21:38:32 <tusho> ihope: THEN WHY DO THEY MAKE NUMEROUS SPELLING AND GRAMMATICAL ERRORS AT THE SAME TIME?
21:38:38 <tusho> A WELL-THOUGHT OUT POST WILL SURELY BE LISTENED TO MORE
21:38:53 <ihope> tusho: because they don't know spelling and grammar?
21:39:07 <tusho> ihope: OKAY WELL THAT'S A LITTLE RIDICULOUS THEN
21:39:20 <ihope> And they don't have a spelling checker and/or don't bother to look up the difference between "your" and "you're" every time they use either.
21:39:41 <Slereah7> Because ALL CAPS IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL
21:40:00 <ihope> Or they make so many spelling mistakes that it's tedious to right-click every red-underlined word to correct it, I suppose.
21:41:31 <ihope> And grammar checkers are quite fallible and not as easy to come by.
21:42:41 <tusho> Er. Last.fm lists the 7th track on Autechre's Draft 7.30 as Prince Moth Mothy Moth Moth.
21:42:46 <Slereah7> Maybe they just can't spell.
21:42:49 <tusho> (It's actually "VI AI 5".)
21:42:59 <tusho> PRINCE. MOTH. MOTHY. MOTH. MOTH.
21:43:12 <Slereah7> 10:MOTH GOTO10
21:43:30 <ihope> That's what I said. :-)
21:43:47 <tusho> Though it's not like Autechre's real track names are any less silly.
21:45:20 <tusho> Hm. I wonder what would happen if #esoteric denizens produced electronic music.
21:45:25 <tusho> Oooh.
21:45:32 <tusho> What about an esolang designed for making electronic music?
21:45:44 <Slereah7> Some sort of reverse Fugue?
21:45:55 <Slereah7> The Love Machine 9000 can produce music.
21:46:08 <Slereah7> Well, the windows version, at least
21:46:16 <Slereah7> I never found out how to do it on the penguin
21:46:17 <tusho> Slereah7: Yeah, but for electronic music.
21:46:20 <tusho> None of this traditional stuff. :P
22:02:19 -!- Slereah has joined.
22:02:19 -!- Slereah7 has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
22:14:39 <Slereah> http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/4636/wikionemillion8li.jpg
22:15:08 <tusho> heh
22:18:07 -!- ais523 has quit ("(1) DO COME FROM ".2~.2"~#1 WHILE :1 <- "'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"").
22:21:22 <tusho> R.
22:31:17 -!- cherez has joined.
22:31:17 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
22:31:31 -!- cherez has left (?).
22:32:47 -!- Slereah7 has joined.
22:34:00 <tusho> http://www.daimi.au.dk/~eriksoe/Flip/index.html
22:34:02 <tusho> this news?
22:36:19 -!- RedDak has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
22:45:52 <tusho> z
23:05:19 <ihope> If freenode isn't a general-purpose IRC network, I wonder why every IRC channel in existence is on it.
23:06:07 <Slereah7> Well, all the chats I ever saw on freenode where tech-related.
23:06:44 <ihope> We speak Spanish in #linguistics!
23:07:14 <ihope> And Lojban in #lojban, and then you have all those science and AI channels.
23:07:18 <ihope> Not to mention #math.
23:10:10 <tusho> #lojban is kinda related
23:10:16 <tusho> Most interested parties are tech-related.
23:10:26 <tusho> #linguistics is stretching it, yes, but it's an open project, kinda
23:10:35 <tusho> #math ... ok ... not appropriate but you can see
23:10:45 <tusho> You won't find #Quake2Clan
23:11:22 <ihope> And I'm not interested in such things. :-)
23:11:55 <tusho> :P
23:25:20 <tusho> ihope: Is agora agooooo>
23:25:47 <ihope> Very agooooo>, I'm sure.
23:25:58 <tusho> AWSUM
23:26:40 <tusho> ihope: "Ed Murphy to Agora, Agora, Agora"
23:31:57 <augur> ok
23:32:15 <augur> i think we should do an esolang with transformations in the chomskyan sense.
23:32:20 <tusho> okay.
23:32:32 <augur> primarily because transformations are supposedly a bitch to parse.
23:50:08 -!- jix has quit ("CommandQ").