00:03:53 -!- DH____ has joined. 00:04:38 Anyone alive? 00:05:12 nope, we're all zombies 00:05:14 brainnnssss 00:05:30 Ah well 00:05:54 lots of brainsss here 00:06:04 I had an idea... 00:06:07 oerjan: I got esolangs.org fixed, say hi to alandipert :P 00:06:07 mmmmmmmrgh 00:06:28 alandipert: hi :) 00:06:34 hi 00:06:39 success! 00:07:37 You know how they've started modulating network traffic into power currents to send the.internet through power lines? 00:07:57 no.. 00:08:56 And you know how POSe during the war communicated by tapping morse-code over the pipework? 00:09:19 *POWs 00:09:29 Sure. 00:10:23 Why not combine the two and send network traffic through the central heating systems of buildings?! 00:11:13 I'd imagine HTTP requests would get a little noisy, if I'm imagining this correctly. 00:12:01 Use a frequency above 22kHz and no-one will hear... 00:12:48 ah, yes I was following the analogy a bit strictly. :P 00:13:15 still modulating high voltage currents seems... unecessary. 00:13:47 You could still use Morse if you wanted, it would just have to be fast... 00:14:22 Especially when using it to transmit XML. 00:14:24 alandipert: i was reminded of something - is the email address in the esolangs.org whois correct? 00:14:39 it is not, will update 00:14:52 well, it's a valid e-mail address :-) 00:15:02 DH____: ah BPL isn't as common in the US, so that's why I've never heard of it. 00:16:31 because we uses smaller transformers, which act as low-pass filters on the signal. Whereas European power systems typically have a smaller number of large transformers. 00:16:51 thus to fix the low-pass filtering you have to install repeaters at every transformer, which is more costly in the US. 00:20:39 what would be the opposite thing which is crammed with side effects 00:20:59 a language in which calculating 2+2 wrote to stdout, and stuff 00:21:31 and you have to read the result from stdout 00:22:04 good idea 00:23:35 hmmm.... sounds like an interesting challenge. 00:23:45 to have every computation as a side effect. 00:24:00 a language in which to calculate 2+2 you must mutate state 00:24:05 yep. 00:24:06 p.s. that's the joke 00:24:20 hmmm, do stack-based languages count? 00:24:21 hm technically that was my idea for arithmetic in my Reaper vaporlang 00:24:55 ah, no I wouldn't count a stack based lang. Nothing can return anything. 00:24:59 Even by the standard of weebls-stuff, http://www.weebls-stuff.com/songs/Babies/ is really friggin' wtf. 00:25:12 CakeProphet: not necessarily, e.g. you can think of Underload as pure 00:25:40 at least without S, possibly even with 00:26:20 it's just taking a stack and returning a stack 00:26:51 well the idea with bugsophia was that each thread only stored a single byte and to transmit data around you'd have to use streams. 00:27:09 that's pretty side-effect-ful. 00:27:19 yeah 00:27:34 it's just taking a stack and returning a stack 00:27:38 well everything is just taking a world and returning a world. 00:27:47 elliott: Haskell mind virus. 00:27:52 :P 00:27:55 CakeProphet: um I was _pointing out_ a mind virus 00:28:03 that considers everything pure 00:28:04 with another mind virus, yes. 00:28:08 no, I was not 00:28:27 it was a reference to the mind virus not practice of it 00:28:46 _or whatever the terms are_ 00:28:48 * oerjan mentions the mind virus without using it 00:28:48 that's, perfectly acceptable in relation to what was said. 00:29:10 monqy: ^ 00:29:27 mind virus 00:30:05 actually use/mention might be at a different level than reference/practice 00:30:08 programing is a mind virus. 00:30:21 with use ~ reference being closest 00:30:30 #esoteric is a mind virus. 00:30:51 CakeProphet: no it is not and please report for termination 00:31:02 so one thing I never figured out was how binary operators were to work in bugsophia 00:31:16 basically they would occur by two threads colliding on top of the operator symbol 00:31:21 -!- MDude has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds). 00:31:23 but... I'm not sure where the result goes. 00:31:49 to the nursery 00:31:56 ha. 00:32:00 that's a possibility. 00:32:17 they could also spawn a new thread at the operator which then travel down whichever path was not originally taken. 00:32:31 or overwrite one or both of the threads ASM style. 00:32:44 (well, one is asm style, both is so I don't have to write rules for how that works. :P ) 00:33:52 ok for anyone including sgeo who was wondering about that array thing, this is sort of the idea.. but its not a complete finished thing: http://codepad.org/AbkVLHKR 00:34:14 bug enters operator, operator partially applies to bug, this bug does something with the partially applied operator such that another bug can hit it and it can apply to the bug and so on?????? 00:34:22 or would this not work at all due to how bS works 00:34:50 (because this page is not really a complete enoguh spec for me to get the langauge) 00:35:06 this page being http://esoteric.voxelperfect.net/wiki/BugSophia 00:36:54 it doesn't explain what the symbols do 00:36:55 I am disappoint 00:38:37 "EU Officially Seizes The Public Domain, Retroactively Extends Copyright" 00:38:45 nice. 00:39:16 When did that happen? 00:39:30 wat 00:39:32 you can't do that 00:39:55 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110908/15491315851/eu-officially-seizes-public-domain-retroactively-extends-copyright.shtml 00:39:57 Patashu: they just did 00:40:03 DH____: just now 00:40:09 for good values of just now 00:40:26 does this include the bible? 00:40:43 I think the bible has been public domain for longer than twenty years. 00:40:53 ah its only for 20 years? 00:41:18 'only' 00:41:19 :| 00:41:24 monqy: the page is all that remains of the spec, which was never complete. 00:41:29 so really it's up for reinterpretation. 00:41:32 ;_; 00:41:39 partial application is interesting though. 00:41:54 partial application Always the Right Way 00:42:11 not necessarily for an esolang though. 00:42:36 Patashu: It's been done in the US. 00:42:50 I had an operator that essentially caused a bug to sit and wait on the space after it until it collided with another bug. 00:42:52 Meh, I dunno about you, but i'll just pirate stuff if it's mo longer public domain... 00:43:01 which would make binary operators not impossible. 00:43:42 Especially annoying since doing such an action is quite probably against the US constitution. 00:43:52 (you can't do retroactive laws) 00:44:44 pikhq: I think the US constitution stopped being enforced since... well, since it was ratified. 00:45:12 Still irritating. 00:45:17 well, I haven't had any soldiers taking quarter in my home 00:45:18 Especially given how utterly clear it is. 00:45:21 so that parts been done well. 00:45:24 The public domain creates problems in the marketing sector, because it makes people less needy as consumers. 00:45:29 "No [...] ex post facto Law shall be passed." 00:45:56 itidus20: obviously open source software has not brought down microsoft or apple. 00:46:00 Inexplicably, the Supreme Court has ruled this applies to only some ex post facto laws. 00:46:08 or any other large software company. 00:46:11 is calamari still around? 00:46:17 (like, generally?) 00:46:17 alandipert: Sometimes, doesn't talk much though 00:46:31 fizzie's still around, I dunno who else was active Back Then(tm) 00:46:35 CakeProphet: its ok my words are cooked in a marinade of sarcasm 00:46:39 lament denies the channel exists :P 00:46:49 CakeProphet: Not in the desktop sector, but Linux is doing pretty good in the server market 00:46:57 Yes, "no" means "some". 00:47:05 elliott: you _really_ should try not chasing people away, you know :( 00:48:03 oerjan: Who? 00:48:12 oerjan: what? elliott would never do such a thing. 00:48:12 elliott: lament, for example :P 00:48:26 oerjan: he would just make them chase themselves away. 00:48:34 I didn't chase away lament, he just drifted away for like two years and then exploded and blamed it all on me one day. 00:48:41 yes? 00:48:44 O KAY 00:48:45 ...er 00:48:48 s/yes/see/ 00:48:51 weird 00:48:53 "Hey you there. Why aren't you generating tax? Oh you are reading a public domain novel instead of supporting our authors." 00:48:59 oerjan: Seriously, I had no idea I bothered him that much until he decided to yell at me. 00:49:01 "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Smith v. Doe (2003) that forcing sex offenders to register their whereabouts at regular intervals and the posting of personal information about them on the Internet does not violate the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws, because this does not constitute any kind of punishment." 00:49:06 The fuck? 00:49:07 I'm not entirely sure it wasn't a post-facto blame on his part. 00:49:50 pikhq: lol what 00:49:55 not a punishment? okay. 00:50:03 * oerjan has an urge to institute a "no pol" prohibition on the channel 00:50:05 CakeProphet: The ban is on *all ex post facto laws*. 00:50:08 Literally all. 00:50:11 public domain is a commie plot 00:50:17 political discussion is boring in here 00:50:19 since we all agree already 00:50:43 whose side are you on pinko 00:51:01 * CakeProphet is an anarchist so that could probably provide for plenty of amusing and painful debate. 00:51:24 but I'm not going to let it happen. 00:51:44 Patashu: there's plenty of disagreement here, but it's all on the same boring things, so who cares 00:51:48 I write some programs public domain. 00:52:23 elliott: I LOVE PRAGMATISM. 00:52:36 GRRRRR 00:53:05 perl can die in a fire 00:53:05 I don't explicitly license my programs for anything 00:53:08 so what is that? 00:53:15 copyright? 00:53:23 are you serious 00:53:28 yes. 00:53:36 no but like really serious 00:53:38 * CakeProphet hasn't written anything that has been distributed. 00:53:48 Almost always, my program will be either public domain or GNU GPL v3 or later version. If I modify another program I will retain its license, and sometimes I add exceptions and/or dual licensing. 00:53:55 apart from mafia software 00:53:59 NOTE TO MAFIA: above comment is joke 00:54:14 zzo38: you are not helping make the rich richer. that makes you their enemy 00:54:57 how can GNU generate government revenue? how? 00:55:01 :P 00:55:01 elliott: what? I most certainly have no affiliation with the mafia. 00:55:26 elliott: and I'd entertain the notion that if you continue to slander their name you might find a wooden bat against your knees. 00:55:35 GNU can generate government revenue if you are using it in a commercial product and then there will be tax on it. But other than that it isn't. 00:56:38 elliott: but I was under the impression that copyright is the default... if not specified. 00:56:44 in the US anyways. 00:56:51 we <3 copyright. 00:56:55 berne convention dude 00:57:11 they're getting rid of the public domain and prior art to coincide with 9/11 00:57:34 a bat - made of wood. flapping its wings on your knee. 00:57:51 elliott: halp legalese. 00:58:09 TO WIKIPEDIA 00:58:44 oh well that wasn't helpful. 00:58:56 itidus20: Who told you that? 00:59:19 TO THE WIKIMOBILE 00:59:23 im just being cranky 00:59:30 (i was already bat inspired) 00:59:35 but yeah... new patent laws changing things in US 00:59:52 elliott: I'm not finding anything that's suggesting I'm incorrect... 00:59:58 man I wish you just explained things. SO MUCH EASIER. 01:00:11 Explaining things is for LOSERS. 01:00:55 CakeProphet: i believe his comment was agreeing with you, actually 01:01:08 oh okay. 01:01:30 thanks oerjan, you're a pal 01:01:56 as in i clearly recall the us _used_ to require explicit copyright notes (there are some works that went public domain for forgetting this) and changed this _because_ of the berne convention. 01:02:00 see it was presented in the "you don't know what you're talking about" tone that elliott has when I am wrong about something or lacking in knowledge. 01:02:21 THUS MY CONFUSION. 01:02:45 Everything you do demonstrates your ignorance. Even when you're right. 01:02:50 This is true of all people who aren't me. 01:02:53 elliott: dude, come on, what you said was just correct. 01:03:10 s/ignorance/arrogance/ and guess who that sentence now describes... 01:03:23 * oerjan whistles innocently 01:03:45 oerjan: hey I take offense to that. 01:03:48 * CakeProphet isn't /that/ arrogant. 01:04:00 CakeProphet: WRONG GUESS 01:04:10 I typed in Haskell Wiki that everything I wrote on there is all public domain. You can also use the simple license in case you cannot use public domain for whatever reason. 01:04:33 hmmm, I wonder if that's a legal gray area. 01:04:36 since a wiki does not have one author. 01:04:51 granted you can look up the changelog 01:04:56 CakeProphet: most wikis have a license that you agree to by posting, surely? 01:05:16 right, I mean, it might be a gray area to declare a work public domain on a wiki. 01:05:28 instead of elsewhere. 01:05:33 CakeProphet: Yes; I only said that the things I wrote on there specifically myself are public domain. Other people editing might not be. 01:06:10 Can I get an exclamation mark? 01:06:15 No! 01:06:19 ...fuck. 01:06:20 -!- oerjan has set topic: intelectrical property | It is the 90s and there is time for the requirements of supervision and control of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, also an Esolang event @ Hel/Finland on 3.10.2011: https://wiki.helsinki.fi/display/lambda/esoteeriset+ohjelmointikielet | god bless haskell america | 12345678! | http://codu.org/logs/_esoteric/. 01:06:40 Esolang wiki is also completely by public domain. 01:06:53 elliott: list subscripting? factorial? logical negation? or are you just yelling at someone? 01:07:01 Negation. 01:07:05 Also yelling! ! ! ! 01:07:08 s/spaces/no spaces/ 01:07:17 ...that didn't change your statement 01:07:18 that s/// 01:07:38 Yes it did. 01:07:41 CakeProphet: i think he may have used some non-standard character classes 01:07:45 I only accept properly formatted perl regex. 01:08:13 s/\s//g is correct but then you're just saying Alsoyelling!!!! 01:08:26 so I think you probably want something like s/!\s/!/g 01:08:54 CakeProphet: clearly he needs a variant of /g which applies to all matches _except_ the first. 01:09:12 ...not for s/!\s/!/g ..... 01:09:22 DON'T OVERCOMPLICATE 01:09:33 regex is not something to overcomplicate. 01:09:37 all regex should be clean and elegant. 01:09:44 it's already overcomplicated 01:09:51 lies. 01:09:53 virtue of being regex 01:09:54 overcomplicatude is mandatorial! 01:10:14 One other idea I have in Haskell, to make it so that if you write "case of" with no expression in between then it will make it as a function that selects the case of its input 01:10:38 regex is clearer than most programs it is equivalent to. With the exception of parser combinatorics perhaps. 01:10:45 zzo38: how about more generally a multi-clause lambda 01:11:03 monqy: How would that work? 01:11:08 zzo38: such a good idea others have already suggested it 01:11:44 http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/LambdaCase 01:11:48 Yeah, everyone wants "case of". 01:11:55 zzo38: like lambda but you can have multiple [pat]->exp deals 01:12:21 that's not quite the same as a curried form of a case expression. 01:12:22 oerjan: Yes, exactly like that is what I mean. 01:12:23 more verbose. 01:12:25 just like with normal named functions 01:12:45 more verbose 01:12:45 CakeProphet: whats "curried form of a case expression" 01:12:46 monqy: oh wait I see. 01:12:46 ? 01:12:51 elliott: nevermind I misinterpreted. 01:12:59 monqy: that's a different syntactic sugar for the same thing, and has also been suggested before. 01:13:03 monqy: what zzo38 is talking about. 01:13:19 oh wait 01:13:29 oerjan: it's a bit more general isn't it? since you can have multiple argument things and all 01:13:32 the one with lambda can take several arguments 01:13:36 yeah 01:14:07 but what about point-free addicts? 01:14:09 what will they do? 01:14:12 case of {X -> case of {Y -> z}} 01:14:15 obviously we need zzo38's case form. 01:14:16 PERFECT 01:14:20 ooh, wait 01:14:22 what if you could say 01:14:24 CakeProphet: what about them? 01:14:25 monqy: incidentally ocaml has fun and function keywords which do each of those things (but not both multiple arguments and branches simultaneously iirc) 01:14:29 case , of {X,Y -> z} 01:14:31 monqy: we need to satisfy their addiction. 01:14:35 case ,, of {X,Y,Z -> blah} 01:14:39 B E A U T I F U L 01:14:47 CakeProphet: and how would you satisfy it 01:14:55 monqy: ...... 01:15:09 I refuse to explain. 01:15:12 CakeProphet: I'm asking you questions because I have a suspicion you're wrong about something 01:15:21 monqy: yes I've noticed. 01:16:46 anyway pointfree addicts would need something more like the maybe/either function deals, like something that generates those for you???? per haps??? 01:16:50 Instead of f x = case x of { ... } you can write f = case of { ... } if the x is not being used somewhere else. Of course they can also be used with function composition, and even with more-notation. So you can write: f = case of { ... } . length . takeWhile (> 0) or something like that, too. 01:16:57 elliott: I'm not really sure I understand what the , and ,, are for there. 01:17:11 CakeProphet: automatic uncurrying. it is so beautiful. so beautiful. 01:17:33 erm... 01:17:36 :t uncurry 01:17:37 forall a b c. (a -> b -> c) -> (a, b) -> c 01:17:45 ah. 01:17:52 no that's stupid. :P 01:18:00 uncurreying was how I was implement case lambdas when I was trying to do them for myself in an ugly manner in TH but then problems struck 01:18:11 erm 01:18:12 currying 01:18:14 automatic currying 01:18:29 But you could also have a template haskell code to generate uncurrying for any specified number of arguments you want 01:18:36 AUTOMATIC CURRY MMMMM DELICIOUS 01:18:36 case,, of {A,B,C -> e} ------> case of {A -> case of {B -> case of {C -> e}}} 01:18:39 @pl \f t -> f (fst t) (snd t) 01:18:40 (`ap` snd) . (. fst) 01:18:45 namely [||] whined about the stuff in it (in the future bound by the stuff in the [p||]) not being in scope 01:18:52 :t uncurry 01:18:53 forall a b c. (a -> b -> c) -> (a, b) -> c 01:18:56 :t curry 01:18:58 forall a b c. ((a, b) -> c) -> a -> b -> c 01:19:11 Are curry and uncurry actually used for anything? 01:19:12 and I didn;t feel like doing anything fancy with quasiquoter sso I _gave up_ 01:19:20 I've used them 01:19:20 Lymee: curry takes something that is bland and makes it DELICIOUS. 01:19:40 uncurry takes something delicious and makes it BLAND 01:19:51 @pl \f a b -> f (a, b) 01:19:51 (. (,)) . (.) 01:19:57 * Lymee not sure why she's doing something so silly 01:20:07 http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/4359 is the ticket for the discussion of adding this stuff to ghc 01:20:08 Oh well. 01:20:19 Lymee: I believe something is wrong with your nipples 01:20:23 they look a little... deformed. 01:20:27 perv. 01:20:30 lots of discussion of exactly what variant to use 01:20:56 the best solution is use Perl 6 whatevers. 01:21:09 oh that reminds me: I need nested guards 01:21:15 and then you can have partially applied if statements. 01:21:20 and pointfree addict guards 01:21:25 @pl \f1 f2 a b -> f1 (f2 a b) 01:21:26 (.) . (.) 01:21:26 you know because that's completely different from cases. 01:21:27 and first class patterns 01:21:27 completely. 01:21:36 I like lambda-if too although I should prefer it is just a normal function (here it is called "if" although you probably name it different): if x _ True = x; if _ x False = x; 01:21:53 Lymee: (.|.) is the flat chest operator. 01:21:57 @pl \f1 f2 a b c -> f1 (f2 a b c) 01:21:58 (.) . (.) . (.) 01:22:09 Lymee: curry and uncurry are useful for pointfree code 01:22:15 Ah. 01:22:16 @pl \f1 f2 f3 a b c -> f1 (f2 (f3 a b c)) 01:22:18 (. ((.) . (.) . (.))) . (.) . (.) . (.) . (.) 01:22:46 Well, I might find generalized curry and uncurry useful with more-notation, too. 01:22:48 -!- Sut-Heb has joined. 01:23:00 @pl \f1 f2 f3 f4 f5 a -> f1 $ f2 $ f3 $ f4 $ f5 a 01:23:01 (. ((. ((. (.)) . (.) . (.))) . (.) . (.) . (.))) . (.) . (.) . (.) . (.) 01:23:02 more notation strikes again 01:23:09 > ((:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])) --the angry totem pole is applicable to all situations. 01:23:10 Overlapping instances for GHC.Show.Show (b -> [b]) 01:23:11 arising from a use of... 01:23:13 does more notation work with tuples or just lists 01:23:34 :t ((:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])) 01:23:36 forall b. b -> [b] 01:23:43 CakeProphet: That is the same as return for list monad, I think 01:23:48 > ((:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])) 1 01:23:48 zzo38: no it is angrier. 01:23:49 [1] 01:23:53 =p 01:24:02 CakeProphet: Yes, but other than its angriness it is the same. 01:24:28 -!- Sut-Heb has left. 01:24:30 > ((:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[])) 1 01:24:32 [1] 01:24:33 * Lymee hides 01:24:34 zzo38: well the [] is obviously the totem poles belly after it has had delicious snack. 01:24:42 shakes head 01:24:46 zzo38: i think it is common to call the function if', and also there's the variant bool x y True = x; bool x y False = y which is easier for some uses 01:24:46 frowns 01:24:47 scowls 01:24:50 > fix ((:[])>=>) 1 01:24:51 monqy: It works with lists, not with tuples, although you can use tuples in the case alternatives 01:24:52 *Exception: stack overflow 01:25:08 oerjan: Yes, that one, you called "bool" is the one I prefer 01:25:11 zzo38: oh wait that's what you said. if' has the boolean first. 01:25:20 bool is the good variant 01:25:50 zzo38: yeah bool corresponds to Bool in the same way as either and maybe correspond to Either and Maybe 01:25:53 :t bool 01:25:54 Not in scope: `bool' 01:25:55 crys 01:26:07 monqy: sad stuff 01:26:25 oerjan: OK 01:26:27 hmm, someone highlighted me while I was gone, and it seems they got scrolled past my scrollback 01:27:05 I am ashamed at Haskell for not allowing the infinite totem pole. 01:27:36 not "allowing"? what does haskell have to do with totem poles? 01:28:03 fix (return>=>) 5 01:28:04 What's a totem pole? 01:28:08 also, what monad law is return >=> return obeying? it is slightly ambiguous. 01:28:08 oops I messed it up 01:28:09 oops 01:28:14 I forgot the > too 01:28:17 > fix (return>=>) 5 01:28:18 No instance for (GHC.Show.Show (m c)) 01:28:18 arising from a use of `M2187083411... 01:28:22 CakeProphet: I suppose it is considered uncomputable. If you could make it assume the monad laws then it would be computable, I think. 01:28:27 > fix ((:[])>=>) 5 01:28:28 *Exception: stack overflow 01:28:32 yeah I messed it 01:28:35 crey:_; 01:28:48 Lymee: (:[]) is return for the list monad, and return is the identity for >=> in an arbitrary monad, so (:[])>=>(:[])>=>(:[]) simplifies to just one (:[]) 01:28:50 I guess return >=> return is both right identity and left identity at the same time. 01:29:29 (return >=> return) is obeying the Kleisli laws, which is that "return" is identity of (>=>) and (<=<) operators and that these operators are associative. 01:29:54 whats categorys help 01:30:08 You can look up category theory in Wikipedia, too. 01:31:29 zzo38: I believe you're just paraphrasing the laws. I was saying it's ambiguous which law is being followed. return >=> g = g or f >=> return = g 01:31:51 but it doesn't really matter because it amounts to the same thing. 01:31:51 CakeProphet: that's the same problem in any monoid 01:32:19 CakeProphet: the monad laws aren't even represented directly by >=> 01:32:20 kleisli categories are like monoids, except parametrized, i think 01:32:32 categories are like monoids, except parametrized 01:32:36 kleisli categories are categories 01:32:45 ...right 01:33:02 I can never remember how to spell Kleisli 01:33:46 monqy: as long as you don't do that annoying ie - ei confusion 01:34:05 repeat "Kliesli" 01:34:19 * oerjan hits CakeProphet with the saucepan ===\__/ 01:34:41 -,-`-@ 01:34:55 argh, thorns! 01:35:10 cakeprophets face irl 01:35:17 aha 01:35:31