00:00:20 D6 could be a roleplaying reference 00:00:46 *Could* be. 00:00:47 no clue 00:00:53 * pikhq rolls 5000d20 00:00:56 :p 00:01:26 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> It's the name of the D function int Gregor.R(real) mangled. 00:01:58 done 00:02:17 _D6Gregor1RFeZi: yes, that looks correct now 00:02:38 ok that means _ was the only part i nearly understood :) 00:02:59 http://pastebin.ca/351161 00:03:06 50 lines 00:04:40 _D6Gregor1RFeZi: Sorry; I don't do C++. 00:04:48 I mean. . . 00:04:58 I don't look at C++'s mangled names. 00:05:05 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> It's D, not C++ 00:05:29 Hmm. . . I thought D used one of the name mangling schemes made for C++. . . 00:05:48 so, _D means the D language, 6Gregor means Gregor, 1R means R, F = float, Z = int, and I don't know about e and i/ 00:05:50 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> It's similar, but certainly not the same. D's name mangling is made for D. 00:06:28 Haskell can spit out some interesting mangled names in its linker error messages. 00:06:40 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Gotta love mangling :P 00:07:50 that was easier than i thought 00:08:07 it would have been a lot cleaner if python files had ungetc 00:09:14 Well, at least it's got a consistent mangler; removes the issues that C++'s lack of standard mangling schemes produces. . . 00:10:04 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: C++'s mangling is standardized ... just nothing complies to the standard :P 00:11:05 * SimonRC boggles at the C code that ghc emits: 00:11:09 typical extract: 00:11:11 R1.p = (P_)(W_)&GHCziBase_unpackCStringzh_closure; 00:11:35 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Heheheh 00:13:09 BTW, what about my proposed analysis of your name? 00:14:27 Sukoshi: looks like a custom parser is the way to go 00:14:45 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> SimonRC: I'm actually not sure about "FeZi" - I just got the mangling name by compiling the appropriate file :P 00:15:02 Mangling! Fun. 00:15:26 well FeZi has to encode int and real somehow, doesn't it? 00:15:37 "ldi1e2:ab3:abci56e1:gli2ei3eeei42ee" <-- fun 00:15:56 that is [{1: 'ab', 'abc': 56, 'g': [2, 3]}, 42] bencoded 00:17:07 i like bencode 00:17:47 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> oerjan: yeah. 00:17:58 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> oerjan: And the fact that one of them is a parameter, and the other is a return type. 00:21:33 i guess we need you to go and compile a different function :) 00:34:50 -!- pikhq_ has joined. 00:35:21 Grr. . . 00:35:25 -!- pikhq has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 00:35:31 STOP TURNING OFF THE CABLE MODEM, DAMN IT! 00:35:33 -!- pikhq_ has changed nick to pikhq. 00:38:04 heh 00:40:28 Sukoshi: A yacc parser for bencode is way too much 00:47:17 oerjan: what kind of parser is the one i wrote? 00:47:31 -!- digital_me has quit ("Lost terminal"). 00:48:53 looks like pretty straightforward recursive descent predictive parser 00:52:04 -!- ShadowHntr has quit (Client Quit). 00:57:23 -!- kxspxr has joined. 00:57:52 hi 01:10:28 SETI: A 99.999% chance of being a waste of effort and a 0.001% chance of destroying the entire Human race. 01:10:31 :-P 01:11:37 either they don't exist, they already know we are here, or we wouldn't want them to? 01:12:48 bbl 01:13:54 basically the chance that two civilizations should develop and not be millions of years apart in time is minimal 01:14:02 asdf 01:14:40 and if they are millions of years apart then the first one will have colonized the galaxy or destroyed itself before the other one arises 01:16:34 or the're just intorverts 01:18:09 hm... 01:20:22 there was this book i read about alien life that suggested maybe interstellar travel was _so_ awkward no civilization actually bothered to do it 01:21:07 alas, there is always another option, including the one we haven't thought of 01:22:23 I think this just about sums up the present day: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Population_curve.svg 01:22:26 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)). 01:22:44 ignore the actual units of the y-axis or even what it's measuring 01:23:33 perhaps. it doesn't show the fact that the growth is now decelerating 01:23:58 I don't mean for population particulary. 01:24:14 An exponential growth curve should be the logo for the 21st century 01:24:58 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity 01:24:58 Well, in _Orion's Arm_, there is a quite nice explanation using wormholes and time dilation that predicts that as long as intelligent civilisations are reasonably distant from one another, they will encounter one another while all having the about same tech level. 01:25:04 reddit# 01:25:45 reddit#? 01:26:05 I have read that already 01:26:27 The growth is decelerating? 01:26:48 heh 01:26:49 yes it has been predicted that it will stabilize around 9 billions or so 01:26:54 logistic 01:26:56 You mean the growth is going down, or it's actually slowing down? 01:27:09 slowing down 01:27:24 But it's currently above zero? 01:27:28 what caused the two dips in the 1000's? 01:27:32 yes 01:27:37 And, of course, the population is above zero as well? 01:27:41 one is the great plague 01:27:43 one of them is certainly the Black Death 01:28:01 ...Yes, I should have known the fact that growth is above zero as well... 01:28:25 ihope: do you know about differentiation? 01:28:35 oh nice the've actually got the data for analyis 01:28:40 Yep. 01:28:57 Derivatives and integrals... and limits. Calculus is fun. 01:29:12 what about? 01:29:48 What about what? 01:29:53 calculus 01:29:57 so i am saying that the second derivative of population wrt. time is negative 01:30:06 Fun. 01:30:48 i forget how to tell gnuplot to fit a curve 01:32:13 What about calculus is fun, you mean, then? 01:32:19 no 01:32:50 disregard my comment 01:35:20 wtf 01:35:26 "Undefined value during function evaluation" 01:37:47 -!- pikhq has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 01:38:09 anyone know gnuplot? 01:38:57 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Sort of 01:39:00 -!- digital_me has joined. 01:39:05 -!- pikhq has joined. 01:39:10 f(x) = a/(b + exp(-1*c*x)) 01:39:14 fit f(x) "/tmp/popdata" via a, b, c 01:39:22 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Not that well. 01:39:23 => Undefined value during function evaluation 01:39:52 bsmntbombdood: that almost looks like Haskell. 01:40:15 digital_me: do you know? 01:48:04 garg 01:48:54 -!- digital_me has quit ("brb"). 01:49:09 -!- digital_me has joined. 01:51:11 oh damn 01:51:15 the values are too big 01:52:04 exponential of large numbers? 01:52:09 yeah 01:52:13 :( 01:52:19 actually that shouldn't matter 01:52:25 only goes up to like 6000... 01:52:29 since the exponent is negative 01:52:41 yeah :/ 01:53:19 can you do if then else? 01:53:53 don't think 01:53:55 it would be reasonable to define exp(-6000) as 0 01:54:03 i'll just divide everything by 1000 01:54:10 wow, that's a terrible fit 01:54:53 right 01:55:54 this curve fitting sucks 01:58:12 oh, i can do conditionals 02:04:12 according to this model, in about 2700, the world population will go to 53,000 million, then by 2800 be -120,000 million 02:04:41 negative? 02:04:49 yeah 02:05:34 well i guess if we learn to control antimatter :) 02:07:16 it's barely changing my initial parameters :/ 02:08:18 perhaps your function is not suitable for least squares estimation or whatever gnuplot uses 02:08:35 what should i use? 02:09:13 i don't know 02:11:40 there's a big population spike at -400 02:12:56 the growth from -700 to -400 was the biggest for a long time 02:14:42 untill like 1600 02:14:51 then it just goes crazy 02:15:55 and those two happen to be around the first and second golden ages of science... 02:16:31 except that with the timing... 02:17:13 the first population increase may have caused the age of philosophy while the second was _caused_ by the age of science 02:17:47 -700 to -400 was a golden age of science? 02:18:01 well, -400 or so 02:18:07 -!- ihope has quit (Connection timed out). 02:18:38 with aristotle, euclid and everything. 02:19:19 of course i mean philosophy as an analogy of science 02:20:34 there was another jump at -4900 02:21:57 i don't think you can deduce that much 02:22:32 well, it looks pretty major when graphed 02:22:53 only with a log scale though 02:23:34 i mean, the numbers in the table are only accurate to the nearest million 02:23:45 *accurate=given 02:24:31 there may have been a jump from -5000 to -4000 but there is no way to say exactly when the growth started from the table 02:25:03 yeah 02:25:06 and there was a doubling in the next millennium 02:26:03 and each of the two next ones 02:26:45 and then more than tripled from -1000 to 0 02:27:02 heh, i tried to fit it using a sixth order polynomial. it failed. 02:27:16 so i'ld say the -5000..-4000 was pretty tame in comparison 02:27:59 probably that was when most of people shifted to agriculture 02:28:51 and then it grew exponentially until the potential for that technology was used up 02:29:47 Singular matrix in Invert_RtR! 02:54:34 -!- kxspxr has quit. 04:10:10 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 04:11:03 -!- SevenInchBread has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 04:21:53 -!- digital_me has quit ("leaving"). 04:40:06 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 04:55:14 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 04:55:30 'sup? 04:56:28 pus 05:01:20 antibiotics would be a good idea 05:03:27 the antibiotic alternative 05:13:36 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Anybody want to help me redesign Plof? 05:13:46 why, what's crap about it? 05:14:12 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> There's a functions-that-return-deep vs functions-that-return-shallow problem. 05:14:24 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> eg if returns deep, but normal functions return shallow. 05:15:07 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Lemme rephrase that: 05:15:15 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> The 'if' function, for example, returns deep, but normal functions return shallow. 05:15:30 what's the diff between "deep" and "shallow"? 05:15:50 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> An example: If you do this: a = { if(condition, { return 1; }); }; 05:15:59 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Then that inner return ought to return out of the a function. 05:16:04 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Even though it's several layers in. 05:16:13 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> That's a deep return. 05:16:20 oh ok 05:16:34 weird, plof looks kinda like tomato 05:16:36 Hmm. 05:16:42 but implemented 05:16:48 Plof kicks ass. 05:17:03 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: Except for the return problem, which makes for some VERY ugly builtin functions :P 05:17:03 Although it does have a major issue (that being that it's not done). 05:17:08 though in tomato, to return something: 05:17:16 _D6Gregor1RFeZi: Yeah. . . 05:17:26 * pikhq contemplates a Plofish way to do that. . . 05:17:29 douche@(foo!4,bar!4) = { foo+bar; }; 05:17:35 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I think I need some kind of nomenclature to differentiate them, but that would increase the confusion involved in writing Plof by quite a bit :( 05:17:56 so how does while return? 05:18:10 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Deep as well. 05:18:21 k 05:19:02 a@(condition) = { if({condition}, { 1; }); }; 05:19:16 that is quite weird how plof has its similarities to tomato 05:19:30 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Hmmmm ... combination of an explicit way to note something as a deep-return function, then a way to catch returns from shallow-return functions. 05:19:36 i admit plof was made first 05:20:12 how about the last "dropped" value returns it? 05:20:29 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> ... ? 05:20:47 dropped value, as in: 05:20:50 a+b; 05:20:56 you don't set it 05:20:59 i mean 05:21:06 you don't set a variable to it 05:21:37 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> That doesn't really solve the problem :P 05:22:00 THEN, you can return that shallow, and then the outer function will return that value 05:23:30 Did you know that Firefox is already compatible with XHTML2.0? 05:24:05 -!- calamari has joined. 05:28:23 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I'm starting to go in a big loop on my deep-return stuff :P 05:28:38 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I keep whittling it down in my head, and then I end up right back where I am already. 05:29:01 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I think the unfortunate return mechanism is just implicit to the language design. 05:29:22 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> e.g. any language which uses functions like Plof does will need to have a complex return system. 05:40:22 can't you just have implicit returns? 05:40:44 i mean, like functional languages? 05:40:58 bsmntbombdood: This is a functional language. 05:41:17 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> It's mostly functional, but functions can have a list of statements instead of an expression. 05:41:27 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> As such, the implicit return concept sort of breaks down. 05:41:42 you'll never beat lisp 05:41:45 * bsmntbombdood goes 05:41:52 That just makes it an odd functional language, Gregor. 05:41:58 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Lisp has already been beaten, bsmntbombdood :P 05:42:04 NEVAR!!!!!!!! 05:42:05 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: True. 05:43:27 did you fix arrays yet? 05:43:58 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Arrays do woik 05:44:40 how? 05:45:01 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> a = array(1, 2, 3); a[2] = 4; a[] = 7; 05:45:20 cool 05:45:29 so operator overloading? 05:45:43 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> No - that's another reason I want to reorganize it. 05:45:46 wait, a[] = 7; ? 05:45:58 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> bsmntbombdood: That's concatenation. 05:46:14 :/ 05:46:31 overload + for that 05:46:46 Expose a method of overloading operators. 05:46:46 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> What's wrong with a[] = 7 05:46:49 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> = can't be overloaded because of how objects work, + can't be overloaded because it already has a meaning in terms of objects. 05:46:56 :p 05:46:59 fugly 05:47:06 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Anything else could be overloaded, but it doesn't make sense to allow -, * or / to be overloaded given that + can't be. 05:47:12 Although yes, yes. . . 05:47:12 a[] = 7 doesn't make sense 05:47:31 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> bsmntbombdood: It's how PHP does it, and I find it totally intuitive there :) 05:47:41 object3=object + object2; makes a huge, new object. . . 05:47:48 php sure is a symbol of elegance 05:47:54 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: Yeah. 05:48:41 how do you add numbers, then? 05:48:46 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> + 05:49:05 yuck 05:49:09 _D6Gregor1RFeZi: Are you going to think of a way of doing command line arguments? 05:49:16 bsmntbombdood: Numbers aren't classes. 05:49:22 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: I'm hoping so ^^ 05:49:24 yuck again 05:49:35 that's gross 05:49:36 afk food 05:49:42 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> WTF bsmntbombdood, are you a Java programmer? Shaddap. 05:49:55 java? 05:50:22 [func=(a as int){println("Foo");}] 05:50:22 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> In Java, everything is an Object, but they allow gigantic exceptions to their rules of operator overloading to make that work. 05:50:44 everything isn't an object in java 05:51:12 Int foo = new(Int);, I believe, is valid Java. 05:51:25 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> X_X 05:51:43 java is yucky 05:51:51 (I don't do Java, so take that with a grain of salt) 05:52:45 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: I'm thinking about changing + for objects to something else, and thereby allowing overloading of everything but = 05:53:01 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> Maybe : 05:53:08 why not overload =? 05:53:28 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> bsmntbombdood: a = [ foobar ]; b = a; c = b; d = [ bleh ]; 05:54:00 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> bsmntbombdood: Which is to say, it's ambiguous. 05:54:04 Suggestion. . . 05:54:26 Class and function definitions use a new operator, :=? 05:54:32 * bsmntbombdood gones 05:55:03 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> pikhq: Hmmmmmm ... I sort of don't like the inconsistency that would create. 05:55:38 Yeah. . . 05:56:35 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> >_^ 05:58:42 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I'm thinking about making programming language design my specialty for grad school. 05:58:59 Heheh. 06:02:09 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit. 06:02:50 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 06:06:34 back 06:10:32 nice idea 06:10:45 <_D6Gregor1RFeZi> I'm thinking about making programming language design my specialty for grad school. 06:46:11 -!- flagitious has quit ("Leaving"). 07:10:48 -!- na[zZz]gjunk has quit ("Bi-la Kaifa"). 07:30:04 -!- Sukoshi has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 07:33:13 -!- Sukoshi has joined. 07:33:35 -!- Sukoshi has quit (Remote closed the connection). 07:34:14 -!- Sukoshi has joined. 07:41:56 -!- Arrogant has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:25:47 -!- cmeme has quit ("Client terminated by server"). 08:25:58 -!- cmeme has joined. 08:27:44 -!- puzzlet has quit (Remote closed the connection). 08:27:52 -!- puzzlet has joined. 08:33:12 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("nighty everyone"). 09:30:21 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 11:02:35 -!- kxspxr has joined. 11:05:51 -!- kxspxr has quit (Client Quit). 11:06:31 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving"). 12:02:44 -!- ihope_ has joined. 12:02:56 -!- ihope_ has changed nick to ihope. 12:22:32 -!- ihope has quit (Connection timed out). 14:40:31 # I'm being followed by /etc/shaddow # -- by /bin/cat stevens 14:49:58 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 14:56:26 -!- helios24 has joined. 14:57:44 hi * 2 14:58:31 _D6Gregor1RFeZi: why? 15:19:04 -!- helios24 has quit ("Leaving"). 15:19:06 -!- helios24 has joined. 15:20:20 * SimonRC goes 15:30:38 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)). 15:41:37 -!- helios24 has quit ("Leaving"). 15:41:40 -!- helios24 has joined. 15:44:18 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 15:51:20 -!- helios24 has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 15:51:21 -!- anonfunc has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 16:00:24 -!- anonfunc has joined. 16:01:22 -!- helios24 has joined. 16:01:41 -!- anonfunc has quit (Client Quit). 16:17:00 -!- FabioNET has joined. 16:25:22 -!- _D6Gregor1RFeZi has changed nick to GregorR. 16:57:46 -!- nazgjunk has quit ("Bi-la Kaifa"). 17:03:58 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 17:33:32 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 17:48:14 -!- kxspxr has joined. 17:59:20 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 17:59:45 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 18:01:40 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 18:07:11 -!- nazgjunk has quit ("Bi-la Kaifa"). 18:17:11 -!- jix__ has joined. 18:17:54 -!- jix__ has changed nick to jix. 18:24:32 -!- sebbu has joined. 18:40:16 -!- calamari has joined. 18:45:55 -!- _FabioNET_ has joined. 18:46:18 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 18:48:02 -!- FabioNET has quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)). 18:49:58 -!- digital_me has joined. 18:57:43 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 19:07:43 -!- Arrogant has joined. 19:12:51 -!- helios24 has quit ("Leaving"). 19:15:13 -!- helios24 has joined. 19:35:57 -!- wooby has joined. 19:35:57 -!- wooby has quit (Remote closed the connection). 19:38:47 -!- helios24 has quit (Remote closed the connection). 19:45:30 -!- helios24 has joined. 19:45:30 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 20:08:16 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 20:44:46 -!- helios24 has quit ("Leaving"). 20:46:32 -!- tgwizard has joined. 21:01:17 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 21:01:31 -!- sebbu2 has joined. 21:11:32 -!- oerjan has joined. 21:18:19 -!- ihope_ has joined. 21:18:34 -!- ihope_ has changed nick to ihope. 21:18:57 -!- jix has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 21:19:13 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 21:21:17 -!- sebbu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 21:21:17 -!- sebbu2 has changed nick to sebbu. 21:27:21 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit. 21:27:23 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 21:27:26 -!- UpTheDownstair has joined. 21:31:16 -!- UpTheDownstair has changed nick to nazgjunk. 21:45:51 -!- UpTheDownstair has joined. 21:46:08 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 21:46:11 -!- UpTheDownstair has changed nick to nazgjunk. 21:57:21 -!- nazgjunk has quit ("i seriously need some sleep -_- guh."). 21:59:59 -!- kxspxr has quit. 22:00:42 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 22:08:15 -!- pikhq has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 22:13:50 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 22:15:45 -!- _FabioNET_ has quit ("A domani..."). 22:27:09 Interestingly there was recently mention of deep vs. shallow return on Lambda the Ultimate 22:27:21 GregorR: ^ 22:27:51 Hm 22:28:50 my impression was that shallow return made most sense if the language distinguished methods from closures 22:29:19 the discussion was in the context of lexical scoping 22:30:09 while deep return made most sense if there were only one kind of functions 22:30:28 -!- puzzlet has joined. 22:30:44 no me understando 22:30:47 but i thought of one possibility: you could allow labels on blocks, to return from them by name 22:31:01 CL does that 22:31:07 (the last in the context of your plof question) 22:31:40 so does perl i think 22:31:53 another P-language :) 22:33:53 does plof have lexical scoping? 22:38:34 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving"). 22:53:47 "No me understando"? Sheesh, even GregorR's Spanish is better than that. 22:53:50 :-P 22:54:07 heck even mine :) 22:54:13 i think 22:54:23 heh 22:55:11 at least you got the verb ending right :) 22:56:38 oerjan: pff. Can you translate "I would have been to like it if he hadn't been wanting to eat" into Spanish? 22:57:06 Actually, no. 22:57:19 "I would have been to like it if it weren't for his wanting to eat." 22:57:34 can you translate that into English first? :) 22:58:08 and no, i doubt i could go beyond the present tense without googling somewhat 22:58:18 "I would have been to like it" is perfectly good and understandable English, isn't it? 22:58:24 BabelFish translation: "Habría sido como a él si no estaba para el suyo que deseaba comer." 22:58:51 BabelFish back-translation: "He would have been like a he if it were not for his that wished to eat." 22:59:31 perhaps but it is excessive for English, it reads almost like Douglas Adams' wioll haven been 22:59:58 Can you say those last three words again? 23:00:31 my memory may be shaky but those were part of his mock grammar for time travellers 23:01:39 Did he actually include "would have been to" in there somewhere?\ 23:02:31 no 23:02:51 A Google search for "I would have been to" yields things like "I couldn't talk about it to anybody, I would have been to ashamed." 23:03:16 Aha! "I would have been to see Himmler or Hitler on the very first day; on the very same day." 23:03:19 which is a misspelling of "too" 23:03:53 Yes. 23:04:07 but "be to see" is an undividable phrase, isn't it? 23:04:56 i am sure there may be occasions when you need that precision, but: 23:05:05 Also, "I would have been to like it if it weren't for his wanting to eat." through Lost in Translation with Chinese, Japanese and Korean enabled produces "_ way I, because this material, with which contat of sees, we wished, poss est did not know _" 23:05:14 Is it undividable? 23:05:37 for most cases you would do just as well with "I would have liked it" etc. 23:07:05 "be to see" certainly does not have the usual future implication of "be to" 23:07:58 eh, wait 23:08:38 actually i find that Hitler quote ambiguous in that respect 23:09:19 it would depend on context 23:10:48 But in "Have you been to see him?" it would be a phrase 23:11:31 or at least a different kind of construction 23:11:41 I see. 23:11:49 anyhow, you are the native speaker here 23:11:55 So like "gone to see"? 23:12:03 yeah 23:28:12 -!- sebbu has quit ("@+").