00:00:44 almost every program consists of an initialization chunk, a big loop, some smaller loops called from the big loop and an optional cleanup when the program ends 00:00:55 Writing a kernel without understanding hardware is probably like trying to swim without entering the water. :) 00:01:02 haha 00:01:23 "possible to learn, but ultimately not very applicable" 00:07:25 addition is hard 00:08:50 addition of what? 00:09:07 integers 00:09:15 integers? imaginary numbers? scorpions and apples? 00:09:17 oh 00:09:18 hm 00:09:23 in what language? 00:09:28 C 00:09:44 I'm writing some multiprecision integer code 00:12:19 It's the overflow that makes it hairy 00:12:33 In C I would expect the worst part to be the memory management. 00:16:44 hm... 00:17:05 very true, oerjan 00:17:17 what, the hm... part? :) 00:17:34 I guess that as well as the memory management in C sucking things 00:17:39 *thing 00:17:44 scorpions and apples? Who added scorpions? 00:18:05 * RodgerTheGreat slowly raises his hand 00:18:44 seems pretty simple so far... 00:20:49 AUTOMATIC MEMORY MANAGEMENT FTW LOL 00:21:06 no 00:21:45 ...with the ability to shift back into manual transmission (lol car analogy) when you want. 00:22:01 * SimonRC goes to bed 00:22:15 cya, SimonRC 00:23:37 the simplest way to handle overflow would probably be to have more bits in the temporary variables than in each array cell 00:33:42 -!- nazgjunk has quit ("sleep"). 00:36:35 I think we should go with a far far unmonolithic kernel than say.... Linux. :) :) :) 00:36:59 (eh, fix my grammar as you see fit) 00:37:41 ....with many many many filesystems... that you can switch between. 00:37:45 *than=unlike 00:37:52 So, HURD. 00:38:01 WEIRD filesystems - at that. 00:41:32 TRUE esotericness would probably require a WYRD filesystem. 00:41:47 file systems that look like MUDs - super-compressed file systems - stenographic/cryptographic filesystems - a filesystem based on worms.... somehow 00:46:44 a filesystem consisting of rainbow tables in which you reverse-engineer MD5s instead of editing files 00:48:01 who says we need an fs? 00:48:03 SevenInchBread: by worms, do you mean rogue processes carrying data around in the computer, or physical earthworms? Or both/either? 00:48:36 gigantic sandworms roaming below the surface producing spice. 00:49:38 ....essentially what lament said. 00:55:25 ...well, I'm kind of convinced that... to store data... you need some method of organizing the data - regardless of how you store it. 00:55:26 -!- ShadowHntr has joined. 00:55:31 woot, I can add!! 00:56:10 What an antiquated conviction. 00:57:14 -!- sebbu has quit (Client Quit). 00:57:44 whether you call it a file system or not is regardless. 00:58:22 base 2**32 is the best 00:58:45 (4294967295 4294967295) + (3) == (1 0 2) 01:00:07 couldn't you just use longs and forget about overflow? 01:00:16 no 01:01:40 on the contrary, base 3^42 is best. 01:11:50 ah... here's an idea. 01:12:31 interprocess communication could use filesystems to communicate instead of the usual "stream". 01:29:18 hmmm... representing files as linked lists allows you to create infinite files - and tree structures. 01:31:55 representing files as lazy thunks allows infinite files without loops. 01:32:27 (This message was presented to you by the Haskellers for World Domination) 01:32:33 represent files as lambd terms allows a turing complete filesystem 01:32:59 representing, lambda 01:33:53 so.... basically... a simple change in the OS's representation of a file gives you quite a number of possibilities for structure... universally accessible from any language. 01:36:07 Wicked, dysfunctional people might point out that a next step could be using persistent objects. 01:36:24 we have persistant objects, they are called files 01:37:00 i mean with code 01:37:33 as in object-oriented 01:38:53 and at this point the relational database people will probably want a word in edgewise 01:39:45 that is when we throw them out of #esoteric and decide each file should be a running brainfuck program. 01:39:49 meh.... I have a love-hate relationship with OO. 01:40:10 ....brainfuck, coincidentally, is a very handy representation of the typical file. :) 01:40:29 a running brainfuck program could work 01:40:54 pause execution while there's no IO with that file 01:41:32 or just use... running brainfuck programs... file writes would just be like an input. 01:41:43 exactly 01:42:00 but, no 01:42:05 so no waiting... just pause when we want input... and then all the changes are persistent... 01:42:13 then you couldn't change the program 01:42:24 writes replace/change the program 01:42:29 so then we make a hot-swappable brainfuck. 01:44:08 * oerjan thinks that Unlambda could hot-swap pretty easily. 01:44:32 * SevenInchBread is off to make another brainfuck derivitive. 01:44:33 of course its I/O sucks. 01:44:43 why? 01:44:46 Brainfuck... ON LINKED LISTS. 01:45:14 you must test every input against every possible value 02:03:29 SevenInchBread: how's that different from brainfuck? 02:03:46 too many brainfuck derivitives 02:06:42 by the way, i certainly think an esoteric OS shoudn't have files 02:08:51 what do you use for persistance then? 02:09:09 gnomes 02:09:22 very small gnomes carrying papyrus rolls 02:09:42 asparagus 02:11:14 SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN. 02:11:38 bsmntbombdood: some sort of objects 02:12:05 bsmntbombdood: a "file" is raw data that anything can read. It's a fairly bizarre concept. 02:12:28 a file is an object 02:12:31 for example, i have an mp3 file 02:12:36 it's a song 02:12:42 why should i be able to open it with a text editor? 02:12:49 it makes no sense. It breaks abstraction. 02:13:19 all things shall be the POLYNUMEROUS PAM... which is left implemtnation specific, to confuse everyone as to what it is. 02:13:22 on the other hand, look at PalmOS for a working example 02:13:38 bu bu but 02:13:41 everything is a file 02:14:07 and all forms of persistence, memory management, back scratching, and ultimate deliberation... shall be of the POLYNUMEROUS PAM . 02:16:03 SevenInchBread: polyamorous 02:16:38 bsmntbombdood: only in the same sense that "everything is a number" 02:16:49 exactly 02:16:53 ..... 02:17:00 files are described by numerical file descriptors ;) 02:17:12 bsmntbombdood: it's not the kind of an abstraction a decent OS should provide. It's too low-level. 02:17:25 all those "everything is a " people scare me.... it's like religious adherance to some weird all-powerful principle. 02:18:02 ....instead, those people should believe that EVERYTHING SHALL BE OF POLYNUMEROUS PAM. 02:18:36 Polymerous Spam! 02:19:29 ....everything in esoos should be represented in overly verboose XML.... 02:26:32 -!- ShadowHntr has quit ("End of line."). 02:46:39 -!- crathman has joined. 03:17:13 -!- oerjan has quit (zelazny.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 03:17:28 -!- oerjan has joined. 03:42:20 -!- SevenInchBread has quit (Remote closed the connection). 04:38:30 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 04:38:34 -!- crathman has quit ("Chatzilla 0.9.77 [Firefox 2.0.0.3/2007030919]"). 05:03:37 -!- oerjan has joined. 05:22:33 -!- anonfunc has joined. 05:34:12 -!- ShadowHntr has joined. 05:36:31 -!- digital_me has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 05:47:13 -!- Arrogant has joined. 06:02:05 -!- Sgeo has quit ("Leaving"). 06:25:38 -!- mule| has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 07:09:11 -!- sekhmet has quit (Remote closed the connection). 07:09:14 -!- sekhmet has joined. 07:13:37 'night, guys 07:28:01 -!- ShadowHntr has quit (Client Quit). 07:30:49 -!- anonfunc has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 07:30:52 -!- anonfunc has joined. 07:44:29 you poor thing :( 07:44:58 haha... i scroll up and say something that'd be weird even there :P 07:50:01 you poor thing. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:10:40 -!- RodgerTheGreat_ has joined. 08:10:40 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 09:14:16 -!- Arrogant has quit ("Leaving"). 10:20:03 -!- mule| has joined. 10:28:18 -!- jix has joined. 10:58:39 -!- helios_ has joined. 10:59:08 -!- helios_ has quit (Client Quit). 11:00:36 -!- helios24 has joined. 11:01:48 -!- helios24 has quit (Client Quit). 11:03:18 -!- helios24 has joined. 11:04:15 -!- anonfunc has quit. 11:04:20 -!- helios24 has quit (Client Quit). 11:04:42 -!- helios24 has joined. 11:12:33 -!- ais523 has joined. 11:19:17 -!- jix has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 11:31:18 idea: every file is a datastructure equivalent to XML... 11:31:38 ... but you have to all IO on the file as raw characters of XML 11:31:41 :-) 11:31:51 actually that's just perverse, rather than esoteric 11:33:50 why does everyone like XML so much these days. Why not a readable format that saves on characters (IMO JSON is more readable and more concise but not perfect) 11:34:10 nonono, BER 11:34:40 We talk about XML a lot here because it is easy to take the piss out of it. 11:35:33 classic example: http://www.codu.org/rxml.php 11:35:43 because everything in XML has to be formatted more redundantly than needed 11:36:13 Why does nobody try to format XML in XML? 11:36:55 because everything in XML has to be formatted more redundantly than needed 11:37:27 (and of course this can be continued ad infinitum if this is believed to be beneficial) 11:37:42 BTW, codu is GregorR's site: http://www.codu.org/hats.php 11:40:08 one idea I had for a nonstandard file structure that might actually be useful is to change the one-many relationship between directories and files into a many-many relationship 11:40:34 and then loop it round so that any directory could be a subdirectory of any other directory (with the system maintaining lists of backlinks) 11:41:01 in fact, you could go further and use just a combined file/directory concept with some contents and a list of files it linked to 11:41:01 so you have a netwok rather than a tree 11:41:15 the problem with that is that stuff can get lost 11:41:30 it's a directed network where you're allowed to go backwards along the lines if you want, as long as you say what you're doing 11:41:34 you can have files that are reachable but you have no idea how to reach them 11:41:48 and things lack a canonical name 11:41:58 well, it would be like an ordinary directory structure with more links 11:42:04 hmm 11:42:10 and as for canonical names, modern filesystems don't really have them anyway 11:42:23 irc://irc.freenode.org/esoteric/../esoteric 11:42:31 (I have no idea if that would actually work!) 11:42:34 IT JUST FEELS WRONG 11:43:08 (BTW, when I clicked on that link, nothing happened at all, but I'm not sure why) 11:43:09 -!- helios24 has quit ("leaving"). 11:43:09 would there be a root node? 11:43:17 -!- helios24 has joined. 11:43:42 at least one. Probably one for the system and one for each user on a multi-user system, like c:\ and My Documents\ on Windows, or / and ~ on Unix 11:43:48 ooooh 11:43:55 you know about the plan 9 FS, right/ 11:43:56 ? 11:44:07 I'm not too aware of that, 11:44:11 s/,// 11:44:12 well look it up 11:44:41 it implements much of its security by not even giving people a *name* for things they aren't supposed to know about. 11:44:48 -!- helios_ has joined. 11:44:48 -!- helios_ has quit (Client Quit). 11:44:59 * ais523 looks it up 11:45:08 The two systems could be combined easily enough 11:45:10 there is lots of mounting and union directories 11:46:02 silly idea: you have union directories in Plan9FS, so EsoFS should have intersection directories, set difference directories, and complement directories. 11:46:05 :-P 11:46:17 heh 11:46:36 actually, intersection directories don't sound like a bad idea 11:46:45 That could actually be useful. I'd like to see the symmetric difference between C-INTERCAL versions 0.24 and 0.25 11:46:46 but complement directories sure do! 11:46:59 nonono 11:47:30 you could have a directory containing all the picture files you have, and another containing all the files from 2003... 11:47:37 I've heard it suggested that a big long list of 'every file on the computer' would actually be easier to navigate than other systems 11:47:44 the intersection of these would be all your pictures from 2003 11:47:57 tada! 11:48:02 Your directory system would be a fully-featured categorisation system 11:48:08 I would like that featuer a lot actuall 11:48:09 y 11:48:14 ais523: yes 11:48:46 a sort of cross between a big directory tree and a collection of DB tables 11:48:51 In fact, wiki software has been doing this sort of thing for ages; in MediaWiki, the links and backlinks do what I suggest, the categories would do what you suggest if the developers got round to it, and subpages give you canonical names 11:48:52 kewl 11:49:39 Another thing I'd like is unlimited amounts of metadata in files 11:49:48 We have file-size and permissions at the moment 11:50:14 Macs have that don't they? 11:50:19 some do 11:50:37 I'd like a list of metadata so that we can find the right program to open a file, even if we've never come across the format before 11:50:45 I personally don't like any metadata system between the small system unix uses and the fully-fleged resource fork of older macs 11:51:14 Ideally, we want to load our BF programs in a BF IDE, but Emacs will do if we don't have one (as they're text files) and in the worst case a hex editor 11:51:33 (or if really needed, you could edit the file using cat) 11:52:11 BF programs are basically trees of strings of "<>+-,.", right? 11:52:28 * ais523 is the sort of person who uses cat /dev/random to get their terminal out of the wrong shift state 11:52:36 SimonRC: yes 11:53:12 in fact, the actual characters used don't really matter IMO; <>+-., are just conventional so that people can communicate BF programs and have them mean the same thing at their destination 11:53:19 there should also be a way to get a list of options for opening, including options in the metadata as well as the programs you have installed (in separate lists) 11:53:55 you could have a 'relevance' result like you do on search results, according to how suited a program would be for a file 11:54:05 and each program could have its own algorithm 11:54:30 so a plaintext editor is going to be moderately-high-relevance for a plain-text file containing text 11:54:37 heh, so that what google's "I'm feeling lucky" really is - the default open 11:55:06 and moderate relevance for a program in most non-esoteric languages, and low but still positive relevance for a uuencoded binary 11:55:59 you know, esoteric programming languages are reaching the state where they are actually useful in some cases 11:56:27 (For instance, ALPACA gives one of the simplest Life implementations around, and BF (not C89) is probably now the world's most portable language) 11:56:40 Linear Lisp 11:57:44 * ais523 is being chased all over the Internet by SimonRC at the moment 11:57:48 *sent 11:59:29 the principle of building enforced garbage-collection into all your commands is really quite esoteric 11:59:56 in fact, it's logic is like a functional version of BF (you have to decompose something whilst creating two copies if you want to copy it) 12:00:21 s/'// 12:01:06 * ais523 thinks that clog should respond to sed commands so that you can correct your typos in the logs too 12:03:10 ISTR there is a plug-in for some IRC clients that does that for the client. 12:03:39 I wouldn't be surprised; surely someone had the same idea before me 12:06:34 -!- helios24 has quit ("leaving"). 12:06:42 -!- helios24 has joined. 12:47:11 -!- jix has joined. 12:54:11 ~dof ,[.,]!Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:54:36 (that's strange, I got the output in #bsmnt_bot_errors rather than here) 12:54:43 ~exec exec self.bf7+self.bf8 12:54:47 ~dof ,[.,]!Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:54:47 Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:54:47 Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:55:19 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 12:55:21 ~dof ,[.,]!Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:55:22 Most simple BF programs also work in DoFuck 12:57:17 ~exec sys.stdout(os.listdir("/bot/scripts/")) 12:57:17 [] 12:57:51 I've taken to messing with bsmnt_bot in #bsmnt_bot_errors to avoid spamming #esoteric 12:58:23 oh. well i just wanted to remind you that you can save files in /bot/scripts/ now. 12:58:51 how? We could put the BF and DoFuck interpreters in there 12:59:06 just with the usual python file commands 12:59:39 (I don't actually know much Python at all; I've picked it up mostly from the #esoteric logs) 13:00:10 besides, what does it do with the files there? Does it run them on startup, or do we have to run them manually, or what? 13:00:18 manually so far 13:01:06 www.python.org/doc 13:03:38 ~exec with open("/bot/scripts/bf.py") as f: write bf3+bf4 13:03:38 SyntaxError: invalid syntax 13:03:55 ~exec exec "with open("/bot/scripts/bf.py") as f:\n write bf3+bf4" 13:03:55 SyntaxError: invalid syntax 13:04:10 ~exec exec "with open('/bot/scripts/bf.py') as f:\n write bf3+bf4" 13:04:11 SyntaxError: invalid syntax 13:04:27 the bot is still running an old version of python. i tried the same as you... 13:05:06 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/bf.py')\nf.write(bf3+bf4)\nf.close()" 13:05:06 IOError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/bot/scripts/bf.py' 13:05:28 that was opened for reading 13:05:40 add , "w" 13:05:43 i think 13:05:56 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/bf.py','w')\nf.write(bf3+bf4)\nf.close()" 13:05:57 NameError: name 'bf3' is not defined 13:06:03 -!- jix has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 13:06:06 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/bf.py','w')\nf.write(self.bf3+self.bf4)\nf.close()" 13:06:19 ~exec sys.stdout(os.listdir("/bot/scripts/")) 13:06:19 ['bf.py'] 13:06:34 * ais523 came to the same conclusion as oerjan at about the same time 13:06:46 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/dof.py','w')\nf.write(self.bf7+self.bf8)\nf.close()" 13:06:50 ~exec sys.stdout(os.listdir("/bot/scripts/")) 13:06:50 ['bf.py', 'dof.py'] 13:07:06 ~exec self.raw_register_queue.pop() 13:07:07 AttributeError: IRCbot instance has no attribute 'raw_register_queue' 13:07:08 ~exec self.raw_register_queue.pop() 13:07:09 AttributeError: IRCbot instance has no attribute 'raw_register_queue' 13:07:16 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:07:19 sys.stdout(self.bf7) 13:07:21 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:07:28 ~exec sys.stdout(self.bf7) 13:07:29 def bfarg(x,y): 13:07:29 p=y.group(2) 13:07:29 a=y.group(3)+unichr(0) 13:07:29 o='' 13:07:30 p=p+'!' 13:07:31 t=[0]*30000 13:07:33 i=0 13:07:35 l=0 13:07:37 while p[i]!='!': 13:07:39 if p[i]==']' and t[l]!=0: 13:07:41 c=1 13:07:43 while c>0: 13:07:45 i=i-1 13:07:47 if p[i]==']': c=c+1 13:07:49 if p[i]=='[': c=c-1 13:07:56 whoops 13:08:07 I was about to warn you against that when you corrected your command 13:08:23 ~bf ,[.,]!Definitely stopped this working? 13:08:47 now all we have to do is reload it from the directory, somehow 13:10:31 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/bf.py')\nexec '\n'.join(f.readlines())\nf.close()" 13:10:31 SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string 13:10:44 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/bf.py')\nexec '\\n'.join(f.readlines())\nf.close()" 13:10:52 ~bf ,[.,]!Testing 13:10:52 Testing 13:10:55 yay! 13:11:18 ~exec exec "f=open('/bot/scripts/dof.py')\nexec '\\n'.join(f.readlines())\nf.close()" 13:11:44 ~dof [,.]!Testing 13:11:45 Testing 13:12:18 (because outputting \0 with bsmnt_bot has no obvious effect, cat is actually one character shorter in DoFuck) 13:13:30 oerjan: if you're interested in the code and don't want to flood the channel, do this: 13:13:38 ~exec sys.stdout(repr(self.bf7)) 13:13:38 "def bfarg(x,y):\n p=y.group(2)\n a=y.group(3)+unichr(0)\n o=''\n p=p+'!'\n t=[0]*30000\n i=0\n l=0\n while p[i]!='!':\n if p[i]==']' and t[l]!=0:\n c=1\n while c>0:\n i=i-1\n if p[i]==']': c=c+1\n if p[i]=='[': c=c-1\n" 13:13:41 ~exec sys.stdout(repr(self.bf8)) 13:13:42 " if p[i]=='+': t[l]=t[l]+1\n if p[i]=='-': t[l]=t[l]-1\n if p[i]=='<': l=l-1\n if p[i]=='>': l=l+1\n if p[i]=='.': o=o+unichr(t[l])\n if p[i]==',':\n t[l]=ord(a[0])\n a=a[1:]\n i=i+1\n sys.stdout(o)\nself.register_raw(r'\\S+ PRIVMSG (\\S+) :~dof ([^!]*)!?(.*)',bfarg)" 13:14:09 ~help 13:14:40 Oh by the way, I invented a new joke language in my sleep last night. Look at this: 13:14:41 !huh 13:14:49 ? 13:14:50 !ps 13:15:01 oh, EgoBot's down 13:15:20 I'll have to write Huh-language into bsmnt_bot instead, then. 13:16:10 ~exec self.register_raw(r'\S_ PRIVMSG \S+ :~huh', lambda x,y:sys.stdout('Huh?')) 13:16:13 ~huh 13:16:26 ~exec self.register_raw(r'\S+ PRIVMSG \S+ :~huh', lambda x,y:sys.stdout('Huh?')) 13:16:28 ~huh 13:16:28 Huh? 13:17:00 right. 13:17:52 It's an esoteric language because it was already programmed into EgoBot before hand, just nobody noticed before 13:18:08 I don't think it's Turing-complete 13:18:59 omg! 13:19:47 ?? 13:20:03 ~exec sys.stdout(bot) 13:20:03 <__main__.IRCbot instance at 0xb7c9140c> 13:20:10 right... 13:20:45 what did you expect that line to do? 13:20:53 it ought to be possible to use execfile if the scripts is designed to modify bot 13:20:57 *script 13:21:29 for shorter loading 13:22:22 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:22:23 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:22:25 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:22:26 ~exec self.raw_regex_queue.pop() 13:22:35 ~exec execfile('/bot/scripts/bf.py') 13:22:40 ~bf ,[.,]!Testing 13:22:41 Testing 13:22:45 ~exec execfile('/bot/scripts/dof.py') 13:23:05 oerjan: I think execfile works anyway in this case 13:23:32 hm... i suppose so, given the way ~exec is constructed 13:24:15 ~exec sys.stdout(bot) 13:24:16 <__main__.IRCbot instance at 0xb7c9140c> 13:24:17 ~exec sys.stdout(bot) 13:24:17 <__main__.IRCbot instance at 0xb7c9140c> 13:24:18 ~exec sys.stdout(bot) 13:24:19 <__main__.IRCbot instance at 0xb7c9140c> 13:24:21 hmm 13:24:55 * oerjan wonders what confuses SimonRC 13:25:15 * ais523 wonders why SimonRC gave the same command three times 13:25:37 i didn't actually mean to print out the contents, just check that it had the value i thought 13:30:56 ais523: to see if it gave the same answer 13:31:18 I thought it might be something like that 13:33:28 BTW, I take it MechaniQue is Turing-complete? From the wiki description, it looks like it would be easy to write a Minsky machine in it 13:34:04 (It's also the only language other than INTERCAL I know of that uses NEXT for flow control; but it doesn't seem to have a FORGET statement or RESUME for values >1) 13:35:39 BASIC uses NEXT, although not in the same way. 13:36:56 yes, BASIC uses NEXT as a punctuation mark (like } in C or cis in Perligata). A 'NEXT statement' to me would always imply the INTERCAL version 13:37:08 -!- sebbu has joined. 13:37:52 -!- bsmnt_bot has quit (Excess Flood). 13:38:14 whoops, that was me, sorry 13:38:21 but I thought it had been throttled? 13:38:44 * SimonRC throttles ais523. 13:38:56 In the sense of strangling you. 13:39:06 I guessed. 13:39:48 I asked it for all the attributes of the 'self' object and their values, without realising there were quite so many 13:40:56 still, I discovered that 1174566977.4449899 was on its list of currently running commands 13:43:24 so now the only bot we have running is clog? 13:45:21 isn't cmeme here? 13:45:35 yes it is, I missed it 13:46:28 the good news is that for the first time, not all work was lost :) 13:46:39 or so we hope 13:47:18 i don't think the flood protection works for long lines. 13:47:34 only for many short ones 13:47:41 it had split its message over three maximum-length lines and was kicked when it tried to write the fourth 13:47:54 right... 13:48:15 (and not all work has been lost for ages, I normally just copy the most-recently-working commands back out of the logs and type them in again) 13:55:38 of course, #bsmnt_bot_errors isn't logged, so I might have to use a different method to save the experiments 13:57:41 like logging it yourself. 14:08:32 strangely enough, my client's so old and/or primitive it appears not to have a logging function 14:08:46 it doesn't matter though, I'll find a way (copy-and-paste has worked in the past) 14:10:13 I know it's so primitive that I have to identify to nickserv by hand 14:13:56 can't you give a password on startup? that has been supported since the first IRC RFC. 14:15:14 No. The only startup option is to run a JavaScript script, with scant information about how to use that to give a password or to message NickServ 14:15:35 you don't need to message nickserv. i don't. 14:15:57 the ordinary irc password is passed on by the server to nickserv. 14:16:07 you have a choice: message NickServ or give a server password. If you can't give the password, messaging NickServ is given as a workaround 14:16:53 so basically you have a client that is _worse_ than some older ones. 14:17:06 or wait... 14:17:21 are you using a URL for irc login? 14:17:51 it's about 50-50 between using a URL and using /join 14:18:09 there might be a spot in the URL for login/password. 14:19:14 I'll try that now 14:19:20 -!- ais523 has quit ("Testing"). 14:20:26 -!- ais523 has joined. 14:20:45 it didn't work; I got 'invalid IRC URL: (null)' 14:20:56 hm? 14:21:36 I think it had problems trying to parse the resulting URL 14:24:15 Microsoft's website about including username/password in URLs (it's about http, but it's the same for ftp and presumably irc too) is amusing 14:24:23 * webpage 14:24:42 http://support.microsoft.com/kb/834489 14:25:59 it seems there are two workarounds for Microsoft disabling the feature: don't include a username-password pair (which is pretty obvious, really) 14:26:36 and /instructing users/ not to include a username-password pair 14:28:54 i found a draft IRC URL scheme which conspicuously does not include a spot for password, just a request to prompt the user for one. 14:29:06 * SimonRC eats dinner 14:29:20 I suppose putting a password in a URL is a security risk 14:29:36 but probably not much more than sending it over IRC in plaintext 14:32:15 heh, Microsoft's website also has step-by-step instructions for opening the box that the software comes in 14:41:18 hi guys 14:41:34 hello 14:47:23 -!- mtve has quit ("Terminated with extreme prejudice - dircproxy 1.0.5"). 14:47:36 -!- mtve has joined. 15:41:20 -!- felixx has joined. 16:21:21 -!- ais523 has quit. 16:41:50 -!- jix has joined. 16:54:26 -!- ais523 has joined. 17:37:42 -!- felixx has left (?). 17:53:07 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 18:05:51 -!- RodgerTheGreat_ has quit. 18:16:50 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 18:31:30 -!- SevenInchBread has joined. 18:32:38 ...have their been any efforts to convert the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voynich_manuscript into a computer-readable encoding? 18:33:56 I thought that many traditional efforts to solve that assumed that the text itself was irrelevant and the code was encoded in the metadata 18:34:26 some do 18:45:53 SevenInchBread: Your new Dupdog-like language with a name I can't remember or type: do you think Wiki Cyclic Tag would be suitable as a language in it? Your new language provides the framework needed to make it Turing-complete by itself 18:50:32 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 18:51:04 hmmm.... Kallisti? 18:51:27 Well... it's not finished yet... so I have no clue how it will turn out... until someone writes me some interpreters. :) 18:52:47 -!- mule| has left (?). 18:55:47 the problem is that you'll get syntax errors all over the place unless you harmonize all the interpreters. Perhaps only interpreters that don't have syntax errors should be used on any run, so programs can be simple using just 1, or complex using most of them? 18:55:58 syntax errors are impossible. :P 18:56:42 oh well, that means that you /will/ have to use every interpreter on any run, and so whenever a new interpreter's written it'll invalidate all previous programs written in the language 18:56:45 by the way a non-esoteric language (Forth) shares the syntax with kallisit. 18:56:47 kallisti 18:56:59 (well, forth is fairly esoteric, but it's also fairly mainstream) 18:58:37 It's impossible to write a syntax error HOMESPRING (although you can write something that causes the interpreter to generate a temporal paradox), but it's not really suited to how I expect kallisti will end up 18:58:50 s/(HOMESPRING)/in $1/ 18:59:45 there will only be a certain set of interpreters.... it's a callaborative design - not the method in which you program in it. 19:00:54 The basic idea was to create dupdog with a huge number of interpreters instead of two... but I'm too lazy to do that - thus I turned it into a collaboration. :) 19:02:24 define huge 19:02:47 ....anything greater than 2.... 19:02:52 -shrug- 19:03:17 2.1 ? :) 19:05:21 ... 19:05:32 YOU PROGRAMMERS AND YOUR PEDANTICS. 19:05:46 MUST ALL THINGS BE DEFINED?????? 19:08:30 undefined behavior sucks 19:08:30 do it like TMMLPTEALPAITAFNFAL with the list of interpreters changing every day 19:08:44 undefined behaviour is very useful in defining specifications for languages 19:10:12 .... 19:10:55 * SevenInchBread is beginning to become weary of all the strictness entailed in computing... 19:13:36 maybe we should have a forgiving esolang that can withstand small amounts of mistakes by its authors. It would make a change. 19:13:51 s/its authors/people programming it/ 19:15:30 ...no one in "serious" programming language design seems to want this behavior... except like, Perl. I think it would be great to experiment with the idea and turn it into a workable idea. 19:16:35 ideally it would even fix mistakes in the algorithm you were using 19:16:46 a self-healing language 19:17:25 the problem is that it would probably make it difficult to do things it "thinks" are a mistake, unless the syntax is very carefully designed 19:17:54 right... one of the issues with Perl I think... the syntax is all weird because of all the corrective behaviors. 19:18:47 you could just have some sort of 'I really mean this' delimiter that you could use over small sections of code 19:18:52 hm 19:18:57 could work 19:19:53 I prefer the idea of designing syntax to eliminate programmer by either making mistakes more difficult to make or making it easier for the compiler to help the programmer find mistakes before the program can run 19:20:01 *programmer error 19:21:13 eh, I don't care much about the later... but I use a lot of interpreted languages that don't do a lot of nifty compile-time checks. 19:21:36 Just seems natural to me that an error occurs when it's tried... 19:22:33 there was an interesting example in a book about compilers I read once; it was the quadratic formula with one closing bracket missing 19:23:00 the book said that although it was obvious to a human where it went, it wasn't obvious to a computer, because there were 10 places it could legally be put and lead to a non-syntax-error 19:24:02 hmmmm, that's a good point. Computers have a hard time with ambiguity. 19:24:18 ...unless you give them rudimentary artifical intelligence. 19:25:14 has anyone read about the Elephant language? It's got some weird ideas borrow from human intelligence and natural languages. 19:25:28 perhaps set up a learning algorithm that'll pick up a coder's style and use that to guide corrections? 19:25:42 SevenInchBread: link us up 19:28:01 http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/elephant.html 19:31:21 it reminds me of TwoDucks, only it's actually theoretically possible to implement 19:33:29 and it has a "don't" keyword, just like INTERCAL. Wow, it's almost esoteric! 19:34:01 (I suspect it's don't is more practically useful than INTERCAL's (which is redundant except for comments), though). 19:35:33 It reminds me of... programming a human. 19:36:24 only less frustrating 19:36:34 none of this "free will" nonsense 19:36:43 and you don't have to feed programs 19:38:26 I don't know; IRP can be a pretty efficient language sometimes if you're skilled in writing it 19:39:36 as long as you have one or more reliable interpreters, that's very true 19:39:56 Find the greatest prime number! 19:40:29 SYNTAX ERROR: PLEASE INSERT 25 CENTS 19:40:45 .......................where?...... i don't wanna know 19:41:00 lament: there is no greatest prime number. Program complete in ...um... I've lost count. 19:41:50 thanks 19:42:03 Now, find the smallest prime number! :) 19:42:19 lament: using one definition it's 2 19:42:38 but there was a book I read once called 'Maths made difficult' which debated the usual definition of prime 19:42:48 i like the title 19:42:56 By the definition 'a prime is a number with two factors, itself and 1', the only prime is -1 19:42:57 apart from the plural "maths" 19:43:02 which is ridiculous 19:43:19 or british 19:43:24 It was a pretty good book; it was sort of maths from an esoteric perspective 19:44:08 some of it was highly mathematical (it's the only place I've ever seen the formula for solving cubic equations written out _in full_) 19:44:28 cool 19:44:40 but some of it was frivolous (it had in a list of 'Objections to fractions' one based on a misquote from the Bible, and answered with a different misquote from the Bible) 19:45:11 still the word "maths" is ridiculous :) 19:45:55 I generally take any example cited from a fictional work as instantly invalidating a proof. 19:46:00 it's a common abbreviation in English as spoken in England, I think. (The North American abbreviation 'math' sounds strange to me.) 19:46:22 heh @ http://planetmath.org/?op=getobj&from=objects&id=1407 19:46:34 RodgerTheGreat: I think what it did was take lots of arguments of different levels of seriousness, and 'refuted' them with the same level of seriousness 19:46:44 haha 19:46:47 I see 19:47:01 Another fact from the same book: most people know that if you multiply two numbers, you get their product 19:47:04 ais523: just because it's common doesn't make it any less ridiculous :) 19:47:27 and many people know that the numbers being multiplied are called the multiplier and multiplicand 19:47:31 ....it could be... subjective? 19:47:44 likewise, most people know about numerator and denominator for division 19:47:44 ais523: because 'mathematics' is a singular noun 19:47:58 lament: so is 'maths' 19:48:05 (they both end with 's', after all) 19:48:19 however, in an addition the numbers are tha addend and the augend 19:48:29 and in a subtraction the numbers are the minuend and the subtrahend, apparently 19:48:30 ais523: sure, but it's a strange way to shorten 'mathematics' 19:48:44 >.> it's only strange if you've been using "math" for your whole life. 19:48:49 ...like me. 19:48:56 lament: let's not turn IRC in to Usenet here 19:49:02 ais523: i suppose there's no good way to shorten an inherently bizarre noun (singular noun ending in s) 19:49:42 let's shorten it to MM for the time being, then, to avoid the argument 19:49:51 well, I always understood it as "mathematics" referring to a wide body of topics, each covering a specific type of "math" 19:49:59 RodgerTheGreat: well, then you understood it wrong 19:50:05 RodgerTheGreat: because that's not the etymology. 19:50:09 .... 19:50:13 .... 19:50:26 more importantly.... why does it matter? and why must someone always be right or wrong? 19:50:39 usage is occasionally more important than etymology. 19:50:48 I say... 19:50:51 actually wait, maybe you're right 19:51:05 we call mathematics... MATHorgy 19:51:15 ...FROM NOW ON... AS IT IS THE NATURE OF OUR CHARACTERS. 19:51:18 to do so. 19:51:33 "google" is derived from a number's name. However, it's verb-based usage has only a tenuous connection with this meaning 19:51:42 and YES I know the correct spelling is "googol" 19:51:58 hey, numbers are functions in some languages (like my work-in-progress Underload) 19:52:11 SevenInchBread: I support this course of action 19:52:14 when applied to another number, it returns the argument to the power of the function 19:52:27 and when applied to a string, it repeats the string that many times 19:52:42 and when applied to a function, it acts like the corresponding Church numeral would 19:53:04 ...math creates crazy people. 19:53:09 ....I mean, MATHorgy. 19:57:07 stupid google makes it hard to search for 'maths' 19:57:19 it thinks 'math' matches 19:57:38 did you try searching for "maths" ? 19:57:46 in quotes? 19:57:48 ooh 19:57:49 that works 19:57:58 * RodgerTheGreat bows 19:58:39 no useful hits, though 19:58:57 ais523: how do brits shorten 'economics'? 19:59:05 I just searched for "math" limiting it to pages in .uk domains and found no useful hits either 19:59:14 I GROW TIRED OF THE ARRAY OF BYTES. 19:59:28 lament: I don't think they do (I know an economist and they say 'economics' in full) 19:59:34 we need HARDWARE REPRESENTATIONS OF STRUCTURES. 19:59:39 ...in caps 20:00:40 can't think of any singular nouns ending with s that get shortened.... 20:00:46 -!- ais523 has quit ("in case I get caught up in an interesting conversation and miss my bus"). 20:00:59 ...they both make sense to me.. 20:01:30 who both 20:05:45 math and maths 20:06:39 * SimonRC eats dinner 20:06:59 * SimonRC eats dinner 20:16:07 SevenInchBread: 'mathematics' and correspondingly 'maths' makes little sense to me because i'm not a native English speaker 20:16:28 SevenInchBread: and it's really bizarre for a singular noun have a plural ending. 20:17:04 SevenInchBread: it's something like 'mathematica' in all the other languages i'm familiar with. 20:17:25 apparently it's only plural in english and french 20:17:51 I've never actually heard maths used until today... it sounded odd at first, but then in relation to "mathematics" it made sense. 20:19:29 well... mathematics is, grammatically, singular... even though it looks plural. 20:21:56 exactly, it's grammaticaly singular, which is why it's weird for it to have a plural ending. 20:22:39 It's singular in both greek and latin. 20:24:19 mathematics, economics, gymnastics, hueristics, physics, ergonomics, cybernetics, logistics, statistics 20:24:32 exactly 20:24:39 none of those make much sense to me. 20:24:40 ....just a weird convention with... fields of study apparently. 20:25:18 it's a special case... sounds natural to me. :/ 20:25:21 i basically have to mentally change the final 's' to 'a' 20:27:19 very infrequently does the breaking of a "regular" part of English grammar sound strange to me. :P 20:28:05 ...because they're everywhere - the grammatical rules you follow for a word depends mostly on its origin. 20:29:26 analysis? 20:29:47 analysis sounds completely singular to me... where mathematics has a sort of semi-plural sound to it. 20:31:30 bbl 20:31:38 -!- RodgerTheGreat has quit. 20:32:17 "Mathematics is the art of pedantic rigour" and "The mathematics are of vital importance" both sound fine to me (the second one sounds a bit more formal though) 20:35:09 SevenInchBread: yes, the grammatical rules do depend on the origin - and the origin is quite singular 20:35:25 analysis _is_ a singular noun with a singular ending 20:35:31 the plural would be analyses 20:35:48 'is' is a common singular ending 20:35:58 not 'cs' though 20:36:31 heh... I would divide it at "ics" myself. :) 20:36:46 ics 20:36:51 sure 20:37:12 -shrug- doesn't matter much 20:37:30 I define grammatically correct as semantically meaningful. 20:38:02 if it conveys an idea - even a bizzare one - the grammatic formation doesn't matter much. 20:39:01 ...even "colorful ideas sleep furiously" conveys an idea... 20:39:04 er... 20:39:12 colorless green ideas sleep furiously. 20:40:17 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo 20:41:42 * SevenInchBread ...has a fetish for wordplay. 20:46:06 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_homophonous_phrases --strangely hilarious 21:12:39 hmm... interesting... anyone ever heard of the Synthesis kernel? 21:12:52 It's an extremly fast OS kernel that makes heavy use of self-modification. 21:17:23 l 21:36:15 well, considering you were told about it in this channel... 21:39:02 oh. haha, don't remember that. 21:54:17 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 21:54:38 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 22:30:35 -!- jix has quit ("Bitte waehlen Sie eine Beerdigungnachricht"). 22:34:17 hmmm 22:35:01 -!- bsmnt_bot has joined. 22:35:09 -!- bsmnt_bot has quit (Remote closed the connection). 22:36:05 -!- bsmnt_bot has joined. 22:51:16 -!- SevenInchBread has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 22:52:50 -!- SevenInchBread_ has joined. 22:53:19 -!- SevenInchBread_ has changed nick to SevenInchBread. 22:57:30 hmmm... I think it makes more sense to represent concatenations as trees... instead of just returning the combined result. 22:57:43 especially with things like and/or 23:10:37 -!- UpTheDownstair has joined. 23:12:46 -!- UpTheDownstair has quit (Client Quit). 23:20:21 -!- sebbu2 has joined. 23:22:54 hmm 23:23:09 goedel's incompleteness theorem proves that humans are super-turing 23:23:13 -!- RodgerTheGreat has joined. 23:25:38 because axiomatic systems are equivalent to turing machines, and humans can derive results not possible from axiomatic systesm 23:27:33 -!- nazgjunk has quit (Connection timed out). 23:32:58 -!- GregorR has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 23:33:31 bsmntbombdood: what results? 23:33:50 dunno 23:33:55 ... 23:34:21 that's a key element of your proof, unless your proof is supposed to be super-turing too 23:35:12 "Humans are super-turing, because i said so." - "But that is illogical!" - "That's right. Humans are above logic." 23:38:53 -!- nazgjunk has joined. 23:39:11 -!- sebbu has quit (Connection timed out).