00:04:26 If a program does nothing but output a single character many times, running it is probably a bad way of determining how many times it outputs that character. 00:04:46 * warrie_ takes a look at BF busy beaver 00:26:19 warrie_, hrrm? 00:26:45 well bf is deterministic depending on input 00:26:51 there is no random operator 00:27:01 so the same program should give the same count 00:27:08 when given the same input 00:27:19 Hmm... found an interesting blog when I tried to find the BFBB... http://eigenratios.blogspot.com/ 00:27:41 MizardX, seen it before once 00:27:47 but what is eigenratio? 00:28:08 old :P 00:28:17 -!- ab5tract has joined. 00:28:31 Eigen values is some special constants that comes from matrices, and a few other systems. 00:28:35 How would you determine the amount of output given by a program like +[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[->++<]>[-..]? 00:28:41 MizardX, hm ok 00:28:59 warrie_, run it with a given input? 00:29:06 wait till it finishes 00:29:27 doing it otherwise sounds like it would solve the halting problem 00:29:38 you may be able to solve that specific case however 00:29:47 AnMaster: suppose there are 1,000,000 [->++<]>s. 00:29:57 2^15 00:30:09 characters will be printed 00:30:11 warrie_, hm I think that may be well defined 00:30:21 Would you run it, or perform some simple calculation and end up at 2^1000001? 00:30:21 that one is easy in fact 00:30:35 yes since you can see much much every [->++<]> adds 00:30:56 then figure out the rate for decrementing 00:31:35 warrie_, but the general case of bf programs.. wouldn't that solve the halting program? 00:31:55 Yes. 00:32:15 Well, maybe not. 00:32:33 really? 00:32:56 * AnMaster waits for warrie_ to explain himself 00:34:46 I find it likely at the moment that it's possible to take any program that outputs n (possibly infinitely many) characters and produce one that runs faster and outputs a number of characters of which n is a function. 00:34:55 Modulo formality and all. 00:35:59 Obviously, it's possible to run the [->++<]> program, note the number of characters it outputs, and produce the null program, with the function being a constant function. 00:38:48 -!- Sgeo has joined. 00:38:49 http://www.getacoder.com/projects/bug_finder_92913.html 00:41:57 That there is a computable function F whose input is a program that outputs n characters and whose output is n if n is finite, where F runs faster than the trivial function satisfying this criterion. 00:42:01 That being the "run it" function. 00:42:49 Hmm, that won't do. 00:43:15 Or maybe it will. 00:44:29 -!- Corun has quit ("Leaving"). 01:17:52 Okay, my ORK interpreter now runs *all* demo programs correctly, including the Kipple interpreter. 01:18:21 I've also added implementation notes and bugs. 01:18:31 http://www.formauri.es/personal/pgimeno/temp/esoteric/orkdemo.php 01:22:48 -!- Corun has joined. 01:29:14 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 01:50:13 Eigenratio for the Conway's Life self-interpreter: 5760. ("That's the number of generations that need to be run in Dean Bell's unit cell at level N in order to emulate a single generation in level N+1.") 01:51:15 -!- olsner has quit ("Leaving"). 01:54:13 -!- ab5tract has quit. 01:58:51 I prefer the eigenratio 5760*500*500, since each big generation-cell is that many little generation-cells. 02:14:12 -!- ab5tract has joined. 03:08:57 -!- ab5tract has quit. 03:47:03 -!- Organ_used_homos has joined. 03:49:56 Better description of eigenratio: http://eigenratios.blogspot.com/2006_08_18_archive.html (He was the one who named it) 03:52:11 Yay :D 03:52:45 Organ_used_homos: Please describe the reason for your nickname with NO DETAILS AT ALL 04:00:31 Here's an explanation with no detail : It was on another server. 04:00:37 -!- Organ_used_homos has changed nick to Slereah_. 04:00:59 Please include precisely one more level of detail. 04:01:43 It was a joke. 04:03:57 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 04:07:20 -!- psygnisfive has joined. 04:47:38 -!- ab5tract has joined. 04:47:45 'sup dude 04:48:32 -!- ab5tract has quit (Client Quit). 05:22:26 Mmm, supper. 05:22:32 * GregorR is a sup dude. 05:22:47 GET IT? GET IT? IT'S A PUN. 05:24:33 DO YOU WANT MORE DETAILS NOW 05:45:51 * GregorR randomly decided to look at JSMIPS again. 05:46:49 + "today" 05:47:44 JSMIPS? 05:48:17 -!- warrie_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 05:49:01 Slereah_: http://codu.org/jsmips/ 05:53:16 oklopol! 06:11:51 -!- Sgeo has quit (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)). 06:51:55 -!- GreaseMonkey has joined. 07:38:51 -!- sebbu2 has joined. 07:39:59 -!- olsner has joined. 07:58:08 -!- sebbu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 07:58:09 -!- sebbu2 has changed nick to sebbu. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:51:02 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("I'm a thaasophobic."). 08:56:08 -!- nooga_ has quit ("Lost terminal"). 09:07:35 -!- oerjan has joined. 09:14:29 -!- olsner has quit ("Leaving"). 09:36:07 -!- trave has joined. 09:55:07 -!- trave_ has joined. 09:56:11 -!- trave has quit (Nick collision from services.). 09:56:13 -!- trave_ has changed nick to trave. 10:09:30 -!- trave has quit (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)). 10:23:56 -!- trave has joined. 10:50:10 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving"). 11:05:21 -!- SimonRC has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 11:10:30 -!- Corun has joined. 11:23:45 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 11:46:08 -!- Corun has joined. 11:53:05 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 12:01:18 -!- nooga has joined. 12:01:23 shiiit 12:01:27 i forgot C 12:03:26 -!- trave_ has joined. 12:04:10 -!- trave has quit (Nick collision from services.). 12:04:36 -!- trave_ has changed nick to trave. 12:07:25 -!- trave has quit (Client Quit). 12:12:22 GregorR: impressive! (jsmips) 12:14:30 Orc looks cool. 12:14:41 Maybe I can do sum pi-calc with it :o 12:16:15 -!- nooga has quit (Remote closed the connection). 12:37:18 -!- nooga has joined. 12:37:27 clock() does not work :C 12:38:32 What about cock() 12:38:38 How does it not work? 12:40:52 http://www.ladyada.net/make/fuzebox/ 12:40:54 fucking WANT 12:51:31 4K ram? good for 99bob and stuff but quite limited otherwise 12:53:35 "NTSC RCA composite and S-video out (PAL not supported at this time)" 12:53:36 well 12:53:54 that limits it's usefulness here in Europe 13:00:41 pgimeno: it's for 8-bit games 13:00:43 see the video 13:14:27 it seems that a fully functional VM is pretty hard... 13:14:33 you need to pass everything to functions to get it working 13:14:38 but you have to put the functions SOMEWHERE 13:14:48 but that's mutation of the machine state 13:17:35 Hm. 13:17:38 Machine state. 13:17:46 I for one welcome our new robot overlord. 13:19:29 heh 13:29:56 ais523: appealing a cfj because of schildt 13:29:58 THAT i can support 13:30:09 ehird: wrong channel, but yes 13:30:23 no, schildt's programming is esoteric 13:30:24 :P 13:36:51 -!- oklokok has joined. 13:39:34 o 13:41:38 btw, http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/16-12/ff_kaminsky?currentPage=all 13:41:41 ^ interesting. 13:44:50 cheap sensation 13:45:09 the attack is absolutely not cheap 13:50:17 The article, on the other hand... 13:50:20 "The vulnerability gave him the power to transfer millions out of bank accounts worldwide." 13:50:52 Well, yes. 13:50:56 But it's entertaining. 13:51:12 Who reads wired for serious, somber articles? 13:52:01 -!- oklopol has quit (Connection timed out). 14:03:22 -!- Mony has joined. 14:04:12 plop 14:05:18 Yo 14:05:37 salut Slereah_ ^^ 14:05:59 Comment vas-tu, Mona. 14:06:07 Mona :O 14:06:16 Ã§a va 14:06:17 et toi ? 14:06:50 De même. 14:07:00 Je dis Mona car c'est le nom des chats de 2chan. 14:07:27 c'est aussi le nom d'une femme 14:07:32 or, je ne suis pas une femme :D 14:09:19 http://membres.lycos.fr/bewulf/Divers6/Shii2.jpg 14:09:31 (Mona vient de la police utilisé pour les faire) 14:10:24 \o/ 14:12:05 The scary part is that I understood half of that conversation/ 14:13:14 Well, it did involve kittuns 14:39:41 who wants to think about a purely functional vm and how it's impossible 14:50:18 Virtual machine? 14:50:31 Also why would it be impossible? :o 14:57:24 Slereah_: yes, and because to do anything you have to modify e.g. the call stack or similar 14:57:26 le francophonic invasion 14:57:29 it's impossible to have a VM that only appends 14:57:30 aaaa 14:57:30 without mutating 14:57:39 because at the heart, its based on memory which mutates 14:58:46 ehird : Only if you consider every memory-part of the machine as the memory. 14:59:02 Plus, imagine if your machine just rearranged its connections! 14:59:14 Slereah_: well, show me a spec for a purely-functional (no mutation whatsoever) vm that lets you add two numbers 14:59:18 what connections do you mean? 14:59:18 i'll show the mutation. 14:59:32 BETWEEN THE COMPONENTS 14:59:39 Wires and such. 14:59:43 a 14:59:49 Virtual ones. 15:00:09 Also 15:00:16 I am a functional machine D: 15:00:24 Slereah_: Show the specccccc :P 15:00:27 Give me a program, I'll interpret it for you 15:00:58 filthy ocaml junkie you are 15:01:08 Slereah_ doesn't know ocaml 15:01:10 as far as I know 15:01:11 so shush 15:01:21 he 15:01:22 's a scheme lad. 15:01:26 I know Ocaml 15:01:30 aha! 15:01:30 I just don't use it 15:01:45 Although I'm curious about picaml 15:01:52 Also orc on the esowiki 15:01:55 I am intrigued. 15:02:07 To pick a single point out there, I'm not seeing why you couldn't have an immutable call stack. 15:02:42 fizzie: how would you call a function? 15:02:50 it's immutable. you can't change the call stack. 15:02:54 it must not change. 15:03:19 You can construct a new call stack, though. 15:03:30 Yes indeed. Whatever that means. 15:03:30 fizzie: Where do you put it? 15:03:32 You can't replace it. 15:03:35 With the new one. 15:03:52 I just assume it means something along "Using memory-part as not the memory itself" 15:04:24 fizzie: You can all very well construct a new call stack, but it just sits there doing nothing. 15:04:31 You can't put it into VM memory; it's immutable. 15:05:50 You can pass it to the function. 15:06:05 It's more of a continuation than a call stack in that case, though. 15:06:13 fizzie: Pass it to what function? 15:06:19 You can't construct a function, it has nowhere to go in memory. 15:06:49 You need to make a function then pass a reference to the vm so that it calls it. 15:07:00 But making a function and getting a reference requires putting a function in memory, thus mutating memory. 15:07:09 vm-memory that is 15:07:25 Huh? I assume you have something that can allocate new memory, yes. 15:07:40 fizzie: Yes, but the _in-vm memory cannot change_. 15:07:45 that is the whole point: it's purely functional 15:07:56 you cannot _mutate anything existing_ that exists inside the VM 15:08:20 it's not about implementation 15:08:23 it's about the deisgn of the vm itself 15:08:27 Uh... cons'ing new storage does not sound like mutation to me. 15:08:28 all code in the vm is purely functional, that is 15:08:43 fizzie: that requires changing the VM's memory. 15:08:47 changing anything within the VM is not allowed. 15:09:18 It just means giving it new storage. I'm not sure why your completely functional VM would have mutable memory anyway. 15:09:29 ... when did I say it would? 15:09:52 fizzie: Since I absolutely cannot see how it is possible: how would you spec a VM that mutates nothing within the VM, that lets you add two integers together? 15:10:24 I think there must be some issue of definition mismatch somewhere. 15:10:38 most likely. 15:10:43 But how would you spec such a trivial thing? 15:11:42 I assume a purely functional VM would have (wrt. memory) a single primitive like (cons), which would not be considered mutation. 15:12:04 fizzie: Example? 15:12:15 Plus, why are you always thinking of Lisp? 15:12:25 It's not like it's the only functional thingamagig. 15:12:32 Umm. 15:12:35 Since when am I? 15:12:37 Okay, a single primitive like malloc, then, if you want it to sound low-levelish. 15:12:38 Also. 15:12:41 Lisp is not purely functional. 15:12:50 Not the language, ehird 15:12:53 The original lisp! 15:12:53 I think that was directed to me. I know it most, that's why. 15:13:01 The lisp that is purely functional 15:13:05 fizzie: I'm just asking how you can have a functional VM that lets you add two integers together. I'm not sure you can. 15:13:57 I'm not going to start speccing things. But it's a *virtual machine*, you can freely select what sort of primitives you provide. 15:14:16 I do not think you can create a virtual machine that is able to operate without any mutation whatsoever. 15:14:30 You've basically just said "you're wrong", soooooo... 15:18:21 Your VM can have "call this object as a function" as a primitive, for one thing. You don't need to construct any call stacks or do any mutation "inside the VM" to call a function, then. 15:18:30 fizzie: how do you make an object 15:18:40 push to a stack? ding, you just mutated 15:18:45 put in a register? dinnnnnnggggggggggg 15:18:48 put in vm memory? DINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG 15:19:00 With another primitive that allocates new storage. 15:19:13 Ah, and what does it return? How do you use the storage? 15:19:39 Okay, allocates and initializes to whatever you want. 15:19:46 Immutable storage, that is. 15:19:51 fizzie: Variable sized objects? 15:19:54 How do you initialize them? 15:20:20 You don't need variable-sized objects, but I don't see why that would be a problem. 15:20:32 fizzie: In the actual bytecode. 15:20:43 How do you initialize an object with a variable sized initialization? 15:21:09 The function call primitive can easily accept a variable number of parameters. 15:21:25 ok, let's look at this example: 15:21:30 Or the storage-allocation-and-initialization primitive. 15:21:32 {...} call 15:21:32 And you can build variable-sized objects out of fixed-size objects, anyway. 15:21:41 that {...} has to mutate, to put it on the stack or similar 15:22:41 Huh? If it's a parameter to call, why would you need to put it on a stack? 15:23:04 fizzie: {...} being a function 15:23:13 Sure, why not. 15:23:15 Besides, how can call take variable parameters? 15:23:27 I'm talking at bytecode-level here 15:23:36 It's a virtual machine, why couldn't your "bytecode" do whatever you want? 15:23:59 i'm lost 15:24:36 fizzie: Obviously my Lisp interpreter is a virtual machine. 15:24:39 After all, it runs programs. 15:24:42 A completely functional VM (with primitives like "apply") will probably resemble a functional-paradigm language quite a lot, since indeed you don't have registers or anything, just parameters and return values. 15:25:08 Well, yes. 15:26:23 PICKLE SURPRISE! 15:28:02 -!- oerjan has joined. 15:28:33 y 15:29:00 e 15:29:26 s 15:31:04 fizzie: I mean, a VM bytecode isn't exactly going to be efficient if it's a nested tree ala lisp. 15:31:15 Yet it's kind-of hard to make a stack based VM that doesn't mutate a stack. 15:31:32 Yes; if you base a VM on mutable concepts, it is indeed hard to make one that doesn't use mutation. 15:32:15 Well, yes, but the point is... 15:32:30 If you make your VM use arbitrary nested trees of a few primitives... you've invented Lisp 15:32:32 A functional VM like that would not probably be very "low-level", which I guess is quite understandable, given that "low-level" pretty much means "close to the underlying system", which is very mutation-rich. 15:32:36 (And yet most lisps compile down to a vm, heh.) 15:33:00 fizzie: The idea is, it's a low-level thing, except the system it's being low-level on is a mystical immutable computer. 15:33:23 I want a mystical computer 15:33:28 ehird: a VM can implement a purely functional abstraction even if it isn't purely functional at the physical level (which nothing in our universe can be, presumably) 15:33:35 well, duh, oerj 15:33:36 oerjan: 15:33:44 but...that's not the point 15:33:53 the _VM WORLD_ has to be immutable 15:34:02 i.e. everything you can access via the VM code has to be immutable in every way 15:34:06 VM code = code running on it 15:34:56 ehird: you can do something monadic, the access calculates the next world from the previous 15:35:07 yes, but that's not exactly very functional in spirit 15:35:19 i'm talking more the lambda-calculus type 15:35:49 combonotors :o 15:35:57 Well, you can probably make a purely functional abstraction that's on a "lower level"; you can easily get rid of abitrarily nested trees, at least. (As long as you allow constructing those with the cons-like operation.) 15:36:07 ehird: i am reminded slightly of reversible turing machines 15:36:36 fizzie: The problem is trees in general; it's not very efficient. 15:36:42 the connection being that it is hard to remove information from those, since you need to uncalculate it 15:36:54 cons 1 (cons 2 nil) vs nil 2 cons 1 cons 15:37:19 * oerjan should mention that he is not entirely sober, since that might explain something 15:38:04 Also: 15:38:11 THe former needs a call stack. 15:38:25 Yes, if you want something that's efficient to execute a conventional computer, you'd probably best use a VM that's close to it. 15:38:28 So now you've got something even less like a VM; CPS-transformed lisp. 15:38:36 I'm not really interested in efficiency. 15:38:38 Just low-levelity. 15:39:28 ehird: a kind of graph machine, where graphs grow like crystals, but generated parts of crystals cannot be changed 15:39:38 oerjan: that, except lower-level :-P 15:39:46 crystals are low-level 15:41:09 isn't it muriel or something that only allows you to copy information forward? that's almost immutable 15:41:27 I think so 15:41:32 Hm. 15:41:33 No. 15:41:37 Like SMITH, Muriel has no traditional control structures. Instead, Muriel has a command to replace the currently running Muriel program with a given string, and run that instead. This leads to a programming method where a program must quine itself in order to perform any sort of loop. 15:41:50 maybe it was SMITH 15:43:01 hm seems so 15:44:22 [[. It has no jumps whatsoever; the instruction pointer can only be incremented, and only by one instruction at a time. As a substitute for loops, the language allows code to be copied forward where it will be executed in the future.]] 15:44:23 Kind of. 15:46:00 also there's Elephant (barely non-esoteric) 15:47:29 where everything about the past can be referenced 15:47:49 ah, that's mccarthy's isn't it? 15:47:51 not low-level, of course 15:48:06 yeah 15:48:30 Slereah_ doesn't know ocaml 15:48:38 impossible! he's french after all 15:49:50 see, what i'm planning on implementing is a high-level smalltalk-alike, except it's purely functional, and prototype-based 15:50:36 Is ocaml Frenh? :o 15:52:00 it's developed by INRIA and Xavier Leroy iirc 15:52:06 Normal people would just do a "traditional" VM that's just a bit more functionally-oriented than the rest. 15:52:09 Like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECD_machine was 15:52:47 fizzie: well this is ehird we are talking about 15:53:05 Yes, and this is #esoteric. 15:53:09 To hell with traditional things, I want purely functional! :-P 15:53:25 I don't actually care if it's slow, Squeak is a dog anyway - besides, I'm planning on writing the VM in the language itself 15:53:27 the compiler too. 15:53:35 #esoteric can only do purely dysfunctional 15:53:36 (As well as a bootstrap in-C vm&compiler.) 15:53:48 (But beyond that...) 15:55:29 Isn't dysfunctional the unlambda/BF mix? 15:58:49 0x29A 15:59:03 but there is no reason we couldn't have more 15:59:12 Why that name by the way? 15:59:21 hint: it's hex 15:59:21 It doesn't roll well on your toungue. 15:59:29 Hex for what? 15:59:44 sheesh 15:59:46 666 15:59:52 Oh. 16:00:02 ... 16:00:03 Wait 16:00:08 What about the other one. 16:00:20 huh? 16:00:38 wait 16:01:11 THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE ... oh wait i just claimed the opposite didn't i 16:01:41 I recall some language called 0x29C or something 16:01:46 Related to the first 16:02:29 http://esolangs.org/wiki/0x29C 16:02:33 Yah 16:02:36 how observant 16:02:41 668? 16:02:46 anyway, current thinking: I need to figure out how to do a purely-functional, applicationy-language without having a lisp-like (nested (tree)) 16:03:01 Why 668 :o 16:03:10 Slereah_, you said 0x29C 16:03:43 thus you said 668 16:03:47 Yes. 16:03:48 I know. 16:03:53 But why is it called 668. 16:04:18 i say potayto, you say 0xP0TAHT0 16:04:28 oerjan, what base is that 16:04:47 it isn't valid hex expressed in the common 0x way 16:04:49 at leas 16:04:51 least* 16:05:05 AnMaster: it's base humor 16:05:21 wait doesn't "base humor" mean something else? 16:05:33 the phrase sounds familiar 16:05:52 and AnMaster wins! 16:05:52 s/wait /wait, / 16:05:59 oerjan, eh? 16:06:17 you detected a pun. that still keeps surprising me. 16:06:25 especially when not sober 16:06:34 I'm always sober 16:06:41 oerjan, and, what is "base humor"? 16:06:43 but i'm not 16:06:43 I can't remember 16:06:47 except having heard the word 16:06:48 oerjan: why aren't you sober? 16:07:19 because an old friend came to town and bought a bottle of red wine 16:07:43 drink in moderation, or better yet, don't drink at all 16:08:04 it's the first time i drink since June. i think that's plenty of moderation. 16:08:24 AnMaster: why? drinking a lot is great for ideas, drinking a lot if great for getting things done that are not fun to do 16:08:40 *drinking a little to the first one 16:08:46 ,... 16:08:48 AnMaster: low-level humor, btw, iirc 16:08:50 the fucking latter one i mean 16:09:03 -!- oklokok has changed nick to oklopol. 16:09:09 afk for the rest of the evening 16:09:27 bie 16:13:58 this Orc thing, how is it esoteric? 16:15:57 not 16:15:58 it seems 16:16:17 isn't Orc a bit old? 16:16:22 * oerjan goes on a blanking rampage 16:16:39 delete, don't blank 16:16:39 :p 16:16:58 bottle of red wine? 16:17:08 isn't vodka beter for blanking? ;p 16:17:36 s/et/ett/ 16:17:41 possibly 16:18:34 hm we don't seem to have a deletion request template 16:19:04 you're an op 16:19:06 just delete it 16:19:26 i'm not 16:19:44 dang 16:19:48 oh 16:20:06 i have returned from breslavia todays morning and had no sleep 16:21:01 i know, it's easy to make that assumption from my air of wisdom and authority 16:21:26 correct 16:21:37 oerjan, why do you act sober when not sober? 16:21:49 i guess it's starting to wear off 16:22:46 it was only half a bottle after all 16:23:34 half a litre per capita is the definition of nothing, as we say in Poland 16:23:57 (vodka ofc) 16:24:05 if i wasn't seriously out of training it would probably have been nothing to me too 16:24:30 heh, I can't drink 16:24:37 maybe a beer sometimes 16:24:42 but not too much 16:24:57 ah, end of work, bbl 16:24:59 -!- nooga has quit ("Lost terminal"). 16:59:49 -!- AquaLoqua has joined. 17:07:47 -!- Slereah has joined. 17:10:30 -!- AquaLoqua has quit ("Dana"). 17:16:22 -!- kar8nga has joined. 17:22:38 http://esolangs.org/wiki/1cnis <<< doesn't perl have a "use" for getting bignums? 17:22:56 use fairly_big_numbers; 17:23:09 yes. 17:23:44 well yeah that wasn't really a question 17:25:09 -!- Slereah_ has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host)). 17:27:17 THEN WHY DID YOU USE A QUESTION MARK DUMBASS 17:27:28 i mean, hi 17:27:33 -!- MizardX has quit (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)). 17:28:15 -!- MizardX has joined. 17:45:33 -!- Slereah_ has joined. 17:54:26 oerjan: i like you when you're drunk :D 17:54:32 well i guess you aren't anymore 17:54:52 i'm not half as think as you drunk i am 17:55:28 -!- Corun has joined. 18:03:04 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 18:04:14 -!- Slereah has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 19:03:45 -!- warrie has joined. 19:27:51 oko 19:59:02 bye 19:59:04 -!- Mony has quit ("Join the Damnation now !"). 20:07:36 -!- Slereah has joined. 20:18:28 -!- Slereah_ has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 20:27:08 -!- Slereah_ has joined. 20:30:46 -!- olsner has joined. 20:36:44 ehird: concatenative 20:36:53 bsmntbombdood: wat 20:37:09 anyway, current thinking: I need to figure out how to do a purely-functional, applicationy-language without having a lisp-like (nested (tree)) 20:37:16 except: 20:37:23