←2009-12-05 2009-12-06 2009-12-07→ ↑2009 ↑all
00:25:47 -!- OxE6 has joined.
00:41:03 -!- oerjan has joined.
00:44:01 <oerjan> hm, the logs have changed their timezone...
00:47:12 <oerjan> looks like they moved to china...
00:47:28 <oerjan> it's either that, or perth
00:48:37 <oerjan> no wait, perth would have daylight saving
00:50:12 <oerjan> oh wait
00:50:28 <oerjan> wikipedia is confusing. as is perth.
00:50:36 <OxE6> oranges are too
00:50:46 <oerjan> "A referendum held on May 19 2009 concluded that daylight saving will not be held in the future."
00:54:50 <augur> lol wut
00:55:16 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
00:55:32 <oerjan> ok there _may_ be a few other insignificant countries in that time zone
01:11:46 -!- jpc has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
01:28:14 -!- kar8nga has joined.
01:37:50 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving").
02:04:53 <oklofok> ehird: I wonder how draw() will do for more complex expressions. <<< actually it's pretty simple to do it, basically you just do dynamic programming on expressions, and for each, store the size of the bounding box for the pic, combining them is just a matter of trivial.
02:09:17 <oklofok> uorygl: Remind me why putting things next to each other means multiplication rather than addition or something. <<< it's because of a(b + c) = ab + ac; a + bc = (a + b)(a + c) looks too aggressive!
02:09:57 <AnMaster> oklofok, the latter one can't be correct. err...
02:10:18 <AnMaster> wait, was that with no operator = + ?
02:10:34 <AnMaster> no you use + too
02:13:36 <oklofok> uorygl: The thing about theorems is that in general, they're easier to verify than to find in the first place. <<< yes, but that's not what mathematica can do, it can *use* the theorem.
02:14:19 <AnMaster> oklofok, your client uses : for what someone said?
02:14:22 <AnMaster> it's confusing
02:15:02 <AnMaster> oklofok: because it is often used to address someone (like this, though I set my client to use , normally for tab completion)
02:17:44 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined.
02:18:22 <AnMaster> oklofok, anyway, how is a + bc = (a + b)(a + c) supposed to work? What was the implicit operator there?
02:19:02 <AnMaster> none of +-/* works
02:20:00 <AnMaster> <ehird> Oh well, all I want is a fun symbolic computation environment that isn't really weird like Mathematica and isn't really archaic like Axiom and the like.
02:20:00 <AnMaster> <ehird> And Maxima.
02:20:01 <AnMaster> hm
02:20:05 <AnMaster> what is wrong with maxima?
02:20:39 <oklofok> ehird: Uh, why not? <<< because there is a countable amount of pairs like that, consider a base 257 number, each function can be considered a distinct number in that base => at most |N| functions
02:22:29 <oklofok> AnMaster: yes, it's confusing
02:22:47 <oklofok> it confused someone just the other day
02:23:06 <oklofok> AnMaster: oklofok, anyway, how is a + bc = (a + b)(a + c) supposed to work? What was the implicit operator there? <<< reversing addition and multiplication
02:23:53 <oklofok> anyway, that starts looking natural after doing a bit of boolean algebra, it isn't exactly inferior in any way
02:24:29 <AnMaster> oklofok, ah yeah
02:24:38 <AnMaster> oklofok, so + means "times"?
02:24:39 <AnMaster> then
02:25:15 <oklofok> yeah that's just distributivity of * over +, a(b + c) = ab + ac
02:25:38 <AnMaster> oklofok, so you say "(a + b)(a + c)" would be same as normal "ac+ab"?
02:25:48 <AnMaster> because then you missed one c above
02:26:00 <AnMaster> I think
02:26:29 <AnMaster> or maybe not
02:26:56 <oklofok> if xy = yx, then yes
02:27:07 <oklofok> otherwise just ab+ac
02:27:27 <AnMaster> oklofok, just that I think it should be "ac" not "a" in the first term in: a + bc = (a + b)(a + c)
02:27:42 <AnMaster> or maybe not
02:27:56 <AnMaster> this uncommon notation sure is confusing!
02:28:43 <AnMaster> oklofok, oh wait, you said boolean algebra?
02:29:47 <oklofok> ab + bc would be (a + b)(b + c) in normal notation = (a + b)(c + b) = ac + ab + bc + b^2, which in reversed notation is (a + c)(a + b)(b + c)(b + b)
02:29:50 <oklofok> so no, that's not the same
02:29:58 <oklofok> i mean that's not what i meant
02:30:26 <oklofok> if you reverse notations, reversed a + bc is normal a(b + c) = ab + ac, which is reversed (a + b)(a + c)
02:30:38 <oklofok> and in boolean algebra, it's directly a rule
02:30:45 <AnMaster> so that is a V (b ^ c) = (a V b) ^ (a V c) which seems.... almost but not quite correct? (^ doesn't work too well there... but can't be bothered to find the unicode codepoint)
02:31:08 <oklofok> that's right
02:31:56 <AnMaster> oklofok, I always had problems remembering that law: if it was ^ or V that went between them
02:31:59 <oklofok> if you use ^ and V, it's less confusing because the symmetry is more visible
02:32:04 <oklofok> AnMaster: both.
02:32:24 <oklofok> everything that is true in boolean algebra is true if you reverse them
02:32:25 <AnMaster> oklofok, well yeah but I mean if: a V (b ^ c) = (a V b) ^ (a V c) or V (b ^ c) = (a ^ b) V (a ^ c)
02:32:35 <oklofok> and reverse constant 1's and 0's
02:32:38 <AnMaster> oklofok, ^
02:33:11 <AnMaster> s/or /or a /
02:33:11 <oklofok> oh
02:33:32 <oklofok> alright think of it like this
02:33:58 <oklofok> in "a V (b ^ c)", you're doing "a and (expression of b and c)"
02:34:17 <oklofok> then you just do the "a and" thing inside the expression instead of doing it to the result
02:34:31 <oklofok> and you get expression of (a and b) and (a and c)
02:34:32 <oklofok> well
02:34:33 <oklofok> okay
02:34:42 <AnMaster> hm
02:34:54 <oklofok> i'm not sure that's helpful, i just think of it as outside => inside
02:34:54 <AnMaster> err
02:35:00 <AnMaster> well that is and in both cases
02:35:05 <AnMaster> this was mixing and and or
02:35:27 <AnMaster> <oklofok> in "a V (b ^ c)", you're doing "a and (expression of b and c)" <-- is actually: a or (b and c)
02:35:29 <oklofok> well "a V (b ^ c) = (a ^ b) V (a ^ c)" <<< this here makes no sense
02:35:53 <oklofok> oh sorry
02:36:19 <oklofok> a ^ (b ^ c) = (a ^ b) ^ (a ^ c) is also a valid rule
02:36:37 <AnMaster> oklofok, well yes. But that again isn't the same as discussed here
02:36:53 <AnMaster> because it was mixing ^ and V
02:37:57 <AnMaster> oklofok, this is the distributivity stuff I'm talking about.
02:38:11 <AnMaster> I think it is probably a V (b ^ c) = (a V b) ^ (a V c) then
02:38:37 <oklofok> yes, the point is the expression does not change
02:38:44 <AnMaster> oklofok, well yes...
02:38:45 <oklofok> i thought that was still clear from what i said, but apparently not
02:39:07 <AnMaster> oklofok, it is just something I trouble memorizing for tests and such.
02:39:11 <AnMaster> I had*
02:39:31 <oklofok> hmm.. you do know a(b + c) = ab + ac right?
02:39:58 <oklofok> i mean that's really the exact same rule, it's just in boolean algebra you can put * = and, + = or, or just as well + = and, * = or
02:40:03 <AnMaster> oklofok, well yes, that is trivial in normal math. the issue is in boolean algebra and "whatever the English name is for the ^ and V notation"
02:40:45 <AnMaster> hm
02:41:36 <oklofok> you have a(b + c) = ab + ac, put ^=*, V=+ and you get a ^ (b V c) = (a ^ b) V (a ^ c)
02:41:49 <AnMaster> hm okay
02:41:59 <AnMaster> oklofok, that was most helpful indeed
02:43:01 <AnMaster> oklofok, but (a+b)(c+d) doesn't work the same as in "normal" math does it?
02:43:42 <oklofok> (a+b)(c+d) meaning (a V b) ^ (c V d) or what do you mean?
02:43:49 <AnMaster> and what about (a+b)(a-b) = aa-bb
02:43:56 <AnMaster> oklofok, well yes
02:44:12 <AnMaster> oklofok, which would expand to (in normal math):
02:44:30 <oklofok> it works the same, (a+b)(c+d) = a(c+d) + b(c+d) = ac + ad + bc + bd
02:44:36 <AnMaster> hm
02:44:39 <AnMaster> okay
02:45:16 <oklofok> BUT also ab + ac = (a + ac)(b + ac) = (a + a)(a + c)(b + a)(b + c)
02:45:44 <AnMaster> oklofok, I'm pretty sure rules don't work the same the other way though. not (a V b) = (not a) ^ (not b)
02:45:50 <oklofok> again probably easier to see how that works if you use ^ and V, i'm just not used to the notation
02:45:56 <AnMaster> for one thing, how would not translate?
02:46:01 <oklofok> (a+b)(a-b) = aa-bb <<< is this an axiom?
02:46:03 <oklofok> it's not.
02:46:22 <oklofok> and what's -b anyway?
02:46:30 <AnMaster> oklofok, hm?
02:46:30 <oklofok> -b is usually an element such that b + (-b) = 0
02:46:40 <oklofok> these do not exist in boolean algebra
02:46:46 <AnMaster> oklofok, well, I meant (a+b)(a-b) == (a^2)-(b^2)
02:46:58 <AnMaster> that is true in normal math
02:47:05 <AnMaster> easy to remember rule.
02:47:10 <oklofok> and it's nonsensical in boolean algebra.
02:47:24 <AnMaster> not an axiom of course, just follows as a result from other rules
02:47:47 <oklofok> yes, but subtraction simply does not exist in boolean algebra
02:47:53 <AnMaster> well yeah
02:47:56 <AnMaster> good point
02:48:51 <oklofok> you can think of it like this, all objects are nonnegative, and less than one (not literally, just a mnemonic ofc), so addition always gets you closer to 1, and multiplication gets you away from it, towards 0
02:49:00 <oklofok> objects = elements in your algebra
02:49:25 <oklofok> you do know a boolean algebra is in fact any system whose elements follow these rules, and not just {0, 1} with some axioms added?
02:49:27 <AnMaster> oklofok, you can't use the (a+b)^2 == a^2+2ab+b^2 rule either I think.
02:50:19 <oklofok> (a+b)^2 = (a+b)(a+b) = a(a+b)+b(a+b) = aa + ab + ba + bb = a + b + ab, because both multiplication and addition are idempotent in BA
02:50:37 <oklofok> if you don't know that, ... = aa + bb + ab + ab
02:50:48 <AnMaster> <oklofok> you do know a boolean algebra is in fact any system whose elements follow these rules, and not just {0, 1} with some axioms added? <-- well yes, the same rules are at least in part shared with simple set theory
02:51:07 <AnMaster> if you do union = + and intersection = *
02:51:47 <oklofok> AnMaster: yes, and what's even more interesting (and, sadly, what makes finite boolean algebras uninteresting) is that in fact for each finite boolean algebra B, there is a set that's completely isomorphic to B
02:52:08 <AnMaster> uhu
02:52:31 <AnMaster> what exactly does finite/infinite mean in *this* specific context?
02:52:58 <oklofok> isomorphism just meaning one-to-one correspondence between elements, and multiplication and addition work the exact same way in both systems
02:53:09 <AnMaster> well yes I know what isomorphism is.
02:53:14 <oklofok> AnMaster: same as always :)
02:53:17 <AnMaster> learnt it in graph theory stuff
02:53:20 -!- Leonidas has changed nick to Xeonidas.
02:53:21 <oklofok> finite would be like {1, 2, 5}
02:53:34 <oklofok> infinite would be like N
02:53:40 <AnMaster> oklofok, as the set of possible values?
02:53:43 <AnMaster> as in*
02:54:02 <oklofok> formally, infinite <==> there is a proper subset that can be put in bijection with the original set
02:54:34 <AnMaster> oklofok, oh that's an interesting and very useful definition of infinite. You learn something new every day :)
02:55:11 <oklofok> AnMaster: basically what a boolean algebra is is a set where you have some dudes, and you have these rules called "and", "or" and "not". the axioms just limit what sort of mappings they can form between the elements
02:55:21 <oklofok> finite just means there's a finite amount of dudes
02:55:38 <AnMaster> oklofok, usually Mr. True and Miss False? ;P
02:56:13 <oklofok> also not "not", more like complement
02:56:25 <oklofok> well, you don't really need an actual operator for it
02:56:25 <AnMaster> oklofok, but then what about the set of real numbers. Is there such a subset for it?
02:57:03 <AnMaster> well, maybe you can form a bijection without starting somewhere.
02:57:32 <oklofok> AnMaster: yes, we could take all numbers of the form bbbbb0,bbbbbb..., and just kinda move the b's before 0 one step to the right
02:58:19 <AnMaster> oklofok, how does this interact with cantor's diagonal argument?
02:58:31 <oklofok> AnMaster: mr. true and mr. false would form the simplest nontrivial boolean algebra, but for any n there is a boolean algebra with 2^n dudes
02:58:43 <oklofok> and these are *the only finite boolean algebras*Ä
02:58:58 <oklofok> this is what i meant by "for blah blah there's a set such that blah blah isomorphism"
02:59:00 -!- Xeonidas has changed nick to Leonidas.
02:59:02 <AnMaster> oklofok, hm, I only worked with the true/false style boolean algebra
02:59:12 <AnMaster> I did know there were other types
02:59:19 <AnMaster> just never came in contact with those
02:59:33 <oklofok> you said you knew sets also form a BA
02:59:48 <oklofok> well
02:59:56 <AnMaster> oklofok, actually what I said was that I knew that the same rules worked.
03:00:08 <AnMaster> I didn't say I knew *why* this was
03:00:20 -!- Pthing has quit (Remote closed the connection).
03:00:26 <AnMaster> but this explains a lot
03:00:29 <oklofok> to be more precise, if we have any set S whatsoever, and take the powerset 2^S, then if you define and as intersection and or as union, then a boolean algebra will be formed
03:00:34 <oklofok> 1 = S, 0 = {}
03:00:43 <AnMaster> oh nice
03:01:00 <AnMaster> nifty even
03:01:19 <oklofok> to prove the rules work is very simple, actually, you just have to prove a few things about unions and intersections
03:01:37 <AnMaster> oh? hard?
03:01:47 <AnMaster> as in, "hard to prove those"
03:02:03 <oklofok> AnMaster: oklofok, how does this interact with cantor's diagonal argument? <<< cantor's thing says there is no surjection N -> R, i proved there's a surjection "subset of R" -> R
03:02:27 <AnMaster> oklofok, oh right. But N is a subset of R
03:02:40 <AnMaster> well right
03:02:47 <oklofok> yes, it's not true that for all subsets Z of R, there is a surjection from Z to R
03:02:50 <AnMaster> not all subsets might have such a surjection
03:03:08 <oklofok> consider {}, it's a proper subset of R, but you can't map one of it's 0 elements to each element of R :P
03:03:15 <AnMaster> oklofok, would it be possible to construct such a set that for all subsets there is a surjection?
03:03:31 <oklofok> N is a big subset, and infinite one in fact; cantor's argument says it's still not big enough.
03:03:35 <AnMaster> oh wait yeah {}: All subsets of {} form a surjection against {}
03:03:41 <AnMaster> of course
03:03:42 <AnMaster> there are none
03:03:49 <AnMaster> which makes the whole thing pointless
03:03:51 -!- FireFly has joined.
03:03:55 <oklofok> yes
03:04:10 <oklofok> what was that "hard to prove those" thing about
03:04:19 <AnMaster> oklofok, about "<oklofok> to prove the rules work is very simple, actually, you just have to prove a few things about unions and intersections"
03:04:26 <oklofok> i didn't say "hard"
03:04:32 <oklofok> i said "very simple"
03:04:32 <oklofok> :D
03:04:36 <oklofok> there's a slight difference
03:04:44 <AnMaster> oklofok, no, but you are in general way above my level in maths
03:04:50 <oklofok> ah
03:04:57 <oklofok> that's what you meant
03:05:03 <AnMaster> yeah
03:05:38 <AnMaster> oklofok, what you consider trivial, I likely will consider "not too hard", what you consider "not too hard" I will likely go "huh?" at :P
03:06:05 <AnMaster> (apart from the really trivial trivial bits)
03:06:23 <oklofok> well let's see, a(b + c) = ab + ac, with sets that's a \cap (b \cup c) = (a \cap b) \cup (a \cap c), well... do you even need a proof for that?
03:06:48 <oklofok> we're taking all elems that belong to either b or c
03:06:48 <oklofok> but
03:06:55 <AnMaster> oh right latex. hm \cap is ^ and \cup = V right?
03:06:59 <oklofok> we then remove all elems that belong to a
03:07:11 <oklofok> clearly it doesn't matter whether we remove all elems of a before or after the union
03:07:19 <oklofok> just draw like a venn diagram
03:07:39 <AnMaster> wasdo you even need a proof for that? <-- a venn diagram works just fine iirc.
03:08:11 <AnMaster> oklofok, argh you said that too a few lines below :P
03:08:20 <AnMaster> well yeah I don't need a proof for that one
03:08:38 <AnMaster> and for boolean algebra you can prove it with a truth table
03:10:12 <oklofok> but, if you want proof: a \cap (b \cup c) = {x | (x \in a) \and ((x \in b) \or (x \in c))} = {x | ((x \in a) \and (x \in b)) \or ((x \in a) \and (x \in c))} = (a \cap b) \cup (a \cap c), basically just open the definitions, and you're done
03:10:28 * AnMaster fires up tex to render that
03:10:57 <oklofok> yes, for the boolean algebra with 2 elements you could write down a truth table
03:11:01 <AnMaster> oklofok, \and?
03:11:08 <oklofok> prolly
03:11:27 <oklofok> i don't see a mistake, but if there's an and, should be \and prolly
03:11:42 <oklofok> anyway, in fact, for any finite boolean algebra, you can write a "truth table"
03:11:50 <AnMaster> oklofok, just lyx didn't like it. Not sure if it is there actually
03:12:02 <oklofok> i mean obviously you can just check the rules work if you have a finite amount of elements
03:12:22 <AnMaster> the whole bit \and((x\in b)\or(x\in c))}={x|((x\in a)\and(x\in b))\or((x\in a)\and(x\in c))}=(a\cap b)\cup(a\cap c) doesn't render. Just silently cut off
03:13:01 <oklofok> anyway the usual boolean algebra 0, 1 is just the powerset of a set with one element, {a}, you just have one dude
03:13:28 <AnMaster> oklofok, makes sense
03:13:53 <oklofok> there is a unique boolean algebra on the power set {{}, {a}}, then the "1" of that algebra is {a}, and {} is 0
03:14:08 <AnMaster> oklofok, hm from this follows that there is a boolean algebra with just {} ?
03:14:26 <AnMaster> a degenerate case indeed
03:14:32 <oklofok> well you could say it's the trivial boolean algebra
03:14:40 <oklofok> err
03:14:48 <oklofok> no in fact i think there's the rule 0 != 1
03:14:49 <AnMaster> hm
03:15:06 <AnMaster> oklofok, oh there has to be at least one element?
03:16:00 <oklofok> "the boolean algebra with just {}" is the algebra you get if you take the powerset of {}, that is, {{}}, it has just one element, which is both 1 and 0
03:16:10 <oklofok> the empty boolean algebra i suppose would be even more trivial
03:16:17 <oklofok> having neither, set of dudes = {}
03:16:30 <oklofok> i'm pretty sure at least that is illegal
03:16:44 <oklofok> but i don't have a set of axioms here, and this is really not that important :P
03:17:08 <AnMaster> ah
03:19:32 <oklofok> well okay there's a rule like "there has to be an element 1 with properties X"
03:19:48 <oklofok> (the properties say it's the biggest object)
03:19:49 <AnMaster> mhm
03:19:53 <oklofok> if the algebra is empty
03:20:17 <AnMaster> <oklofok> "the boolean algebra with just {}" is the algebra you get if you take the powerset of {}, that is, {{}}, it has just one element, which is both 1 and 0 <-- that one is still valid?
03:20:24 <oklofok> then that's false. because there's no element, there isn't an element 1, even if the properties X would be trivially true because there are no objects
03:20:36 <oklofok> yes
03:20:46 <AnMaster> but quite a useless one
03:21:28 <oklofok> yeah, but i find thinking about the degenerate cases usually makes math feel more concrete, sorta like programming vs. using programs
03:21:54 <AnMaster> oklofok, using programs being more concrete?
03:22:18 <AnMaster> oklofok, btw that thing above rendered as something that actually shows up as you expected it would be: $a\cap\left(b\cup c\right)=\left\{ x|\left(x\in a\right)AND\left(\left(x\in b\right)OR\left(x\in c\right)\right)\right\} =\left\{ x|\left(\left(x\in a\right)AND\left(x\in b\right)\right)OR\left(\left(x\in a\right)AND\left(x\in c\right)\right)\right\} =\left(a\cap b\right)\cup\left(a\cap c\right)$
03:22:25 <AnMaster> there seems to be no \and or \or
03:22:44 <AnMaster> oklofok, most importantly you forgot to escape the {}
03:23:23 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
03:23:35 <oklofok> sort of like how programming makes you understand why programs don't always do what you want, maybe :)
03:23:42 <AnMaster> oklofok, ah
03:24:51 <oklofok> (maybe) math is similar, the details and degenerates aren't actually that useful, but so aren't unfinished programs
03:25:02 <oklofok> well dunno, feeling poetic maybe
03:25:04 <AnMaster> heh
03:25:06 <oklofok> should do stuff now
03:25:13 <AnMaster> oklofok, yeah very deep and poetic
03:26:41 <oklofok> well anyway has been fun discussing these important elementary school matters with you :P
03:26:59 <oklofok> first attempt ->
03:26:59 <AnMaster> oklofok, hm btw is there a surjection between R and C?
03:27:24 <oklofok> err
03:27:28 <oklofok> you could take like
03:27:42 <AnMaster> hm?
03:27:51 <oklofok> bababab.bababa.... to (bbbb.bbbb..., aaaa.aaaa...)
03:27:59 <oklofok> (real, imag)
03:28:02 <AnMaster> oh good idea
03:28:20 <oklofok> i think that works, there are two representations for each real so there might be complications
03:28:39 <AnMaster> oklofok, and there is the polar form
03:28:40 <oklofok> what i mean is
03:28:41 <AnMaster> brb myself
03:29:35 <AnMaster> back
03:29:45 <AnMaster> oklofok, what you mean is?
03:30:00 <oklofok> we need to prove if we have some (bbbb.bbb..., aaaa.aaaa...), then there's a real that maps to it, but the problem is when we're finding what to map bababa.babab.... to, we might actually use another representation for that real, say bababa.ccccc..., and actually map it to (bbb.ccc...., aaa.cccc)
03:30:03 <oklofok> *...
03:30:08 <oklofok> can you follow this notation?
03:30:13 <AnMaster> oh you mean that 1+2i and 12+0i?
03:30:30 <oklofok> again the tuples are complex numbers (real, imag)
03:30:31 <oklofok> err
03:30:37 <oklofok> what does that question mean?
03:30:48 <AnMaster> oklofok, forget it, was thinking backwards
03:30:56 <oklofok> say in binary, 0.1111... = 1.0000...
03:31:03 <AnMaster> hm
03:31:36 <oklofok> what "we map bababab.bababa.... to (bbbb.bbbb..., aaaa.aaaa...)" actually says is, given some real, we take a representation of it (one of the two), and map it to some complex number
03:31:50 <oklofok> if the complex number is different depending on the representation of the real we chose
03:31:54 <AnMaster> hm right
03:31:55 <oklofok> then this is not even well-defined
03:32:16 <oklofok> because using the two different representations, we could find two different complex numbers to which the function maps the real
03:32:23 <oklofok> and functions don't do that.
03:32:29 <AnMaster> oklofok, thus providing that C is larger than R?
03:32:37 <oklofok> do you mean "proving"
03:32:43 <AnMaster> oklofok, err yeah
03:32:44 <AnMaster> XD
03:32:48 <AnMaster> crazy typo
03:33:16 <oklofok> no, this doesn't prove that. kinda like saying "the ill-defined function f(x) = 0 and 1 isn't a surjection between R and C, therefore C is bigger than R" doesn't prove shit
03:33:43 <AnMaster> ah
03:34:10 <oklofok> there definitely *is* a surjection from R to C, and in fact i could just fix the error
03:34:24 <oklofok> we take some base say base 1010010
03:34:27 <AnMaster> oklofok, oh?
03:35:03 <oklofok> now, numbers that have 293 as their ith digit, map to complex numbers with 0 as their ith digit, and numbers that have 8544 as their ith digit, map to complex numbers with 1 as their ith digit
03:35:10 <oklofok> everything else can be chosen arbitrarily
03:35:32 <oklofok> now, for each complex number, we can construct a real number that has 293's and 8544's in the proper places
03:35:58 <AnMaster> why 293 and 8544?
03:36:11 <oklofok> because both 293 and 8544 are in the middle of the interval [0, 1010010), there won't be any complications
03:36:24 <AnMaster> oh
03:36:37 <oklofok> numbers that only contain stuff from the "middle of the base", have unique representations, afaik
03:36:45 <AnMaster> aha
03:36:51 <oklofok> and those were completely arbitrary, those numbers
03:37:09 <AnMaster> right
03:37:18 <oklofok> now it's a surjection, but not a bijection, as you can probably see if you followed that
03:37:42 <AnMaster> hm.... right
03:37:58 <oklofok> we just needed the function's values to be nice for numbers whose base 1010010 representation only contains 293's and 8544's
03:38:05 <AnMaster> oklofok, what about constructing a bijection then?
03:39:45 <oklofok> there's a relevant theorem i can't find
03:39:59 <AnMaster> ah
03:40:22 <oklofok> well anyway something like if there's a surjection both ways then there's a bijection
03:40:29 <oklofok> clearly there's a surjection from C to R
03:40:35 <oklofok> (see it?)
03:40:36 <AnMaster> well yes
03:40:38 <oklofok> (:P)
03:40:56 <AnMaster> just set the imaginary part to 0
03:41:47 <oklofok> yes. well, technically R is a completely separate field, it doesn't even have imaginary parts. that's just how R is embedded into C.
03:42:00 <oklofok> but anyway the function that takes the real part
03:42:01 <AnMaster> well right
03:42:20 <AnMaster> oklofok, not the one that returns the real part?
03:42:30 <oklofok> err yes returns
03:42:35 <oklofok> i mean takes from the number, and returns :P
03:42:38 <AnMaster> right
03:42:41 <oklofok> anyway second attempt coming soon.
03:42:43 <AnMaster> not takes (as argument)
03:42:52 <AnMaster> oklofok, well cya. I shouldn't hold you up longer
03:42:58 <oklofok> yes bad terminology
03:43:01 <AnMaster> this has been very interesting :)
03:43:16 <oklofok> cya! ->
03:45:29 -!- kar8nga has joined.
04:30:22 <AnMaster> mathematica sure is buggy... like altgr inserting space. Found a fix on google groups for it.
05:09:04 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
05:55:53 <AnMaster> I just invented a feather-like language I think
05:56:36 <AnMaster> at least inspired by featuer
05:56:38 <AnMaster> feather*
06:20:41 -!- rodgort has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:47 -!- MigoMipo has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:47 -!- FireFly has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:47 -!- oklofok has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:47 -!- jix has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:49 -!- comex has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:49 -!- olsner has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:49 -!- ineiros has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:49 -!- Cerise has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:20:52 -!- yiyus has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:34 -!- AnMaster has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- Leonidas has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- dbc has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- HackEgo has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- lament has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- uorygl has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:21:36 -!- mycroftiv has quit (verne.freenode.net irc.freenode.net).
06:22:27 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
06:22:27 -!- FireFly has joined.
06:22:27 -!- oklofok has joined.
06:22:27 -!- rodgort has joined.
06:22:27 -!- ineiros has joined.
06:22:27 -!- Cerise has joined.
06:22:27 -!- olsner has joined.
06:22:27 -!- yiyus has joined.
06:22:27 -!- jix has joined.
06:22:27 -!- comex has joined.
06:22:51 -!- Leonidas has joined.
06:22:51 -!- mycroftiv has joined.
06:22:51 -!- HackEgo has joined.
06:22:51 -!- dbc has joined.
06:22:51 -!- lament has joined.
06:22:51 -!- AnMaster has joined.
06:22:51 -!- uorygl has joined.
06:23:23 <AnMaster> yeargh
07:06:26 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
07:14:13 -!- quantumEd has joined.
07:32:14 -!- adam_d has joined.
07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended).
08:00:00 -!- clog has joined.
08:10:50 -!- oerjan has joined.
08:12:48 <oerjan> 19:40:22 <oklofok> well anyway something like if there's a surjection both ways then there's a bijection
08:12:51 <oerjan> 19:40:29 <oklofok> clearly there's a surjection from C to R
08:13:06 <oerjan> if there is an injection there is obviously a surjection the other way
08:13:53 <oerjan> the reverse is also true but probably requires the axiom of choice
08:14:11 <quantumEd> oh no! that's a shame because axiom of choice is true
08:14:15 <quantumEd> ack
08:14:21 <quantumEd> isn't* I ruined that joke
08:14:37 <oerjan> it's independent. you can choose whether you include it.
08:14:45 <quantumEd> uh ??
08:14:50 <quantumEd> all the axioms are independent
08:15:33 <oerjan> perhaps. however it requires proof, which gödel and cohen provided for the axiom of choice at least (and the continuum hypothesis)
08:15:37 <quantumEd> why do people so often point out when they use choice.. nobody says, ..but that requires axiom of powerset
08:16:10 <oerjan> because choice is the only one which doesn't give you a unique thing you construct
08:21:41 <quantumEd> the whole logic set theory is based on has that property
08:22:34 <oerjan> hm well yeah choosing an element from a general set doesn't really give a unique thing either
08:22:56 <oerjan> <oklofok> yes, but subtraction simply does not exist in boolean algebra
08:23:32 <oerjan> you can use xor instead of union/or though
08:23:45 <oerjan> then it's just a Z_2 module
08:23:56 <oerjan> s/module/vector space/
08:24:20 <oerjan> hm wait
08:24:30 <oerjan> and is not a vector space operation
08:25:06 <oerjan> i really mean, it's then a ring (boolean ring)
08:25:08 -!- MigoMipo has quit ("When two people dream the same dream, it ceases to be an illusion. KVIrc 3.4.2 Shiny http://www.kvirc.net").
08:25:54 <oerjan> of course addition = subtraction then
08:31:41 <oerjan> AnMaster: iwc
08:45:55 <AnMaster> oerjan, indeed. hours ago. remind me
08:46:19 <oerjan> cyberspace. orcs.
08:46:33 <AnMaster> ah yes indeed
08:46:50 <AnMaster> and yeah, I agree fully with the annotation
08:48:08 <AnMaster> oerjan, oh and D&D was rather funny today
08:49:42 <oerjan> i found it a bit grating, actually, pete being _too_ exaggerated
08:50:09 <oerjan> but well, i guess that's what you need to get jim to actually start noticing...
08:50:49 <AnMaster> opinions on mathematica after having spent some time playing around with it: incredibly buggy, three serious usability isssues, was possible to work around two of them. It also crashes a lot.
08:51:09 <AnMaster> Syntax is somewhat strange and I still haven't found out why function parameters need to end with _
08:51:15 <oerjan> would not buy again. </ducks>
08:51:37 <AnMaster> oerjan, well yeah, having to rotate a 3D plot to be able to see it is rather annoying
08:51:49 <AnMaster> it is the one serious issue that I have not found any working workaround for
08:51:55 <oerjan> *whoosh*
08:52:17 <AnMaster> oerjan, I decided to ignore that joke. xkcd reference right?
08:52:56 <oerjan> hm xkcd used it (that bobcat thing), but i thought it was a meme...
08:53:22 <AnMaster> for most simple purposes I have to say maxima with the wxmaxima frontend is as good and sometimes better. Definitely less buggy for a start.
08:53:37 <AnMaster> oerjan, oh right. I'm no expert on memes
08:53:54 <oerjan> anyway the joke was really about the fact you didn't actually buy it, as far as i have discerned
08:53:58 <AnMaster> oerjan, bobcat? wasn't it the send cat through ebay?
08:54:14 <AnMaster> oerjan, gift!
08:54:29 <oerjan> well if you _say_ so
08:54:40 <AnMaster> oh btw another thing I noticed is that Wolfram really likes boasting.
08:54:48 <oerjan> http://xkcd.com/325/
08:55:03 <AnMaster> ah
08:55:12 <AnMaster> right, remembered it as "cat"
08:55:19 -!- lifthrasiir has joined.
08:55:27 <AnMaster> http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/guide/FunctionalProgramming.html says "Long viewed as an important theoretical idea, functional programming finally became truly convenient and practical with the introduction of Mathematica's symbolic language."
08:55:33 <AnMaster> I would call that "a lie"
08:55:44 <AnMaster> of course, the wording is rather vague
08:55:51 <oerjan> you mean you haven't noticed that about wolfram before? it's like he's famous for it
08:56:06 <AnMaster> oerjan, well yes I noticed it, but I hadn't realised the scope of it
08:56:45 <AnMaster> oerjan, oh and I think he claimed mathematica was fast somewhere in the docs. and "highly optimising" or something
08:57:39 <AnMaster> on the other hand, taking a minute or so to compute NextPrime[800!] doesn't seem too bad. Probably not a representative example considering what I heard from ais and such
08:58:27 <oerjan> ehird (?) claimed mathematica _was_ fast as long as you only glued together things it knows well
08:58:41 <AnMaster> oerjan, that seems quite plausible
08:58:48 <AnMaster> oerjan, but I assume you do have a copy?
09:00:09 <oerjan> no
09:01:03 <oerjan> heck i'm not sure i've ever tried it, the institute went with maple...
09:01:52 <AnMaster> oerjan, oh btw the serious issues with workarounds: 1) Pressing AltGr inserts a space, work around by editing internal file, fix found in google groups archive. 2) Maxima was hogging CPU and waking up the laptop cpu around 14000 times per second (!), work around by replacing some library files with updated versions from wolfram: reduced to around 7000 times per second, chmod the java link stuff to be
09:01:52 <AnMaster> non-accessible got rid of the issue completely but as a side effect some features of the internal help system no longer works
09:02:39 -!- Asztal has joined.
09:02:54 <oerjan> maxima?
09:03:04 <AnMaster> oerjan, what about it?
09:03:09 <AnMaster> err
09:03:11 <AnMaster> typo
09:03:15 <AnMaster> meant mathematica
09:03:19 <oerjan> thought so
09:03:34 <AnMaster> maxima is a lot less buggy. for a start
09:03:41 <AnMaster> s/\.//
09:04:30 <oerjan> well it's open source version of old macsyma, isn't it
09:04:57 <oerjan> i think the vax/vms system they had when i joined university had macsyma
09:06:29 <oerjan> http://www.aleph.se/andart/archives/2009/04/monumental_egos.html
09:06:36 <AnMaster> oerjan, yeah but development hasn't been standing still
09:06:52 <oerjan> i was really pointing out the open source part
09:07:01 <oerjan> which _should_ mean less bugs
09:07:23 <AnMaster> indeed
09:08:59 <AnMaster> <oerjan> http://www.aleph.se/andart/archives/2009/04/monumental_egos.html <-- heh
09:10:15 <AnMaster> oerjan, that site uses almost unreadably small text however
09:10:33 <oerjan> not in my browser
09:10:41 <oerjan> (IE 7)
09:10:48 <oerjan> er 8
09:13:03 <fizzie> These Android fonts (available as a package directly) have a lot nicer monospace font; I get a pretty readable 99x19 term on the 3.5" screen.
09:13:05 <SimonRC> one can set a minimum text size in many rowsers
09:13:22 <SimonRC> fizzie: wow
09:14:08 <AnMaster> ah found it, mac fonts (legally) on a non-mac
09:14:24 <fizzie> At least that's what "resize" said the size is, haven't counted the chars.
09:15:12 <fizzie> Number of rows matches, probably columns too.
09:16:04 <fizzie> 99x23 in the no-title-bar "fullscreen" mode.
09:16:08 <SimonRC> type a long line in vim?
09:17:50 <AnMaster> SimonRC, s/vim/emacs/
09:18:31 <fizzie> Yes, it counts correctly; used cat to avoid the editor war.
09:22:05 <oerjan> but now you're at war with PETA instead!
09:22:07 <AnMaster> fizzie, :P
09:22:14 <AnMaster> oerjan, PETA?
09:22:26 <oerjan> `define PETA
09:22:31 <HackEgo> * Peta (PeTa, Peta) is a fictional character in the manga and anime series MR. He is a member of the Chess Pieces, the series main antagonists ... \ [22]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peta_(MR) \ * In physics and mathematics, peta- (symbol: P) is a prefix in the SI (system of units) denoting 1015, or 1,000,000,000,000,000. For
09:22:37 <oerjan> um no
09:22:42 <oerjan> `google PETA
09:22:43 <HackEgo> PETA's animal rights campaigns include ending fur and leather use meat and dairy consumption fishing hunting trapping factory farming circuses bull fighting ... \ www.peta.org/ - [13]Cached - [14]Similar
09:23:01 <SimonRC> fizzie: but cat doesn't have a column count function!
09:24:09 <oerjan> ^ul ((0123456789)S:^):^
09:24:10 <fungot> 012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123 ...too much output!
09:24:34 <fizzie> SimonRC: Wrote 30 chars, copy-pasted twice, then counted the remaining empty spots.
09:27:50 <fizzie> Time for some bus-catching.
09:31:47 <oklofok> oerjan: you didn't answer, how did you do in mathemalympics
09:32:51 <oerjan> i did answer. fairly mediocre
09:33:02 <oklofok> oh you did
09:33:03 <oerjan> as in below the 50% medal cutoff
09:33:10 <AnMaster> mathemalympics?
09:33:20 <AnMaster> when was that?
09:33:28 <oerjan> international math olympiad
09:33:50 <oerjan> 1988 and 1989
09:33:54 <oklofok> oh but international?
09:34:26 <oerjan> well yes
09:34:55 <oerjan> in the national competition i got 3rd and 2nd place
09:35:02 <AnMaster> Results 1 - 1 of 1 for mathemalympics. (0.08 seconds)
09:35:02 <AnMaster> wow
09:35:04 <AnMaster> just wow
09:35:12 <AnMaster> isn't there a special term for that
09:35:15 <AnMaster> just one hit on google
09:35:24 <oklofok> oh cool
09:35:28 * AnMaster suspects spelling is wrong
09:35:40 <oerjan> well duh oklofok made it up afaik
09:35:45 <Asztal> AnMaster: there's "googlewhack", but that's for 2 words together
09:35:51 <oklofok> i wish i'd given a shit in the math competitions :|
09:35:53 <AnMaster> Asztal, ah right
09:36:05 <AnMaster> oerjan, so what was the real name for it?
09:36:27 <oerjan> international math(ematics) olympiad
09:36:37 <oklofok> i've probably told you my fun math competition stories?
09:37:04 <oerjan> *ical
09:37:44 <oklofok> internautical
09:40:41 <oerjan> that would be one where we are all put in a boat at sea, and have to solve math problems to escape
09:41:06 <oklofok> :D
09:41:08 <oklofok> we should do that!
09:41:38 <oerjan> or maybe the other way around, not to get thrown out
09:41:53 <oerjan> i hear that's the popular way with these reality shows
09:44:12 <bsmntbombdood> hi oklofok
09:44:20 <bsmntbombdood> when can i come live with you in finland?
09:45:05 * SimonRC rather liked the maths olympiad when he did it.
09:45:20 <SimonRC> I got to go to the summer school.
09:46:23 <oklofok> bsmntbombdood: well wasn't i advertising an empty room just the other day... :D
09:46:58 <bsmntbombdood> how're the immigration laws?
09:48:40 <oklofok> no idea really. significantly less strict than yours, i'd wager.
09:50:19 <bsmntbombdood> what about work, would i be able to manage without speaking whatever it is the natives speak?
09:50:51 <oklofok> pretty much everyone speaks english here
09:51:49 <oklofok> but tbh i'm not sure you could live here, i mean i wouldn't mind, but my gf might (i suppose i could ask her though)
09:52:04 <bsmntbombdood> but you wouldn't speak english unless there was some reason to right?
09:52:24 <oklofok> you mean do i speak english with finns? no, usually not
09:53:06 <oklofok> natives speak finnish
09:59:22 <oerjan> those pesky natives
10:01:28 <AnMaster> is there a way to tell google that "this word must appear in this page", because most hits I get is when selecting cached shows that "These terms only appear in links pointing to this page:"
10:01:43 <AnMaster> and all results are fairly irrelevant
10:01:54 <oerjan> i've been annoyed by that too
10:02:12 <quantumEd> don't think so, it doesn't work by words on the one page
10:02:27 <oerjan> hm did prepending + help i don't quite recall if that worked
10:02:31 <quantumEd> although there's no reason that couldn't be done as post processing so forget that
10:02:37 <oklofok> yeah sometimes i wish google was a search engine
10:02:55 <oklofok> and didn't just try to read my mind
10:03:00 <oklofok> and give me what i want
10:03:22 <quantumEd> oklofok who said anything about mind reading
10:03:30 <AnMaster> oerjan, prepending + seems to reduce the issue but not solve it completely
10:03:33 <oklofok> i did!
10:04:33 <quantumEd> oklofok literal interpretation of that question misses the intended meaning
10:04:35 <oerjan> i think there is a google help page somewhere, i think i've seen links to it
10:05:07 <quantumEd> oklofok I guess I was assuming you knew a bit about how google ranked pages
10:05:13 <oerjan> why google doesn't put it on their front page is beyond me
10:06:22 * SimonRC goes
10:06:58 <oerjan> oh wait there it is
10:07:59 <oerjan> broken unicode in the norwegian version, not encouraging
10:08:53 <oklofok> quantumEd: all i need to know is they don't look for pages containing exactly what i write in the box.
10:09:23 <oklofok> although they do something close to that
10:10:06 <quantumEd> oklofok dunno, what you were saying seemed kinda smug and sarcastic to me
10:10:16 <oklofok> :D
10:10:18 <oklofok> okay
10:10:22 <oklofok> i suppose it was
10:10:45 <oklofok> google is big, obviously i'm allowed to bash them
10:11:06 <oklofok> you're funny
10:11:22 * oerjan tries the english version in the hope it is more up to date
10:13:07 * AnMaster suspects google turned evil quite some time back. Around the same time as sponsored links were introduced
10:13:24 <AnMaster> that's google in general, sure there are still parts that aren't evil
10:13:25 <AnMaster> for now
10:16:22 <oklofok> quantumEd: a good example of what i mean by mind reading is they correct my typos, 99% of the time they just give me something i didn't want, because what i wanted was less popular than something that sounds similar.
10:16:47 <quantumEd> yeah that sucks
10:17:02 <oklofok> or s/99%/50%/, i haven't made statistics, just become annoyed ;)
10:17:29 <oerjan> oklofok: that's what adding + is supposed to disable, anyway
10:18:12 <oklofok> you and your superior arguments.
10:18:44 <oklofok> as if i have the time to press + everytime i search for something :d
10:19:00 <bsmntbombdood> do it in greasemonkey!
10:19:25 <AnMaster> oerjan, + doesn't disable it in my experience always
10:19:37 <oklofok> hah, take that!
10:21:14 <oerjan> it's supposed to disable synonyms, it says
10:21:22 <oerjan> says nothing about links
10:24:12 -!- MigoMipo has joined.
10:26:22 <oerjan> oh well i cannot find any way to turn off links-only hits either
10:27:05 <bsmntbombdood> goddamnit
10:27:10 <bsmntbombdood> not nazi zombies
10:28:24 <oerjan> of course nazi zombies
10:29:41 -!- puzzlet_ has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
10:29:50 -!- puzzlet has joined.
10:37:44 <uorygl> oklofok: why do you search for so many things containing typos?
10:38:53 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
10:39:19 <oerjan> they are not typos, they are just oppressed words
10:39:22 -!- Asztal has joined.
10:43:56 <AnMaster> posix_madvise
10:43:57 <AnMaster> Did you mean: posix_fadvise
10:43:58 <AnMaster> example
10:44:02 <AnMaster> both exist btw
10:45:36 <oklofok> uorygl: ,aybe i just never typo accidentally, so all the corrections are always wong in my case?
10:49:14 * uorygl binks.
10:49:43 <AnMaster> XD
10:51:00 <AnMaster> oerjan, oh ffs. I think wolfram just tried to claim mathematica somehow is the best programming language at handling name spaces
10:51:11 <quantumEd> And isn't it?
10:51:20 <quantumEd> I've heard people claim mathematica is teh best language
10:51:45 <oerjan> uorygl: i seem to detect some doubt about oklofok's perfection, there. repent, sinner!
10:51:49 <AnMaster> quantumEd, from looking at the docs it seems to provide a fairly bulky way to handle name spaces
10:51:55 <quantumEd> bulky?
10:52:01 <AnMaster> quantumEd, correct
10:52:07 <quantumEd> meaning what ??????
10:52:44 <AnMaster> meaning it seems more complex and messy than it needs to be. For no gain. And that even C++
10:52:53 <AnMaster> c++'s* namespaces seems better
10:53:07 <AnMaster> and let it be known that I'm no C++ lover at all
10:53:24 <AnMaster> in fact I positively detest C++
10:53:41 <oerjan> well at least you aren't negative about it
10:53:47 <AnMaster> har
10:54:45 * uorygl sics Eliezer Yudkowsky on oerjan.
10:56:08 * oerjan places eliezer yudkowsky in a black box, tells everyone it is an evil AI and not to let it out under any circumstances
10:56:50 * uorygl talks to the black box for two hours.
10:56:58 <AnMaster> * uorygl sics Eliezer Yudkowsky on oerjan. <-- everything before "on" there seems like some other language than English
10:56:59 <uorygl> I'm convinced that I should open this box.
10:57:01 * uorygl does.
10:57:16 <oklofok> lol
10:57:23 <oerjan> i was afraid of that
10:57:27 <uorygl> AnMaster: "uorygl" is a Lojban spelling of an English word. "sic" is an English word.
10:57:39 <AnMaster> uorygl, you mean as in [sic] ?
10:57:39 <oerjan> O_o
10:57:42 <AnMaster> well right
10:57:52 <uorygl> No, it's a verb, also spelled "sick".
10:57:53 <oklofok> AnMaster: sic means to tell to attack
10:57:53 <oerjan> and here i was trying to check if it was rot-N
10:58:11 <oklofok> yarr i didn't realize it was ihope either
10:58:17 <oklofok> before now
10:58:25 -!- ehird has joined.
10:58:32 <AnMaster> oerjan, I did that in a few seconds and found it unlikely
10:58:41 <oklofok> whois would've told that tho, it seems
10:58:46 <oerjan> oh that i realized long ago
10:58:47 <AnMaster> oerjan, I also tried reverse
10:58:49 <oklofok> what do you know
10:59:15 <AnMaster> ehird, hi there
10:59:22 <AnMaster> oklofok, how so? There is no ihope in it
10:59:24 <uorygl> "Eliezer" is a Biblical name meaning "God is help". As for "Yudkowsky", all I can tell is that it's an English proper noun meaning "Eliezer Yudkowsky".
10:59:35 <ehird> 18:04:53 <oklofok> ehird: I wonder how draw() will do for more complex expressions. <<< actually it's pretty simple to do it, basically you just do dynamic programming on expressions, and for each, store the size of the bounding box for the pic, combining them is just a matter of trivial.
10:59:35 <ehird> I meant how reasonable output will it give.
10:59:35 <oklofok> AnMaster: everyone knows warrie is ihope
10:59:43 <ehird> We're talking about Yudkowsky's name?
10:59:49 <uorygl> ehird: kind of.
10:59:53 <AnMaster> oklofok, sounds familiar
11:00:05 <uorygl> ehird: < AnMaster> * uorygl sics Eliezer Yudkowsky on oerjan. <-- everything before "on" there seems like some other language than English
11:00:05 <AnMaster> ehird, logs! :P
11:00:05 <ehird> ...
11:00:07 <oklofok> ehird: great output.
11:00:26 <ehird> oklofok: but you can't get smaller and smaller text w/ ascii
11:00:40 <oerjan> uorygl: -owsky is a pretty common slavic name suffix afaik
11:01:09 <ehird> 18:14:19 <AnMaster> oklofok, your client uses : for what someone said?
11:01:09 <ehird> 18:14:22 <AnMaster> it's confusing
11:01:09 <ehird> As does mine.
11:01:10 <ehird> 18:15:02 <AnMaster> oklofok: because it is often used to address someone (like this, though I set my client to use , normally for tab completion)
11:01:10 <ehird> Ho ho, the primitive oklofok knows not the customs of IRC!
11:01:13 <oklofok> ehird: yes, that's why you need to know the sizes of bounding boxes of subexpressions
11:01:23 <ehird> oklofok: that's not actually the context I meant
11:01:33 <ehird> i meant like in power towerzzz
11:01:55 <AnMaster> ehird I'm forced to give you an award...
11:02:11 <ehird> 18:20:39 <oklofok> ehird: Uh, why not? <<< because there is a countable amount of pairs like that, consider a base 257 number, each function can be considered a distinct number in that base => at most |N| functions
11:02:11 <ehird> contexxzt?
11:02:19 <oklofok> :D
11:02:25 <oklofok> it was about functions not being representable
11:02:34 <ehird> in what sense
11:02:43 <ehird> oh the free variable
11:02:44 <ehird> things
11:02:45 <oklofok> arglist + expression is not enough to give you all functions
11:02:49 <oklofok> really pretty obvious
11:03:08 <ehird> expression can be arbitrarily big tho...
11:03:15 <oklofok> but it must be finite
11:03:19 <ehird> well right
11:03:21 <ehird> hmm
11:03:25 <ehird> well recursion
11:03:26 <ehird> of course
11:03:37 <oklofok> what about recursion
11:03:50 <ehird> are we including impossible functions here
11:03:51 <uorygl> Recursion doesn't change the fact that expressions are finite.
11:03:55 <oklofok> yeah
11:03:58 <uorygl> What's an "impossible" function?
11:04:04 <uorygl> An uncomputable one? Definitely.
11:06:35 <ehird> a meaningless one? :P
11:08:24 <oklofok> basically
11:08:53 <quantumEd> there's more functions than you can write down
11:09:04 <oklofok> actually a function can be definable without being computable
11:09:06 <quantumEd> (if you fix a countable language)
11:09:18 <ehird> oklofok: ofc
11:09:40 <oklofok> ehird: maybe ofc, but that was an answer to your question
11:09:45 <oklofok> oh
11:09:49 <oklofok> now i see
11:10:07 <ehird> i see the world
11:10:29 <oklofok> i see so much more than that
11:10:34 <oklofok> like space and stuff
11:11:41 <ehird> i see the nested hilbert-hotel of concepts
11:12:04 <quantumEd> how many computable functions are there?
11:12:06 <ehird> (every room contains a hilbert hotel just as big as the main one, containing all the ideas and subhotels of related ideas)
11:12:09 <ehird> quantumEd: infinite
11:12:16 <ehird> i think
11:12:18 <quantumEd> (say in infinitary lambda calculus)
11:12:23 <ehird> f(x) = x+1
11:12:25 <ehird> f(x) = x+1-1
11:12:27 <ehird> f(x) = x+1-1+1
11:12:28 <ehird> etc
11:12:40 <ehird> you could argue that's two functions
11:12:59 <uorygl> Yeah, in most definitions of a "computable function", there are aleph_0 of them.
11:13:23 <ehird> computable function restricted to the physical universe would be interesting
11:13:30 <ehird> but we don't know how dense we can pack information for a computer
11:13:34 <ehird> etc
11:13:46 <ehird> and we don't know how fast we can compute (to avoid the death of the universe)
11:13:55 <ehird> and we don't know when the universe will die either :P
11:13:57 <ehird> s/ / /
11:13:59 <AnMaster> ehird, what about one that "did something useful" (of course you need to define that first)
11:14:08 <ehird> *does
11:14:30 <AnMaster> ehird, did, since we spent so much time thinking about it that the universe already died.
11:14:31 <quantumEd> uorygl that's just some definition though, it's not necessarily the truth
11:15:02 <ehird> There is no "truth".
11:15:10 <oklofok> was just about to say that
11:15:26 <ehird> Your incorrect philosophy of mathematics may lead you to believe that there is a real "truth" behind computable functions — which ONLY means their definition — but there is not.
11:15:45 <ehird> Computable functions mean what consensus defines them as; they are abstract concepts with no underlying truths.
11:16:23 <oklofok> heil, mein führer
11:16:52 <oerjan> oklofok: wrong channel
11:16:56 * oerjan ducks
11:17:23 <oklofok> i thought this was the one with the nazi zombies
11:17:41 <oerjan> no. this channel still has some brains left.
11:17:52 <OxE6> brains? where?
11:17:54 * OxE6 drools
11:17:59 <oerjan> oops
11:18:05 <oklofok> irc rooms are kind of a sucky place to hunt.
11:18:24 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
11:18:28 -!- puzzlet has joined.
11:18:33 <uorygl> quantumEd: in math, definitions are the truth.
11:18:37 <oklofok> bsmntbombdood seems to be the only one even trying to get into physical contact with his prey
11:18:44 <bsmntbombdood> ?
11:18:51 <quantumEd> uorygl, not so! Truth in undefiniable
11:18:56 <quantumEd> is*
11:19:08 <uorygl> How do we know that pi is the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter? It's defined that way.
11:19:11 <uorygl> What do you mean?
11:19:26 <oklofok> bsmntbombdood: you're a zombie, and you want to eat my brain
11:19:35 <bsmntbombdood> oh baby
11:19:44 <oerjan> you are so busted
11:19:47 <uorygl> A statement is true in a theory if it holds for every model of that theory.
11:19:50 <quantumEd> uorygl, it's a theorem of Tarski
11:19:56 <uorygl> Which theorem?
11:20:02 <ehird> quantumEd: that's just some definitions tarski made up
11:20:04 <ehird> quantumEd: not the truth!
11:20:30 <oerjan> s/true/provable/, iirc
11:20:42 <quantumEd> true and provable are not synonymous
11:20:48 <ehird> imo thinking about true is usually pointless esp. since godel means, well, it's kinda inaccessible
11:20:56 <ehird> i think provable is a formal concept and true isn't, but that's just a hunch
11:21:00 <oerjan> no but i think the tarski theorem is about provability?
11:21:27 <uorygl> Well, I think something is a "logical consequence" or whatever if it holds for every model of the theory.
11:21:33 <oerjan> otoh isn't that godel's completeness theorem
11:21:43 <quantumEd> I'm not talking about godels theorem
11:22:22 <oerjan> they may be close nevertheless
11:22:44 <uorygl> Yeah, remind me. Is there a Turing machine that halts in some models of ZFC but not others?
11:23:12 <oerjan> yes
11:23:17 <uorygl> ...Yeah, I think there is. Just add "the Turing machine halts" as an axiom.
11:23:44 <quantumEd> uorygl, if it's undecidible whether or not a turing machine halts: It does not halt
11:23:52 <uorygl> That is true.
11:23:53 <ehird> ...
11:23:57 <ehird> ur momz
11:23:59 <ehird> is the new topic
11:24:06 <quantumEd> I don't think the axiom "the Turing machine halts" is okay to suffix
11:24:09 <uorygl> Still, for some Turing machines that do not halt, ZFC + "that Turing machine halts" is consistent.
11:24:39 <uorygl> Because a theory is consistent if and only if you can't prove a falsehood from it.
11:24:43 <uorygl> I think.
11:24:48 <quantumEd> anyway all this talk of turing machines just brings us back to cold hearted determinism, there's so much more
11:25:13 -!- puzzlet has quit (Remote closed the connection).
11:25:18 -!- puzzlet has joined.
11:26:01 <SimonRC> oh dear not all this again
11:26:20 <ehird> quantumEd: oh great, let me guess
11:26:26 <ehird> free will exists because of quantum effects
11:26:27 <ehird> did i guess right
11:27:26 <lament> ugh
11:27:45 -!- Azstal has joined.
11:28:25 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
11:28:38 -!- Azstal has changed nick to Asztal.
11:28:49 <ehird> haha the channel collectively grunts in disgust
11:29:13 <oklofok> yes, puzzlet's hop was just that annoying.
11:30:00 <ehird> xD
11:30:05 <oklofok> xxxxxxxxxxD
11:30:10 <ehird> 20:30:22 <AnMaster> mathematica sure is buggy... like altgr inserting space. Found a fix on google groups for it.
11:30:10 <ehird> to insert special characters, I recommend <esc>name<esc>
11:30:12 <ehird> in mathematica
11:30:28 <ehird> inf, pi etc work
11:30:40 <oerjan> infinite pie
11:30:45 <ehird> yes
11:31:04 <OxE6> chocolate pie?
11:31:24 <oerjan> it's chocolate _somewhere_, it's infinite after all
11:31:30 <ehird> re: start of today's logs, people who don't use the axiom of choice upset me :P
11:31:34 <SimonRC> oerjan: um, no
11:31:36 <ehird> oerjan: no, it could be uniform
11:31:44 <ehird> or a repeated tile
11:31:47 <AnMaster> <ehird> to insert special characters, I recommend <esc>name<esc>
11:31:51 <oerjan> but where is the fun in that
11:31:54 <AnMaster> ehird, you forgot about Swedish keyboard
11:31:55 -!- augur has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
11:32:00 <AnMaster> ehird, I need altgr for [ and {
11:32:08 <ehird> AnMaster: dude, remap that shit
11:32:08 <oklofok> all sets of axioms should be used an equal amount
11:32:21 <AnMaster> ehird, anyway the fix works, *shrug*
11:32:23 <SimonRC> even the inconsistent ones?
11:32:23 <ehird> apply the axiom of choice to an infinite set of axioms
11:32:59 <ehird> 00:50:49 <AnMaster> opinions on mathematica after having spent some time playing around with it: incredibly buggy, three serious usability isssues, was possible to work around two of them. It also crashes a lot.
11:33:00 <ehird> 00:51:09 <AnMaster> Syntax is somewhat strange and I still haven't found out why function parameters need to end with _
11:33:00 <ehird> because
11:33:03 <ehird> f[foo]
11:33:10 <oklofok> SimonRC: well if they are hard to prove inconsistent, they can be interesting for a while
11:33:13 <AnMaster> ehird, means?
11:33:21 <ehird> pattern matches on the symbol foo
11:33:21 <ehird> it's a symbolic language
11:33:21 <ehird> also, what are the usability issues?
11:33:30 <AnMaster> ehird, ah I see
11:33:45 <AnMaster> ehird, they were mentioned below
11:33:46 <AnMaster> a bit
11:33:54 <AnMaster> some page or pages later
11:33:55 <ehird> 00:51:37 <AnMaster> oerjan, well yeah, having to rotate a 3D plot to be able to see it is rather annoying
11:33:55 <ehird> 00:51:49 <AnMaster> it is the one serious issue that I have not found any working workaround for
11:33:55 <ehird> works in os x without rotating
11:33:55 <AnMaster> iirc
11:33:55 <ehird> 00:51:15 <oerjan> would not buy again. </ducks>
11:33:55 <ehird> 00:52:17 <AnMaster> oerjan, I decided to ignore that joke. xkcd reference right?
11:33:55 <ehird> no, it predates the internet i believe
11:34:03 <AnMaster> <ehird> works in os x without rotating
11:34:06 <AnMaster> linux specific bug
11:34:09 <ehird> linux of course is a fringe platform for mathematica
11:34:16 <AnMaster> ehird, intel graphics even
11:34:20 <ehird> most people are on windows or os x, or use maxima or axiom or w/e
11:34:38 <AnMaster> ehird, some intel chipset revisions only, only linux
11:34:40 <AnMaster> yeah a bit rare
11:34:48 <oklofok> maxima is horrible after getting used to mathematica's web interface
11:35:00 <AnMaster> oklofok, web interface? You mean W|A?
11:35:11 <ehird> most likely
11:35:12 <oklofok> that's one of thhem
11:35:13 <ehird> 00:54:40 <AnMaster> oh btw another thing I noticed is that Wolfram really likes boasting.
11:35:13 <ehird> he's probably a malignant narcissist
11:35:15 <oklofok> *them
11:35:20 <ehird> he definitely has a gigantic ego
11:35:25 <oklofok> mathematica has tons of web interfaces
11:35:29 <oklofok> web faces
11:35:43 <AnMaster> oklofok, what about wxmaxima?
11:35:52 <AnMaster> oklofok, better than the command line I have to say
11:35:53 <oklofok> i don't know what that is
11:35:55 <AnMaster> quite nice even
11:36:02 <AnMaster> oklofok, graphical frontend to maxima
11:36:13 <oklofok> okay i have wxmaxima
11:36:17 <oklofok> that's the annoying one
11:36:19 <oklofok> :)
11:36:33 <AnMaster> oklofok, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WxMaxima_0.7.1_screenshot.png ?
11:36:44 <ehird> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism)
11:36:45 <AnMaster> later versions are more like mathematica note book in style
11:37:08 <AnMaster> oklofok, as in, you edit directly in the buffer rather than having an input line at the bottom
11:37:09 <oklofok> hmm
11:37:13 <oklofok> mine does ascii rendering for instance
11:37:18 <oklofok> so that's probably newer
11:37:20 <ehird> AnMaster: did you miss the talk about me musing about writing y own maxima/mathematica-alike?
11:37:28 <AnMaster> oklofok, wow your has to be really old
11:37:30 <ehird> oklofok: you're using the command-line version, probably
11:37:34 <oklofok> probably
11:37:36 <AnMaster> ehird, most of it yeah
11:38:23 -!- augur has joined.
11:38:29 <ehird> AnMaster: features in a nutshell: *good* command-line interface with good ASCII art drawing of expressions, a simple syntax that matches mathematical notation quite closely, and some assorted other stuff
11:38:36 <ehird> *writing my
11:39:05 <ehird> oh, and the ascii art drawing is optional, by default it'll display linear expressions, which is nice
11:39:31 <AnMaster> ehird, mathematical notation is ambiguous without context. As in what does a d mean? dx/dy is probably different from ab+dc
11:39:43 <ehird> 00:58:27 <oerjan> ehird (?) claimed mathematica _was_ fast as long as you only glued together things it knows well
11:39:43 <ehird> ais523 claimed it and i parroted based on my experience
11:40:08 <ehird> AnMaster: dx/dy is dividing the variables dx and dy. ab+dc is adding ab and dc. for the former use the derivative function
11:40:15 <ehird> for the latter you mean a b + d c
11:40:19 <ehird> or (a b)+(d c), not sure
11:40:23 <ehird> i said close, but also simple
11:40:25 <AnMaster> ehird, dx/dy is probably a differentiation
11:40:27 <ehird> and understandable
11:40:31 <ehird> so it diverts ofc
11:40:35 <ehird> AnMaster: no it isn't, not in my syntax
11:40:36 <AnMaster> or what you call it in English
11:40:52 <AnMaster> ehird, well I said "mathematical notation"
11:40:53 <AnMaster> duh
11:41:00 <AnMaster> it was about
11:41:01 <ehird> Then why did you state that to me?
11:41:06 <AnMaster> ehird, "that matches mathematical notation quite closely"
11:41:10 <ehird> "quite closely"
11:41:13 <ehird> Obvious keyword.
11:41:50 <AnMaster> ehird, about ascii art drawing, do you mean unicode or plain ASCII?
11:42:28 <ehird> plain ascii, unicode doesn't really help all that much for most of it
11:42:36 <ehird> the layout engine will prolly have different backends
11:42:43 <ehird> like ascii, unicode, html etc
11:43:01 <ehird> (TeX...)
11:43:32 <ehird> (although the TeX will probably be quite low level as the layout engine will mostly result in things like "row, 2, row, line, row, 3" for 2/3)
11:44:18 * AnMaster wonders how to plot a function in the complex plane with mathemematica. 3D plot. x for real part, y for imaginary part (for the input value), And z for absolute value and colour for argument (for the output value)
11:44:36 <AnMaster> I haven't been able to figure out the colour stuff
11:44:49 <ehird> When in doubt, type Plot3D, hit F1, and navigate the docs. There is a special function fofr complex numbers, I believe.
11:45:00 <ehird> Oh, and the documentation search is quite good.
11:45:03 <ehird> "plot complex" might help.
11:45:34 <ehird> *for
11:45:52 <ehird> AnMaster: Here's something that'll make you go WTF: The documentation is a set of Mathematica notebooks.
11:46:02 <ehird> The documentation for Plot3D is the same thing as your REPL.
11:46:18 <ehird> (You can even shift-enter the examples from inside the docs.)
11:46:40 <AnMaster> ehird, I did on reference.wolfram.com, since the built in docs requires java (except for basic ?Function stuff). And the java stuff is what causes the exessive wakeups and CPU hogging. Using built in docs slows down the computer so much that the mouse pointer take several seconds to react
11:47:13 <ehird> The built in docs areer far superior.
11:47:14 <ehird> I suggest fixing the Java issue, it really is a lot more pleasant with the built-in doccs.
11:47:14 <ehird> *are
11:47:36 <ehird> AnMaster: Oh, and here's some fun functions — {Example,Country,Astronomical}Data
11:48:08 <uorygl> I hope Mathematica doesn't need installation instructions.
11:48:11 <AnMaster> ehird, heh
11:48:48 <AnMaster> ehird, the java issue is known, and it is a mathematica bug, not a bug in java. Working fix not yet released.
11:48:53 <ehird> uorygl: You run a script and enter two paths.
11:48:54 <AnMaster> this I found from googling
11:49:02 <ehird> AnMaster: So work around it.
11:49:09 <ehird> It's not heh; those functions really are fun.
11:49:17 <AnMaster> ehird, official workaround is chmod a-rx JLink
11:49:21 <AnMaster> to disable the java stuff
11:49:22 <AnMaster> XD
11:49:58 <ehird> So do an unofficial workaround...?
11:50:14 <AnMaster> ehird, none found so far. at least as far as I have been able to find
11:50:25 <ehird> tried different jvms?
11:50:29 <AnMaster> ehird, I did
11:50:43 <ehird> Well, alright then.
11:50:57 <ehird> New suggestion! Use my thing instead.
11:51:09 <AnMaster> ehird, there is some suggestion to downgrade kernel(!) to 2.6.27 or earlier, but that would break all sort of stuff. Like being able to boot my laptop iirc.
11:51:16 <AnMaster> ehird, sure, go code it first
11:52:58 <ehird> AnMaster: Surely I should go design it first, being that it is a huge undertaking, involving not only the creation of a completely new, unconventional programming language that should be quite fast and yet has to be based around tree rewriting, the programming of complex and subtle algorithms as far down as basic algebra that nonetheless have to be optimised the shit out of, the programming of many, many mathematical and utility functions — that must run
11:52:58 <ehird> efficiently, writing the drawing layout engine, ...
11:53:08 <ehird> ... but tons of other things too.
11:54:47 <AnMaster> why based on tree rewriting?
11:55:02 <ehird> That's what symbolic computation is.
11:55:47 <ehird> It's basically the only way to easily handle expressions involving numbers like pi and insanely big 'uns and still be able to manipulate and compare them efficiently and only evaluate them to arbitrary precision at the last step.
11:57:14 <AnMaster> wow I think this plot just reinvented flower power or something
11:57:23 <AnMaster> ehird, want to see?
11:57:45 <ehird> Such patterns are not uncommon, but sure.
11:57:47 <ehird> Screenshot 'er up.
11:57:51 <ehird> OR
11:57:55 <ehird> Save a notebook and send it to me!
11:57:57 <AnMaster> ehird, the expression is http://sprunge.us/QMhM
11:58:12 <ehird> btw, those lines at the right side select various parts of the expression
11:58:29 <ehird> AnMaster: That Function would be more idiomatically written with lambda syntax
11:58:37 <AnMaster> ehird, oh?
11:58:39 <AnMaster> well yes
11:58:43 <AnMaster> less copy and paste I guess
11:58:48 <ehird> (#+2)& → \x→x+2
11:58:48 <ehird> (#+#2)& → \x,y→x+y
11:58:49 <AnMaster> ehird, or you mean the colour one?
11:58:52 <ehird> # is #1, #n is argument n
11:58:59 <ehird> you postfix the expression with *
11:59:00 <ehird> erm
11:59:01 <ehird> with &
11:59:03 <ehird> yes, it's weird
11:59:04 <ehird> AnMaster: yes
11:59:19 <AnMaster> ehird, I just based it on the examples at http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/ColorFunction.html
11:59:36 <ehird> well, maybe it isn't more idiomatic, but it is shorter, and mathematica is tedious to write :P
11:59:46 <AnMaster> ehird, also I didn't quite grook that syntax you just gave above
11:59:55 <AnMaster> ehird, agreed it is tedious to write indeed
12:00:04 <ehird> [19:57] ehird: btw, those lines at the right side select various parts of the expression
12:00:04 <ehird> other tips: In and and Out actually are real arrays, you can access them in expressions; % means Out[last line], Mod+L recalls the last line, you can modify lines in place and re-evaluate them to replace them
12:00:10 <AnMaster> ehird, anyway what do you think of the result of that plot?
12:00:24 * ehird evaluates that
12:00:35 <AnMaster> ehird, nifty eh?
12:00:49 <ehird> Who spiked my drink?
12:00:58 <AnMaster> ehird, XD
12:01:00 <ehird> Yep.
12:01:03 <ehird> AnMaster: Anyway, to explain:
12:01:44 <ehird> By == I just mean is equivalent; they aren't technically equal, but they behave identically
12:01:44 <ehird> (# + 2) & == Function[x, x + 2]
12:01:44 <ehird> (# + 2 * #2) & == Function[{x, y}, x + 2 * y]
12:01:44 * AnMaster waits
12:01:44 <ehird> etc
12:01:56 <ehird> (...) & is a lambda, # is the first argument, #1 is too, #n is argument n
12:02:11 <AnMaster> err okay
12:02:57 <AnMaster> ehird, how does this call Hue, Sin and Arg?
12:02:58 <ehird> AnMaster: To explain: Mathematica has postfix operators. Yes, you read that right. That's how 3! works.
12:03:03 <ehird> It's 3 !.
12:03:11 <ehird> AnMaster: Umm... the body of a lambda is just an expression.
12:03:14 <AnMaster> ehird, that makes perfect sense
12:03:16 <ehird> How on earth is this confusing to you?
12:03:32 <ehird> Your ColorFunction would be written as:
12:03:49 <AnMaster> I should probably define f to be the function I'm plotting or something
12:03:52 <ehird> (Hue[Arg[2 (# + I*#2)^3 - ...]) &
12:04:01 <ehird> WTF are you confused about?
12:04:01 <AnMaster> like f[re_, im_] := ...
12:04:03 <ehird> It's just lambda syntax.
12:04:10 <ehird> AnMaster: ??????
12:04:13 <AnMaster> ehird, well okay
12:04:14 <AnMaster> sure
12:04:20 <ehird> No, you use expressions inline with Plot3D.
12:04:27 <AnMaster> ehird, oh?
12:04:35 <ehird> Don't define a function unless you need to, and if you must use PlotFunction.
12:04:37 <AnMaster> code duplication, can't be having with that
12:04:40 -!- OxE6 has quit.
12:04:47 <ehird> Oh, you use it more than once? So you do.
12:04:52 <ehird> AnMaster: I think there is a way to simplify this.
12:04:57 <ehird> So that there is no duplication.
12:05:00 <ehird> But yeah, use PlotFunction and co.
12:05:03 <AnMaster> hm okay
12:05:11 <AnMaster> No search results for PlotFunction
12:05:11 <ehird> Erm
12:05:14 <AnMaster> err
12:05:17 <ehird> lemme try and find it
12:05:25 <ehird> Hmm, nope
12:05:26 -!- boily has joined.
12:05:27 <ehird> Just call the function then
12:06:19 <ehird> Eh, who knows.
12:07:16 <AnMaster> well defining a function then using it in Plot3D seems to work
12:07:23 <AnMaster> maybe PlotFunction was for older versions?
12:08:34 <ehird> No, it let you actually do
12:08:41 <ehird> PlotFunction[f, {10, 50}]
12:08:41 <ehird> iirc
12:08:43 <ehird> I may be imagining it
12:08:45 <ehird> Probably am.
12:09:25 -!- kar8nga has joined.
12:09:26 * AnMaster wonders if there is a parametric 3D plot
12:09:47 <ehird> AnMaster: Right click → Copy As → LaTeX.
12:09:49 <ehird> Erm.
12:09:53 <ehird> I didn't mean to address that to you.
12:09:55 <ehird> I was just noting a fun thing.
12:10:07 <AnMaster> ehird, I noticed that before
12:10:29 <ehird> \frac{1}{2}
12:10:31 <ehird> Yep, that works.
12:10:45 <AnMaster> ehird, yet mathematica claims to have uniquely superior state of the art math type setting
12:10:53 <AnMaster> I'm certain I saw that somewhere
12:11:00 <ehird> Well, Mathematica's TraditionalForm output is very nice.
12:11:11 <ehird> (try TraditionalForm[Hold[some expression]])
12:11:40 <ehird> It can even interpret a subset of TraditionalForm's output.
12:11:43 <ehird> *of Tra
12:11:45 <ehird> stupid spces
12:11:46 <AnMaster> http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/ref/RegionPlot3D.html <-- nice
12:11:48 <ehird> *spaces
12:12:30 <AnMaster> ehird, stupid letters
12:12:50 <ehird> ooh, RegionPlot3D[x y z < 1, {x, -5, 5}, {y, -5, 5}, {z, -5, 5},
12:12:50 <ehird> PlotStyle -> Directive[Yellow, Opacity[0.5]], Mesh -> None] is pretty.
12:12:53 <ehird> from that page
12:13:05 <ehird> Apparently that's \text{RegionPlot3D}[x y z<1,\{x,-5,5\},\{y,-5,5\},\{z,-5,5\},\text{PlotStyle}\to \text{Directive}[\text{Yellow},\text{Opacity}[0.5]],\text{Mesh}\to \text{None}] in LaTeX.
12:13:06 <ehird> :P
12:13:33 <AnMaster> ehird, I don't quite think that is true
12:14:14 <ehird> Well, it is.
12:14:15 <AnMaster> well, I guess it depends, I don't think the Plot commands does have any good translations
12:14:24 <ehird> It's copying the formula itself.
12:14:34 <AnMaster> ehird, it should generate pstricks commands XD
12:14:36 <ehird> Not TeX that evaluates the formula.
12:14:52 <ehird> AnMaster: Well, it's just like how it'll give you 2+2 instead of \horriblemacromagic{add}{2}{2}.
12:14:57 <ehird> Because it should show as 2+2, not 4.
12:15:04 <AnMaster> well yeah
12:15:10 <ehird> TeXForm::unspt: TeXForm of Graphics3DBox[<<1>>,<<7>>,ViewVertical->{-0.210506,0.583037,0.784701}] is not supported. >>
12:15:18 <ehird> Aww. Gimme a LaTeX version of the plot itself! :P
12:15:58 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
12:16:43 <ehird> AnMaster: btw, wolfram is a narcissist but that's mostly the documentation's fault, usually the actual meat is good, if slow and buggy
12:16:47 <AnMaster> ehird, well that is non-trivial. Did you want it as an asymptote graph? Or pstricks? Or something else?
12:16:58 <ehird> wolfram mostly sits around, mathematica isn't really his these days
12:17:14 <ehird> AnMaster: I want it rotatable in the output pdf, clearly.
12:17:14 <AnMaster> ehird, he still write the docs?
12:17:24 <ehird> Adobe recently added Flash embedding to pdfs...
12:17:29 <AnMaster> argh
12:17:30 <ehird> And there's a C→ActionScript converter...
12:17:33 <AnMaster> hm
12:17:34 <ehird> And Mathematica is mostly C...
12:17:37 <ehird> Do you see where I'm going? XD
12:17:40 <AnMaster> oh my
12:17:45 <AnMaster> yes I'm afraid so
12:17:50 <AnMaster> also what? C→ActionScript?
12:17:53 <AnMaster> seriously?
12:18:00 <ehird> Yeah, it's called Alchemy
12:18:06 <ehird> There's a Flash port of Doom
12:18:11 <ehird> With it
12:18:14 <ehird> http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/470460
12:18:36 <ehird> "Recompiled from the original sources by Mike, using Alchemy! Thanks Adobe!"
12:18:43 <ehird> Not that much of a port, then.
12:18:54 <AnMaster> ehird, try changing the range to -Pi/Pi in the "Who spiked my drink" plot
12:18:58 <AnMaster> something strange happens
12:19:05 <AnMaster> to be exact, a strange message
12:19:07 <ehird> repaste the expression?
12:19:39 <AnMaster> Power:indet:Indeterminate expression (0.+0.ii)^(0+0.ii) encountered
12:19:42 <AnMaster> to be exact
12:19:57 <AnMaster> those i are stylised ones
12:20:00 <ehird> Paste the expression and I'll diagnose.
12:20:04 <AnMaster> sec
12:20:47 <AnMaster> ehird, http://sprunge.us/FUaa
12:20:59 <ehird> 01:03:34 <AnMaster> maxima is a lot less buggy. for a start
12:20:59 <ehird> well, and a lot less featureful :) maxima is alright, but it doesn't cover everything mathematica does
12:21:11 <AnMaster> ehird, of course
12:21:40 <AnMaster> ehird, btw how do you zoom in on a part of a plot in mathematica?
12:21:40 <ehird> AnMaster: when you see an error click the >> next to it
12:21:44 <ehird> that opens in the built-in docs though, ha.
12:21:51 <AnMaster> ehird, there are no >> there?
12:22:04 <ehird> Screenshot.
12:22:11 <AnMaster> sec
12:22:27 <AnMaster> ehird, sec
12:22:43 <ehird> AnMaster: it's shortcuts; shift-drag moves the image, alt-drag i think zooms
12:23:01 <ehird> ah here we go
12:23:01 <ehird> Drag \[LongDash] interactively rotate a 3D graphic
12:23:04 <ehird> Shift+Drag \[LongDash] zoom a 3D graphic
12:23:08 <ehird> Ctrl+Drag \[LongDash] pan a 3D graphic
12:23:15 <ehird> "Mathematica provides real-time view control for all 3D graphics, wherever they may appear in a document. Mathematica's advanced human interface device system also automatically supports joystick and gamepad 3D graphics control, with special features available on the Wolfram Research 2+12 degree-of-freedom gamepad."
12:23:18 <ehird> Wow, they have a gamepad.
12:23:30 <ehird> btw for me shift-drag isn't zoom i guess ymmv
12:23:46 -!- boily has quit ("leaving").
12:23:47 <ehird> AnMaster: if you zoom in you can see a white patch where the graph was cut
12:23:53 <ehird> that's the effects of the Poewr::indet error
12:24:03 <ehird> *Power
12:24:06 <ehird> Anyway, it's
12:24:10 <ehird> "This arithmetic corresponds to multiplying zero and infinity:"
12:24:12 <AnMaster> hm
12:24:14 <ehird> Power means it happened when doing a power
12:24:19 <AnMaster> ehird, you mean the "slit" in the middle?
12:24:24 <ehird> The expression is, removing the immaginary part, 0^0
12:24:26 <AnMaster> that was there in the smaller version too
12:24:27 <ehird> Work it out.
12:24:32 <ehird> AnMaster: Well, yes.
12:24:36 <ehird> But you can see it more clearly zoomed in.
12:24:40 <AnMaster> ehird, the warning wasn't there then
12:24:54 <ehird> tl;dr your plotting function does 0^0 at one point
12:25:07 <ehird> fix it
12:25:26 <AnMaster> hm
12:25:29 <ehird> basically
12:25:35 <ehird> ::indet means that the expression is indeterminate
12:25:38 <AnMaster> well that's intended, it isn't well defined over the whole range
12:25:44 <ehird> like 1/0
12:25:45 <AnMaster> a function doesn't have to be
12:25:48 <ehird> and the like
12:25:54 <ehird> AnMaster: But you told Plot3D to plot over that range.
12:26:02 <AnMaster> ehird, screenshot you asked for http://omploader.org/vMnhpbg
12:26:10 <ehird> AnMaster: So add a safe guard.
12:26:20 <ehird> AnMaster: Huh. I guess Qt Mathematica is just neglected :P
12:26:28 <ehird> Also, argh! Turn the anntialiasing up to full in the settings!
12:26:35 <AnMaster> ehird, well yes and? If there are asymptotes I may still want to plot over that range
12:26:41 <ehird> Appearance → Graphics → Highest Quality
12:26:51 <ehird> AnMaster: If you can'tt compute the value for that point, you can't plot that point. Simple as.
12:27:23 <AnMaster> ehird, that setting makes no difference
12:27:28 <AnMaster> I blame shitty intel graphics
12:27:35 <ehird> AnMaster: you have to reevaluate an expression
12:27:37 <ehird> maybe even restart mathematica
12:28:44 <AnMaster> ehird, none of those changed it
12:29:01 <ehird> i told you to go with the ati graphics
12:29:06 <ehird> but did you listen ohhh no :)
12:29:19 <AnMaster> ehird, ati graphics were reported to have power usage issues too
12:29:30 <ehird> surely not at low load.
12:29:38 <ehird> who cares anyway, you get like 2 hours of battery anyway
12:29:41 <ehird> that's near-useless
12:29:41 <AnMaster> ehird, at suspend to ram
12:29:43 <AnMaster> even
12:29:57 <AnMaster> and from what I heard, the open source drivers are still buggy for ati
12:30:00 -!- cal153 has joined.
12:30:38 <AnMaster> <ehird> Shift+Drag \[LongDash] zoom a 3D graphic
12:30:38 <AnMaster> <ehird> Ctrl+Drag \[LongDash] pan a 3D graphic
12:30:40 <AnMaster> for some reason
12:30:41 <ehird> AnMaster: yes, they are, but ati have released specifications freely
12:30:43 <AnMaster> those are reversed for me
12:30:55 <ehird> so using their closed-source drivers temporarily isn't some huge moral issue :P
12:30:57 <ehird> AnMaster: ditto
12:31:07 <AnMaster> documentation bug?
12:31:19 <AnMaster> ehird, their closed source drivers are worse
12:31:21 <AnMaster> ever used them?
12:31:29 <ehird> If you have a supported card, fglrx is nice.
12:31:29 <AnMaster> I did during one point
12:31:31 <AnMaster> some years ago
12:31:38 <ehird> A supported, recent card, that is.
12:31:40 <AnMaster> ehird, fglrx crashed and froze all the time
12:31:45 <ehird> AnMaster: Some years ago, yes.
12:31:47 <AnMaster> had to use reset button a lot
12:31:56 <ehird> Nowadays, they're competitive with nvidia's proprietary drivers, which are nice.
12:32:17 <AnMaster> I can't believe this... mathematica only provides one level of undo
12:34:18 <ehird> In what sense?
12:35:20 -!- Slereah_ has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
12:38:26 -!- Slereah has joined.
12:40:02 -!- zzo38 has joined.
12:40:23 <AnMaster> ehird, most programs provide more
12:40:25 <AnMaster> or rather
12:40:29 <AnMaster> most non-trivial ones
12:40:33 <ehird> Ah, in the text entry field.
12:40:38 <ehird> I just backspace, usually.
12:40:58 <zzo38> I fixed my character's back-story, I think?? http://zzo38computer.cjb.net/dnd/raw_transcripts/Vyb_back_story.txt
12:41:58 <zzo38> If you really want to see the true power of Icoruma, look at spells.irm
12:42:44 <AnMaster> ehird, would want to undo last operation, say, rotating a graph
12:42:50 <AnMaster> or zooming something
12:42:58 <ehird> AnMaster: You can reset that by right-clicking and choosing an option, I think.
12:42:59 <zzo38> Maybe I should read the log
12:43:01 <AnMaster> or even evaluating an expression
12:45:49 <ehird> AnMaster: highlight the result line and delete it.
12:46:16 <AnMaster> ehird, what if I was re-evaluating over an old result?
12:46:21 <AnMaster> "don't do that then" right
12:46:40 <ehird> AnMaster: What about it?
12:46:45 <ehird> Doing that is perfectly kosher.
12:48:49 <AnMaster> ehird, "<ehird> AnMaster: highlight the result line and delete it."
12:48:52 <AnMaster> won't work then
12:49:07 <ehird> Why not?
12:49:14 <ehird> Oh, return the evaluatation?
12:49:16 <ehird> *evaluation
12:49:24 <AnMaster> yes
12:49:37 <ehird> Well, yeah, don't overwrite if you don't want to overwrite.
12:50:08 <AnMaster> ehird, realised that too late? well sure, you can be extra careful and such, still a bit irritating
12:50:31 <ehird> Just use Mod+L to try out new ideas.
12:50:33 <ehird> (Ctrl, maybe.)
12:50:35 <ehird> (Or alt.)
12:50:36 <ehird> (Cmd on OS X.)
12:51:28 <AnMaster> ctrl
12:52:08 <AnMaster> anyway, can't test now, laptop turned off and in backpack for tomorrow, cya going to sleep soon (will probably return for a short bit in 0.5-1 hour or so)
12:52:41 <ehird> AnMaster: what kind of sleep is that
12:53:41 <SimonRC> powerman?
12:57:27 -!- OxE6 has joined.
12:58:18 <ehird> no AnMaster is just bad at self-control
12:59:16 <SimonRC> hi 230
12:59:38 <ehird> oklofok: HEY i object to offering that room to bsmntbombdood, i'm reserving that shit
12:59:40 <ehird> :D
13:00:00 * SimonRC likes to use quote-marks when quoting people
13:00:12 <ehird> i didn't quote anyone
13:00:17 <zzo38> "
13:00:21 <SimonRC> ah, ok
13:00:22 <ehird> i couldn't live in finland anyway it has mandatory military service
13:00:42 <zzo38> """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""ACTION likes to use quote-marks when quoting people"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
13:01:17 <SimonRC> where did you get ACTION from?
13:01:28 <zzo38> The screen.
13:01:31 <ehird> "/me"
13:01:45 <ehird> 02:13:07 * AnMaster suspects google turned evil quite some time back. Around the same time as sponsored links were introduced
13:01:45 <ehird> Oh god, advertising! It's so unusual for a capitalist company to be capitalist.
13:02:01 <ehird> Clicking on a sponsored link shortens your lifespan by 5 years, you know. EVIL
13:02:06 <SimonRC> I know that /me is transmitted using "ACTION" and some magic char, but I don't know what kind of IRC client would actually show you that string "ACTION"
13:02:22 <zzo38> PHIRC does
13:02:35 <zzo38> And it displays it in red (normal messages are in blue)
13:02:55 <SimonRC> weird
13:02:57 <ehird> PHIRC being zzo38's own client.
13:03:03 <ehird> Written in PHP, for the command-line, I believe.
13:03:06 <zzo38> Yes, it is
13:03:14 <zzo38> It is written to be used with PuTTY
13:03:15 <ehird> I'll just, uh, leave it at that, yeah.
13:04:57 <SimonRC> zzo38: in what way is it specially adapted for PuTTY?
13:05:05 <SimonRC> and how many users do yuo have? ;-)
13:05:11 <ehird> SimonRC: have you ever *used* cmd.exe?
13:05:18 <zzo38> I don't know if anyone else other than me have used it
13:05:28 <ehird> also, this is the guy who has said he'll switch to linux when he needs to buy a new computer, but he'll make it entirely from scratch
13:05:35 <ehird> so i'll bet uh
13:05:36 <ehird> 1 user
13:05:52 <zzo38> Not entirely from scratch, but more from scratch than most distributions
13:05:54 <SimonRC> ehird: what does cmd.exe have to do with this?
13:06:01 <ehird> putty vs cmd.exe
13:06:08 <ehird> as a terminal
13:06:10 <zzo38> cmd.exe is the Windows command-line
13:06:13 <SimonRC> yeah
13:06:31 <zzo38> Windows console window doesn't support the ANSI/VT/XTERM terminal codes
13:06:53 <SimonRC> but PuTTY supplies its own terminal emulator
13:07:15 <zzo38> Because PuTTY's terminal emulator supports the codes I used.
13:08:00 <SimonRC> but PuTTY also supports the codes that irssi etc use
13:08:09 <ehird> Yes, but zzo38 didn't write irssi.
13:08:29 <zzo38> The FreeGeek has terminals for Linux, and I have some troubles to run it on there using Xterm or the other ones
13:08:34 <zzo38> I don't use irssi
13:08:45 <SimonRC> ah! I see what zzo38 means now I think...
13:08:57 <zzo38> I wrote my own because I didn't like some things in other IRC client so I decided to write my own to make it the way I wanted it to be
13:09:28 <SimonRC> zzo38 is on windows, and he wrote an IRC client for use within PuTTY as opposed to for fur use within the windows CLI?
13:09:43 <zzo38> There's a screen-shot if you want to see: http://zzo38computer.cjb.net/img_10/IRC-strange-characters.png
13:09:56 <ehird> SimonRC: yes.
13:09:58 <zzo38> O, and there's another screen-shot: http://zzo38computer.cjb.net/prog/PHIRC/screenshot0.png
13:09:58 <ehird> In PHP.
13:11:12 <SimonRC> I didn't even know that PHP did CLI stuff
13:11:28 <ehird> SimonRC: It does ... painfully...
13:11:40 <SimonRC> the display format seems to be quite close to the IRC protocol
13:11:42 <ehird> SimonRC: It is, of course, a hideous abuse.
13:11:51 <ehird> Quite close — you mean, identical.
13:12:13 <SimonRC> doesn't it get confusing if you are on 20 channels?
13:12:42 <zzo38> PHP does do CLI stuff. And some programs, such as FurryScript, are a CLI program and then other PHP program can include it in a HTML form
13:12:50 <ehird> zzo38 is only in here
13:13:14 <zzo38> And, yes it can get confusing on 20 channels if you use that many channels on the same server at once!!
13:13:22 <SimonRC> zzo38 must be the re-incarnation of Chuck Moore or something
13:13:28 <zzo38> But I don't ever use that many channels at once, not even on separate servers
13:13:35 <SimonRC> ah
13:14:08 <ehird> SimonRC: Hey, Chuck Moore used a *decent* language. :)
13:14:16 <ehird> also, can an alive person really be reincarnated?
13:14:23 <SimonRC> dunno
13:14:31 <zzo38> Chuck Moore, O, I did write Forth interpreters, and some programs in some Forth systems too.
13:14:45 <zzo38> I put a Forth interpreter in MegaZeux, and I wrote a program for writing GameBoy programs in Gforth
13:15:44 <ehird> It'd be fun to work for Chuck Moore's company. I wonder if his odd manner of speech is the same in person.
13:17:37 <AnMaster> <ehird> AnMaster: what kind of sleep is that <-- taking a shower before
13:17:42 <AnMaster> that was what I did
13:18:34 <SimonRC> zzo38: I was thinking more about the willingness to put lots of effort into replacing huge existing bits of software with stuff you wrote yourself
13:18:59 <ehird> I don't think syntax-highlighting IRC really takes *that* much code...
13:19:14 <SimonRC> um, exactly
13:19:26 <AnMaster> ehird, what would it syntax highlight on?
13:19:38 <AnMaster> embedded code examples?
13:19:39 <SimonRC> his software does what he needs with way less code than ordinary irc clients
13:19:40 <ehird> http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/esoteric/09.12.06
13:19:42 <AnMaster> or IRC itself
13:19:51 <AnMaster> oh logs
13:19:52 <AnMaster> right
13:19:55 <ehird> SimonRC: yes, but i contend that the simple code involved isn't that much effort
13:19:58 <AnMaster> well that should be simple
13:20:02 <AnMaster> a regex even
13:20:13 <AnMaster> match date <nick> data
13:20:17 <AnMaster> well
13:20:19 <ehird> AnMaster: no
13:20:20 <ehird> AnMaster: i meantt
13:20:26 <ehird> read the F. logs
13:20:30 <ehird> to see what we're talking about
13:20:31 <ehird> SimonRC: his fork of Conkeror with ... green tabs, and rewritten gopher support with a scripting language... that's probably a better example
13:20:35 <AnMaster> a few more lines to handle join/part/quit and /me
13:20:58 <ehird> AnMaster: you're rambling about an irrelevant thing.
13:21:05 <SimonRC> ah, yeah, not that much effort
13:21:31 <ehird> (his fork's at http://zzo38computer.cjb.net/; i'll leave that root link there because it's fun trying to figure out where the page is)
13:21:32 <SimonRC> zzo38: where do you find the time to write all that sort of stuff?
13:21:48 <zzo38> SimonRC: I don't know
13:22:18 <SimonRC> or does it not actually take that much time
13:23:09 <zzo38> You can try to figure out
13:23:49 <AnMaster> ehird, ah you mean highlighting the protocol itself yes
13:27:34 -!- OxE6 has quit.
13:27:55 <ehird> someone tell that guy it's 0x
13:28:43 <oerjan> <ehird> also, can an alive person really be reincarnated? <-- i've read claims to that effect. after all in some spiritual traditions, time is an illusion as is the individual
13:28:56 <oerjan> *, as
13:29:22 <ehird> i was going to say "yes, but that's just unsubstantiated bullshit". then i realised we were talking about reincarnation
13:29:24 <AnMaster> ehird, invalid in nicks though
13:29:31 <ehird> AnMaster: you're invalid in nicks.
13:29:37 <oerjan> :D
13:29:44 <AnMaster> ehird, so is your mom
13:32:26 <ehird> int width_times_height_minus_one = width * (height - 1);
13:32:27 <ehird> —actual C code
13:32:43 <zzo38> In what program?
13:33:00 <ehird> A really terribly-written one, clearly.
13:33:11 <ehird> http://pastebin.ca/raw/1703757
13:33:43 <pikhq> Arrrrgh.
13:34:22 <ehird> I mean... not only is the name hideously verbose, not descriptive and much longer than the actual expression, it's an expression that has near NO cost.
13:34:41 <zzo38> But what is the program? What program is this function part of?
13:34:46 <ehird> And "int * map", way to have the disadvantages of "int* map" while still looking weird.
13:34:56 <ehird> that is the entire "program"
13:35:10 <ehird> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/abh84/the_1717_challenge/c0grbec
13:35:10 <ehird> includes link for what it's for
13:35:17 <ehird> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/abh84/the_1717_challenge/c0grssk counterpoint — a really concise J version
13:35:23 <zzo38> I prefer like "int*map" instead of "int * map"
13:35:54 <zzo38> I sometimes program in C, I added codes into MegaZeux in C
13:36:36 <AnMaster> ugh that is just as bad
13:36:37 <AnMaster> int *map
13:36:41 <AnMaster> is what I would write
13:36:59 <ehird> int*map is alright since the * is almost like a space, but I would write int *map too.
13:37:02 <AnMaster> zzo38, so you write int*map,*foo;
13:37:08 <AnMaster> that looks plain weird
13:37:11 <ehird> And I omit spaces almost always.
13:37:20 <AnMaster> int *map, *foo;
13:37:21 <AnMaster> of course
13:37:24 <ehird> (e.g. i'd write x=(y*z)/f; instead of x = (y * z) / f;
13:37:28 <ehird> s/$/)/
13:37:36 <zzo38> No. I never declare multiple pointers on the same line, and I also never declare pointers and non-pointers on the same line
13:37:40 <ehird> and if(x) instead of if (x)
13:37:45 <ehird> and if(x){ instead of if (x) {
13:37:48 <pikhq> I'd generally write int *map, as well. For such is what the good Lords of C, K&R intended.
13:37:53 <zzo38> I write like: if(x) {
13:37:55 <ehird> well, i do add whitespace in places that others don't
13:37:57 <ehird> for instance
13:38:02 <ehird> int
13:38:02 <ehird> foo(...)
13:38:02 <ehird> {
13:38:07 <ehird> that way you can grep for ^foo(
13:38:20 <ehird> pikhq: k&r is obsolete, plan 9 c is the amended k&r style! :-P
13:38:29 <ehird> (which is, uh, identical to what I just said)
13:38:41 <pikhq> ehird: Plan 9 C is also acceptable. It offends not.
13:39:26 <ehird> Preferring K&R over Plan 9 C is like, um, only reading the KJV! As opposed to some other bible that is. Not as opposed to no bible. Also only the Christian bible.
13:39:26 <zzo38> I find it confusing to see "int *map=something;" so that's why I omit the space.
13:39:30 <ehird> That was tenuous.
13:39:39 <ehird> zzo38: I find that quite readable.
13:39:47 <ehird> The value assigned is bound tightly to the variable.
13:39:58 <ehird> int a=3, b=4, c=5; is nice and readable.
13:40:10 <zzo38> It is confusing because it is the value of the variable called "map" not the value of the variable called "*map" at first
13:40:13 <ehird> int a = 3, b = 4, c = 5; makes it harder to distinguish each definition, so I omit the spaces.
13:40:14 <AnMaster> ehird, what about int a,b,c;\na=b=c=3;
13:40:16 <AnMaster> for example
13:40:21 <ehird> zzo38: That's true.
13:40:34 <ehird> AnMaster: doesn't int a=b=c=3; work?
13:40:37 <ehird> hmm, no
13:40:38 <ehird> it should :P
13:40:43 <AnMaster> ehird, how could it?
13:40:45 <ehird> AnMaster: I'd write it as either
13:40:56 <ehird> int a,b,c;
13:40:57 <ehird> a=b=c=3;
13:40:57 <ehird> or
13:40:57 <ehird> int a, b, c;
13:40:57 <ehird> a=b=c=3;
13:40:58 <ehird> depending on how i felt.
13:41:01 <ehird> If the names were longer, probably the latter.
13:41:01 <SimonRC> the last time I wrote C code it was like that first prototype J interpreter. Incredibly dense and macroy, all functions fitting on 1 line.
13:41:10 <ehird> If they're literally a, b and c I would write it without the spaces.
13:41:17 <ehird> I don't make functions fit on one line :P
13:41:22 <AnMaster> I just try to make my code reasonably readable when it comes to spacing
13:41:31 <AnMaster> apart from the int *foo thing
13:41:38 <ehird> AnMaster: I've read your code and find it to have too many spaces to read nicely.
13:41:49 <ehird> Spaces are meant to separate; when you put them around everything, it's like a linear blob of mud.
13:41:49 <AnMaster> ehird, different taste *shrug*
13:41:55 <ehird> Sure, each operator looks sparkly and pretty.
13:42:02 <ehird> But it's disconnected, floating away from the relevant operandss.
13:42:04 <ehird> *operands
13:42:08 <AnMaster> ehird, newly washed and hand polished!
13:42:09 <AnMaster> also
13:42:18 <AnMaster> I tend to do i++; not i ++
13:42:20 <AnMaster> :P
13:42:26 <Deewiant> i ++ ;
13:42:31 <AnMaster> XD
13:42:33 <ehird> AnMaster: So, you're inconsistent too? Whoopy
13:42:39 <SimonRC> 1 i +!
13:42:41 <ehird> Even K&R C omitted quite a lot of spaces, btw.
13:42:44 <AnMaster> ehird, well sure, if it is for readability
13:42:54 <ehird> You'd never catch "a = (b * c) / f;" being written by them.
13:42:59 <AnMaster> and why should I care about K&R? I mostly write the code to be readable by myself
13:42:59 <ehird> Maybe "a = (b*c)/f;" at most.
13:43:14 <ehird> Because a lot of people who write in such a hideous over-spaced style claim to write in K&R style.
13:43:19 <Deewiant> ehird: I'm more offended by the redundant brackets than the whitespace :-P
13:43:21 <AnMaster> ehird, what about a = ( b * c ) / f ;
13:43:27 <AnMaster> (yeargh)
13:43:50 <ehird> Deewiant: In my opinion, b*c/f is easily parsed as both b*(c/f) and (b*c)/f.
13:44:06 <Deewiant> Your opinion is poor
13:44:08 <AnMaster> ehird, */+- have easy to remember well defined ordering
13:44:18 <AnMaster> other operators may be harder to remember
13:44:19 <ehird> AnMaster: I don't want to remember it, it's arbitray.
13:44:21 <ehird> *arbitrary.
13:44:30 <AnMaster> ehird, it is standard math practise
13:44:39 <ehird> C isn't mathematics.
13:44:40 <AnMaster> practice*
13:44:57 <AnMaster> ehird, those are math expressions. And?
13:45:03 <ehird> No, they are not.
13:45:12 <AnMaster> oh?
13:45:18 <ehird> For instance, a+b > a can be true.
13:45:19 <ehird> erm
13:45:21 <ehird> a+b < a
13:45:21 -!- cal153 has quit.
13:45:24 <ehird> and a+b < b
13:45:29 <ehird> and all sorts of things
13:45:57 <pikhq> The rule to use with parentheses, IMO, is to use them when the order of operations could reasonably be misunderstood.
13:46:15 <ehird> I would say that (a*b)/f is one of those cases.
13:46:19 <pikhq> As would I.
13:46:28 <AnMaster> and I would disagree
13:46:35 <AnMaster> with < I would agree however
13:46:46 <AnMaster> however
13:46:57 <AnMaster> I don't find the (a*b)/f irritating
13:47:01 <AnMaster> I'm fine with either
13:47:03 <ehird> I wonder why I chose f for that variable.
13:47:06 <AnMaster> I probably write both
13:47:16 <pikhq> I would also like to note that it only makes a difference with integer arithmetic as done in most programming languages, and not on the reals...
13:47:19 <pikhq> whoo.
13:47:32 <AnMaster> pikhq, hm?
13:47:42 <ehird> If there's a disagreement about whether it was ambiguous between two people who don't think the other is *completely* insane, then it's ambiguous.
13:47:46 <pikhq> AnMaster: a*(b/f) = (a*b)/f in "real math".
13:47:49 <Deewiant> It makes a difference with floating-point arithmetic as well
13:47:59 <pikhq> Deewiant: Also true.
13:48:04 <pikhq> A float is definitely not a real.
13:48:13 <Deewiant> Also true
13:48:13 <AnMaster> pikhq, well yes indeed
13:48:25 <AnMaster> pikhq, just couldn't parse the English there
13:48:48 <AnMaster> too tired
13:57:01 -!- zzo38 has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:01:47 -!- MigoMipo has quit ("When two people dream the same dream, it ceases to be an illusion. KVIrc 3.4.2 Shiny http://www.kvirc.net").
14:06:41 -!- puzzlet has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:06:46 -!- puzzlet has joined.
14:13:40 * ehird rewrites his sconvert utility in haskell
14:14:00 <oerjan> haskell for vertical scones
14:14:15 <ehird> Storage Convert. :P
14:15:41 <AnMaster> night →
14:16:00 <ehird> http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=231
14:18:34 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
14:28:14 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep").
14:31:48 -!- oerjan has quit ("leaving").
14:39:56 -!- nate has joined.
14:40:33 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined.
14:40:46 <nate> can I get assistance here on brainfuck code?
14:47:45 -!- nate has left (?).
15:08:52 <ehird> Yes, if you're patient.
15:13:28 -!- Pthing has joined.
15:17:51 <SimonRC> ah, well, better Nate than Lever!
15:17:58 <ehird> >_<
15:17:58 <SimonRC> </looooooongjonke>
15:18:09 <ehird> I spent half an hour reading that joke and at the end I was "..." for about as long
15:18:26 <ehird> don't get me wrong, it was an enjoyable story
15:18:30 <SimonRC> it is traditional to put a small novel-worth of shaggy dog story before that pun
15:18:36 <SimonRC> ah, you too
15:18:52 <SimonRC> it only works in American
15:19:07 <SimonRC> "lever" and "never" don't rhyme in English
15:19:22 <ehird> eh, my brain adjusted for it
15:19:30 <SimonRC> true
15:19:36 <ehird> as soon as I read "better Nate than" my brain went into RHYME AT ALL COSTS mode
15:20:21 <ehird> it would be fun to have a novel of Finnegans Wake length that all builds up to one terrible pun
15:20:28 * SimonRC recalls the guy that didn't realise you could be in more than one IRC channel at once
15:20:35 <SimonRC> ehird: aye
15:21:01 <SimonRC> it would need to be written "properly", otherwise people wouldn't stick at it long enough
15:21:12 <SimonRC> I mean, so it actually worked without the pun
15:21:31 <SimonRC> alas, then the editor would cut the pun at the end as ruining the whole tone of the book
15:21:59 <SimonRC> unless the whole thing was suficiently surreal, when you might get away with just hinting at it
15:22:12 <ehird> publish it on the internet, have a hardcopy on lulu, and solicit donations. you'll get very little money and little exposure, but it's free :P
15:22:15 <ehird> and there's no editors
15:22:37 <ehird> SimonRC: maybe the book could turn into a book about writing the book gradually
15:22:51 <ehird> and so the ending pun could be mentioned as a pun you were *going* to add
15:22:58 <SimonRC> hm
15:23:14 <ehird> then all the characters laugh, for which there is no explanation
15:25:13 <ehird> this is just reminding me that i have a semi-decent idea for an AI short story and no writing talent, topic change time!
15:25:58 <SimonRC> "AI"?
15:26:07 <ehird> artificial intelligence
15:26:20 <ehird> "AI short story" is confusing, agreed
15:26:39 <SimonRC> define
15:27:36 <ehird> a short story concerning an artificial intelligence (or indeed many); subgenre of scifi
15:27:44 <ehird> beyond that, I'm sure you own a dictionary :-P
15:28:01 <ehird> i guess if i wanted to be specific it'd technically about the singularity
15:28:13 <ehird> but beyond that there starts to be a fine line between a specific genre and the actual story :P
15:29:25 -!- OxE6 has joined.
15:29:41 <SimonRC> oh, ok
15:29:48 <SimonRC> OxE6: s/O/0/
15:29:51 <ehird> what did you think i meant?
15:29:53 <ehird> SimonRC: i said that earlier
15:29:55 <ehird> not valid on irc
15:33:14 <SimonRC> ehird: ah, ok
15:36:45 <OxE6> yeah, this is the best I can do on irc unfortunately :(
15:56:07 <ehird> OxE6: {0xE6}
15:56:12 <ehird> evaluates to 0x56 in all good languages!
15:56:15 <ehird> erm
15:56:18 <ehird> 0xE6
15:57:06 <OxE6> :D
15:57:08 <OxE6> +
15:57:11 <OxE6> oops
15:58:51 -!- adam_d has quit ("Leaving").
16:00:05 <ehird> More people should use SI prefixes on currency!
16:00:14 <ehird> 1 million dollars? Pah! 1 M$, methinks!
16:00:48 <ehird> 1 billion? 1 G$!
16:00:55 -!- p_q has joined.
16:01:13 <Asztal> people already say megabucks
16:01:13 <Asztal> :P
16:01:13 <ehird> Oh, and if you have 10^21 bucks, well that'd be 1 Z$.
16:01:27 <ehird> Asztal: Yes, but they never say M$!
16:01:35 <ehird> It's always 1M $.
16:01:37 <ehird> Nor do they progress past M!
16:01:42 <ehird> Gigadollar sounds so cool.
16:01:55 <OxE6> 1.21 JIGGAWATTS!
16:01:57 <Asztal> I used megametres a lot back in school
16:02:45 <ehird> Most people would say 1,000 km :P
16:02:55 <ehird> 1 Ym = really fucking long
16:03:02 <ehird> Z is the best prefix though.
16:03:04 <ehird> I mean, it's a bloody Z.
16:04:29 <ehird> OTOH, I think furlong/firkin/fortnight is the best system of measurements.
16:04:32 <ehird> Perhaps attoparsecs, too.
16:05:33 <ehird> 60 km/h is 100 kilofurlongs per fortnight (100 kfl/fn). The more you know.
16:08:32 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)).
16:08:33 <OxE6> what about beard seconds? :D
16:08:48 <ehird> SECONDS ARE A HERETICAL UNIT OF MEASUREMENT!
16:09:01 <ehird> My only qualm with the furlong/firkin/fortnight system is that it uses SI prefixes.
16:09:14 <OxE6> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_humorous_units_of_measurement#Beard-second
16:09:26 <ehird> I know.
16:09:35 <ehird> Beardseconds are necessarily related to seconds.
16:09:44 <OxE6> hmm
16:09:58 <OxE6> what measurements of time are "good" then?
16:10:45 <ehird> Dunno. It'd be fun to devise an entirely new system of measurements.
16:10:51 <ehird> Ooh, a smoot might be a good base.
16:11:32 -!- OxE6 has quit ("going back to my dorm").
16:11:40 <mycroftiv> im surprised an article this awesome has survived the rampaging wikicops and deletionists
16:12:00 <ehird> "Philosophers talking about Jeremy Bentham's Utilitarianism sometimes use the conceptual unit of the Hedon to describe the amount of pleasure, equivalent to the amount of pleasure a person receives from gaining one util of utility."
16:12:10 <ehird> It's utilon, bitches!
16:12:12 <ehird> Yudkowsky says so.
16:12:46 <ehird> hedon vs util(on) reminds me of watt vs joule
16:14:33 <ehird> I wonder if anyone's formalised Utilitarianism (given black boxes to deal with fiddly ill-defined human matters)
16:18:56 -!- kar8nga has joined.
16:24:09 <Gregor> Mmm, cinnamon peppermint soda.
16:25:48 <ehird> Gregor: send me a bottle.
16:25:52 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
16:25:57 <Gregor> Send yourself a bottle!
16:26:12 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote closed the connection).
16:26:16 <ehird> I invented a word! conceviances, n. that which is conceived. misconceviances, n. that which is misconceived.
16:26:28 <ehird> Both are excellent words to describe: ideas; children.
16:26:29 <Pthing> ehird, in a bunch of cases sure
16:26:36 <Pthing> usually in terms of monetary compensation though
16:26:46 <ehird> yeah i don't see utilitarianism as being economic
16:26:57 <Pthing> like did you never see one of those industrial-injury payout tables
16:27:04 <Pthing> a lost digit gets you such-and-such
16:27:07 <Pthing> a lost limb is worth this
16:27:21 <Pthing> a lost eye is worth another amount
16:27:28 <ehird> that's more about physical pain than the more lofty hedonism of utilitarianism, imo
16:27:35 <Pthing> no
16:27:40 <Pthing> it's about dismemberment, not pain
16:27:52 <ehird> well, you know what i mean
16:27:55 <ehird> that's about physical injuries
16:28:04 <Pthing> so for example, the loss of a right hand is more than the loss of a left hand (mutatis mutandis)
16:28:10 <ehird> utilitarianism is mostly about intellectual achievement
16:28:16 <ehird> Pthing: that's leftist! :P
16:28:22 <Pthing> hence mutatis mutandis
16:28:29 <Pthing> i don't just break out in latin for no reason >:|
16:29:50 <ehird> Where as I do! Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
16:30:57 -!- puzzlet has joined.
16:33:03 * SimonRC goes
16:35:40 -!- FireFly has quit ("Leaving").
17:08:13 -!- p_q has changed nick to poiuy_qwert.
17:12:44 -!- kar8nga has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
18:14:02 -!- OxE6 has joined.
18:24:48 -!- jpc has joined.
18:52:54 -!- quantumEd has quit ("* I'm too lame to read BitchX.doc *").
18:55:29 -!- poiuy_qwert has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
19:03:34 -!- Asztal has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
19:49:48 -!- OxE6 has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
19:55:56 -!- ehird has quit.
20:17:19 -!- AnMaster has quit (Network is unreachable).
21:02:40 -!- Gracenotes has joined.
21:12:37 -!- mu has joined.
21:12:45 -!- mu has changed nick to OxE6.
21:33:41 -!- OxE6 has quit (Nick collision from services.).
21:33:42 -!- mu has joined.
21:33:50 -!- mu has changed nick to OxE6.
21:58:15 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
21:59:18 -!- puzzlet has joined.
22:37:22 -!- OxE6 has quit.
22:50:26 -!- FireFly has joined.
23:11:19 -!- mu has joined.
23:11:25 -!- mu has changed nick to OxE6.
23:13:59 -!- kar8nga has joined.
23:23:08 -!- AnMaster has joined.
23:25:29 -!- puzzlet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)).
23:25:34 -!- puzzlet has joined.
23:33:31 -!- kar8nga has quit (Remote closed the connection).
23:38:02 <AnMaster> <SimonRC> ah, well, better Nate than Lever! <-- I did get the joke in the first context (of that nick) but what on earth was the stuff about the dog story about?
23:40:20 <AnMaster> <ehird> Perhaps attoparsecs, too. <-- that works out to.. uh... 3 cm or such?
23:40:58 <coppro> according to google, 3.09
23:41:33 <AnMaster> <ehird> Dunno. It'd be fun to devise an entirely new system of measurements. <-- centifortnight?
23:43:56 <AnMaster> coppro, units(1) claim 3.0856776
23:44:11 <coppro> AnMaster: I was rounding
23:44:22 <coppro> also, Planck units > all
23:44:29 <AnMaster> (I actually gussed it would work out to "less than a meter, more than a millimeter" before checking)
23:49:02 -!- FireFly has quit ("Leaving").
23:52:52 -!- coppro has quit ("I am leaving. You are about to explode.").
←2009-12-05 2009-12-06 2009-12-07→ ↑2009 ↑all