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