00:01:52 -!- crathman has quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.3/2007030919]"). 01:41:30 so, after 15 mins discussing conditional keywords, we realise that we haven't decided on the significance of line-breaks 01:41:42 we vote ... and get a 4-4 tie 01:46:37 You know you're bored when you get an executable in 324 bytes. . . 01:47:17 http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/software/tiny/teensy.html And you're really bored when you do this. 01:50:39 ooh, now almost half-an-hour making a decision that one person could have made in 2 minutes 01:51:13 on syntax, i presume. 01:52:05 lololol 01:52:15 * SimonRC howls with laughter at the latest suggestions 01:52:40 it comes to 48 possible forms of the simple two-armed conditional 01:54:03 Damn, that's dumb. 01:54:31 New rule: "Your language fails as an esolang when it's less esoteric than x86 assembly". 01:54:46 we just voted in a 72-variation one 01:55:13 exponential growth, yay! 01:55:16 "IZ [?] [(.|\n) YARLY] (.|\n) (.|\n) [NOWAI (.|\n) ] KTHX" 01:55:31 KHAN! 02:09:10 have you reached 150 yet? :) 02:09:59 no, the vote was final for the moment 02:11:23 45 bytes, wow 02:11:44 ISTR one of us diong this before 02:12:15 121 02:12:44 Of course, I'm doing "Hello, world", which is a bit less trivial. 02:12:50 SimonRC: What, the "really small asm program"? 02:13:22 Um, yeah. That website, I think, was done by one of us. 02:13:22 yes 02:13:33 there was a micro-esolang, too 02:19:58 Mmkay, now I'm down to 101 bytes. . . 02:20:11 cool 02:21:37 what program are you writing? 02:21:39 Now I'm down to segfault bytes. 02:21:46 Just a simple "Hello, world". 02:22:00 have you done the elf header overlapping stuff yet? 02:22:22 I can't see a way to actually fit my code *inside* the elf header. 02:23:53 Hmm. . . I wonder how many bytes a jmp call would take. 02:23:59 can't you overlap the two headers though? 02:24:32 *That* much I have done. 02:24:53 His second suggested overlap is broken, though. 02:27:23 maybe put the first part of the program inside the elf header and jmp to the rest? 02:28:08 I was thinking that. 02:29:24 The problem is, I can't quite figure out a) how many bytes are being used there b) how many bytes I have to actually work with. 02:29:36 or write "hi world" instead and put the data there 02:29:55 Now, that's a thought. . . 02:30:13 he says there's nine bytes of padding 02:30:16 Hmm. 9 bytes. 02:30:18 Yeah. 02:30:38 Now, just to figure out how many bytes my code is actually *using*. 02:30:51 Preferably per instruction. 02:31:01 This'd be easier if I hadn't learned assembly earlier today. 02:31:23 indeed 02:31:33 asm is possibly the most usefull esolang 02:33:12 over, after 4h25 or so 02:33:15 sigh 02:33:23 Mmkay. Got it down to 87, thanks to the idea of putting the data in the header. 02:33:36 in that time, we did what one man could do in 20 minutes 02:33:56 what? 02:34:44 Let's see if I can get a shorter way to exit. . . 02:34:57 segfault 02:35:15 True. 02:35:31 25 minutes to decide on ADD, TIEMZ, NURF, and OVAR 02:35:40 Segfaulting grants 79 bytes. 02:35:52 just make the spec say the program must print "segfault" and exit 02:36:21 Well, if *that* is all I'm going to do, all I need is the ELF header. 02:36:40 segfault messages are non standard methinks 02:39:00 "Wadler later formulated a law to describe how effort was allotted to various topics: semantics is discussed half as much as syntax, syntax is discussed half as much as lexical syntax, and lexical syntax is discussed half as much as the syntax of comments. 02:39:32 (from A History of Haskell) 02:39:41 at the end we just about managed to squeeze in a vote saying that we would have only int math initially 02:39:59 though no-one bothered to say what *width* of integer 02:40:58 NURF and OVAR? 02:42:04 which of course leads to the obvious question: have you decided on comment syntax? 02:42:20 make it 2**16 bits wide 02:42:39 BTW to end-of-line 02:42:42 bsmntbombdood: heh 02:43:18 only 2048 words 02:43:22 i suggest ALSO as comment continuation :) 02:43:40 or whatever the correct spelling is. 02:44:26 zzzzzz 02:44:49 bsmntbombdood: I get the feeling his last header is broken. 02:45:43 Which, of course, it is. 02:47:25 i wonder just how slow 2**16 bit arithmatic would be 02:57:09 With a bit more munging, I was able to get "Hello world\n" to fit in the ELF header. 02:58:39 Hmm. 02:58:47 I wonder what the a.out specs look like. 03:37:52 Mmkay. If this *worked* the way I thought, I'd have a damned small program by now. 03:39:44 . . . Oh. 03:39:53 I, uh, don't have a.out support in-kernel. 03:40:28 . . . 03:47:30 -!- GregorR-L has joined. 03:49:18 consider a number system in base 2i 03:49:30 i think you can represent any complex number in it 03:49:40 with 4 symbols 03:50:03 47 (base 10) = 30103 (base 2i) 03:50:58 it's base -4 with a twist 03:51:08 lol 03:52:20 *sigh* 03:52:23 base -4 can't do complexes 03:53:28 -i = 0.2 03:53:29 Would anyone here happen to know the intimacies of the Linux a.out format well enough to tell me whether or not I'm being an idiot? 03:53:59 i = 10.2 03:54:07 Pikhq: Intimacies? No. Enough to tell me whether you're being an idiot? Maybe. 03:54:18 GregorR-L: Mmkay. 03:54:42 http://pikhq.nonlogic.org/hello-2.asm 03:55:17 I probably am doing something really stupid, like "trying to ignore the assembler's nice little 'header' and such". 03:55:29 I don't, however, speak ASM very well. 03:55:37 oerjan: yep 03:55:37 . . . Well, that is exactly what I *am* doing stupid, probably. 03:55:41 0,1,2,3,130,... 03:55:49 GregorR-L: Nor do I; I just learned it *today*. 03:55:58 lawlercoptah 03:56:59 oh darn, knuth though of it first 03:57:00 * Pikhq would *prefer* being able to do this 'uber-tiny Hello, World' thing using a.out, just because the header is much, much smaller. 03:57:02 131,132,133,120,...,110,...,100,... 03:57:02 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quater-imaginary_base 03:57:03 :( 03:57:51 I may just have to stick with my psuedo-ELF version. 03:58:06 and when he was in high school no less 03:58:37 oerjan: So what? I've written a few heaps of code in high school. :p 04:02:14 For my "Why the *hell* did you do this", working version: http://pikhq.nonlogic.org/hello.asm 04:02:29 87 bytes of "Hello, world". 04:06:00 Now make it a BF interpreter. 04:06:33 I'll get around to that later. 04:06:39 good idea 04:06:41 I still need to beat the dead horse. :p 04:14:12 or just a utm 04:27:38 * oerjan wonders if anyone ever used the quater-imaginary base seriously in computers 04:29:09 Why would you use it instead of 2 floats? 04:31:00 maybe you could do multiplication quickly or something 04:31:18 exact arithmetic, anyhow 04:31:51 maybe for the same reason no one uses exact reals 04:33:58 Uh, hi. I'd like to introduce you to the mpz_t type. 04:34:35 that's integers 04:36:06 i see one example: "Simplified optical complex multiplication using quater-imaginary number representation." 04:36:23 * GregorR-L 's head explodes. 04:36:37 optical multiplication 04:38:51 "But it takes a true genius (No offence Sid), to invent something as wacky as a Quater Imaginary Base Number System !" 04:39:16 thus we conclude that our bsmntbombdood is a genius too :) 04:39:51 heh 04:40:03 -!- calamari has joined. 04:41:50 anyway i'm off to bed 04:41:59 -!- oerjan has quit ("Good night"). 04:53:25 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 04:55:43 -!- calamari has joined. 04:59:58 bsmntbombdood: Fine. Here's something for you. 05:00:31 struct real_t {mpz_t integer, fractional}; 05:01:29 Q != R 05:01:58 What? That can represent all reals that fit in RAM. 05:02:16 Uhh, no. 05:02:20 Ohwait 05:02:26 Uhh, still no. 05:02:27 pi 05:02:28 e 05:02:30 sqrt(2) 05:02:36 Those don't fit in RAM. 05:02:43 touche 05:02:46 Unless you've got a Turing macine. 05:02:48 Touché indeed. 05:03:06 unicode bad 05:03:12 touch\'e 05:03:18 tex good 05:03:20 -!- GregorR has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:03:20 -!- sp3tt has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:03:32 Unicode good. 05:03:36 Tex also good. 05:04:20 But the Unicode "touché" is *IRC* good. 05:04:37 touch\'e is only \tex good. 05:04:58 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 05:05:34 BTW, I think "touché" renders properly in recent Tex builds, anyways. ;) 05:14:35 -!- GregorR has joined. 05:14:35 -!- sp3tt has joined. 05:19:54 -!- sp3tt has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:19:54 -!- GregorR has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:43:01 hmm, by representing strings as trees you get constant time concatenation and O(log n) time indexing 05:49:02 -!- GregorR has joined. 05:49:02 -!- sp3tt has joined. 05:54:15 -!- sp3tt has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:54:15 -!- GregorR has quit (pratchett.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 05:55:47 -!- GregorR has joined. 05:55:47 -!- sp3tt has joined. 05:59:39 Mmkay, I'm thinking that my little "Hello, world" program is the smallest asm one that will run on a 2.6 kernel. 06:01:35 how long? 06:09:40 80 bytes. 06:09:53 There's a 59 byte one, but it won't run on my system. 06:12:40 what makes you think it runs on others then? 06:14:42 Need to try it. 06:15:46 Runs on Gregor's box and Leibniz. 06:15:57 oh 06:16:12 Linux gdeskgor 2.6.17-14mdv #1 SMP Wed May 9 21:11:43 MDT 2007 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz GNU/Linux 06:16:24 Linux leibniz 2.6.8-3-386 #1 Thu Sep 7 05:39:52 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux 06:16:31 Notice something in common there? 06:22:29 Other than i686 GNU/Linux? No, not really. 06:24:16 What, the "it runs on those"? 06:24:32 . . . Don't expect coherency from me. 06:24:45 Please, don't. I've been doing a whee bit too much x86. 07:13:41 -!- calamari has joined. 07:16:35 -!- calamari has quit (Client Quit). 07:22:39 -!- calamari has joined. 07:38:16 -!- calamari has quit ("Leaving"). 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:44:24 -!- jix_ has joined. 10:02:11 -!- GregorR-L has quit ("Leaving"). 10:42:44 -!- iamchrist has joined. 10:43:51 -!- pb_ee1 has joined. 10:47:54 -!- pb_ee1 has left (?). 10:58:22 -!- aarcane has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 11:06:18 -!- aarcane_ has joined. 11:07:43 -!- iamchrist has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 11:09:28 -!- iamchrist has joined. 11:24:44 -!- aarcane_ has quit (Connection timed out). 12:09:14 -!- jix_ has quit ("CommandQ"). 12:57:59 -!- sebbu has joined. 13:31:25 -!- jix_ has joined. 14:05:24 fucking python 15:36:40 -!- crathman has joined. 16:13:07 oklopol: is that a new sexual deviancy? 16:13:53 -!- crathman has quit (Remote closed the connection). 16:14:15 oh dear, repelled him 16:23:27 no, that's my little bother. 16:23:41 *brother 16:23:42 though 16:23:53 he has a scoping disorder. 16:23:58 real bad one 17:20:44 -!- sp3tt_ has joined. 17:21:24 -!- sp3tt_ has left (?). 17:37:45 oklopol: scoping? 17:38:01 also, I am sure I have seen him elsenet... 18:07:02 yes exactly, it's very hard :< 18:08:11 even harder trying to explain a problem trying to keep it a double entendre 18:08:32 i now have my constants defined in every function. 18:08:48 how should i do it? 18:29:25 * SimonRC feels confused 18:51:45 :P 18:52:07 python has neither lexical nor dynamical scoping 18:52:37 so... how do i make a global i don't have to explicitly "include" in every function with "global" 18:52:39 -!- W|cked has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 19:10:31 oklopol: Use Tcl. 19:11:04 Globals are either prefixed with ::, or included in your function's namespace with "global" or "upvar". 19:24:35 :: okay 19:32:10 * Pikhq is too much of a Tcler for his own good 19:43:38 some things are really hard to phrase 19:49:48 I know 19:50:36 I occasionally end up expressing things with explicit qualifiers 19:50:43 *quantifiers 20:07:48 -!- oerjan has joined. 20:09:54 * SimonRC boggles at the number of letters in "haemmorrhage". 20:10:08 what's wrong with just "hemorage"? 20:10:15 :-P 20:10:37 what's wrong with just "bogles"? 20:10:57 what's wrong with just ""? 20:11:17 oerjan: "bogles" would be prnounces differently 20:11:24 *pronounced 20:12:01 actually it is just haemorrhage. 20:12:14 erm, oops, yes 20:13:10 ae is obviously from a greek diphthong, spelling latinized. 20:14:18 hemorrhage is fine. 20:14:57 nah, "hæmorrhage". 20:15:14 wikipedia says AE:e, BE:ae 20:15:34 "AE"? "BE"? 20:15:45 american/british 20:15:51 ok 20:16:47 anyway norwegian does not seem to have that word but we spell another word "hemoroider" 20:17:05 (google says about equally with or without double r) 20:17:33 we have a policy of simplifying spellings 20:17:42 English is usually the best language for technical vocab. 20:18:02 English has a policy of keeping the original language's spelling. 20:18:04 hehehe 20:18:14 "best"? 20:18:22 especially in words like "jalapeno" 20:18:31 English has a hell of a lot of technical vocabulary. . . 20:18:44 most computer terms, for example 20:18:56 It's also got a very, very confusing system of spelling, simply because it uses the spelling for the original language. 20:19:05 anyway norwegian also seems to be less willing to use excessively technical terms for common medical words 20:19:25 The French, being the closest "foreign" country, naturally hate anything English (linguistically). 20:19:58 Which is kind of ironic, considering that they forced *their* language into ours. 20:20:06 although we are not as fanatical as the icelandic, who translate nearly everything. 20:20:34 "Hallelujiah" "café" "ballet", etc 20:20:55 english is just a gigantic pile of garbage, linguistically. 20:21:01 heheh 20:21:13 it's so complicated, most linguists never bother studying it. 20:21:13 * SimonRC recalls PTerry's remark on that. 20:21:25 the verb declensions are ok 20:21:26 English is ever language. 20:21:29 Every. Single. One. 20:21:41 and we have got rid of fucking noun genders 20:21:46 English has a hell of a lot of technical vocabulary. . . 20:21:46 most computer terms, for example 20:21:48 (there we go. I used 3 different linguistic sources in a single sentence!) 20:21:52 The French, being the closest "foreign" country, naturally hate anything English (linguistically). 20:21:53 Which is kind of ironic, considering that they forced *their* language into ours. 20:21:55 siamese twins? 20:21:59 i heard there is an indian language which considers all english words included in theirs... 20:22:08 I don't *think* so. 20:22:26 Ok, so your hand is male, the fingers are female, the thumb is neuter, and the wrist is female of neuter depending on which word you use. WFT?! 20:22:30 *or 20:23:12 "And then the tsunami pummeled the fjord". There we go. One sentence, 4 languages. 20:23:32 ".. during the typhoon" 20:23:40 SimonRC: it depends on how the word sounds, not on what the thing is. 20:23:57 not in my experience 20:24:06 SimonRC: in the languages i'm familiar with, anyway (spanish, russian, ukrainian, hebrew, portuguese) 20:24:13 french is not that easy. 20:24:23 "... after the cumulonimbus clouds came in, following the Czar." 20:24:53 the germanic languages with genders are not so easy either 20:25:09 in both cases most endings have turned into -e or nothing 20:25:42 while in spanish/russian the endings still can be several vowels, mostly correlated with gender 20:26:01 noice that "came" uses an strong anglo-saxon past tense, whereas "pummelled" uses a weak one. 20:27:36 Even our Germanic roots are muddled. . . I think it's 4 or 5 Germanic languages that contribute to our *early* language. 20:27:40 on the other hand i read somewhere that you can guess most french words by the last letters, but it's a bit more complicated 20:27:42 oerjan: this will probably be eventually followed up with removal of gender from germanic langs 20:27:53 english has already done so 20:28:06 not in our lifetime of course 20:28:11 swedish and danish has collapsed masculine and feminine 20:28:14 in the meantime, just learn spanish instead :) 20:28:30 every natural language will die pretty soon. 20:28:35 Ne, ne, ne! Lernu Esperanton. 20:28:38 the overwhelming majority of words have "regular" gender 20:28:48 oklopol: Languages don't die, they blend. 20:28:56 languages do dei. 20:28:56 die. 20:29:01 yes 20:29:08 the big ones aren't in any danger at teh moment, though. 20:29:11 They 'die' by merging into another language. 20:29:11 they die if no one remembers them anymore. 20:29:16 oklopol: correct 20:29:16 Pikhq: no, often they just die 20:29:25 that is not dying, Pikhq 20:29:33 that's... merging 20:29:33 Pikhq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_death 20:30:05 the majority of languages currently spoken are in immediate danger of death. 20:30:13 it's a serious issue for linguists. 20:30:43 (immediate, as in right now, not in a couple hundred years) 20:30:58 they will merge into english first, prolly, then, hopefully, they all die and ppl start using a _good_ language, an artificially made one. 20:31:00 I stand corrected. 20:31:01 within 1-2 generations 20:31:15 many currently still spoken languages will die 20:31:16 oklopol: that last phrase is an oxmoron 20:31:34 The problem is that no speakable language offers that much over any other, apart from the people who use it. 20:31:47 as i also am an ox moron, you will have to tell me what that is 20:31:54 *oxymoron 20:31:58 STFW 20:32:04 STFWikipedia 20:32:35 hmm.. so? 20:32:44 oklopol: if everybody in the world speaks one language... that will just suck 20:32:49 monocultures are bad 20:32:56 the artificial langs can;t really be much better than any natural ones 20:33:00 perhaps, why not make more than one language? 20:33:04 yes they can. 20:33:08 how? 20:33:10 no, they can't. 20:33:13 natural languages suck :\ 20:33:20 languages are highly evolved tools 20:33:27 (natural languages) 20:33:33 mm 20:33:46 perhaps in a few hundred years spoken languages will give way to visual cybernetically transmitted ones... 20:33:49 just as you can't design an organism better suited for survival that the naturally evolved ones, you can't design a language that's better than the ones we have 20:34:05 the existing stuff is just too good 20:34:07 :) 20:34:09 (unless we somehow find a "natural" telepathy) 20:34:12 i think it sucks 20:34:18 yes, but you're ignorant 20:34:21 hah 20:34:22 you wish 20:34:32 beyond the obviously awkard things, like having 93 different phonemic clicks and 8273 verb declensions, there is not much you can do to make a language better 20:34:47 SimonRC: that's not "awkward", that's "expressive" 20:34:52 lament: I'm going to beg to differ. . . 20:35:11 it mostly comes down to libraries, i.e. vocab, which English is good at 20:35:26 i don't have anything on paper about this yet, so you will have to wait a few years for my arguments. 20:35:34 English is an excellent language. I love it. 20:35:39 I can make an organism which is *much* better than other organisms in certain niches. 20:35:46 Of course I love the other ones too. 20:35:48 If you increase the density, people end up speaking slower by ecxactly the same amount because everything is more fragile 20:36:10 SimonRC: pretty much; nevertheless, it's good for things like poetry 20:36:32 if you make it more logical, you find that many people don't think logically, and that they want to express some compilcated things often and some simple things rarely 20:36:33 SimonRC: a language that doesn't support poetry well is not particularly interesting :) 20:36:55 that last point is of particular note... 20:37:29 english is very expressive thanks mostly to vocab 20:37:34 learning some Set theory, Prolog, and Haskell did far more for me than 4 years of French 20:37:47 SimonRC: how are those things at all related? 20:38:03 well, languages are supposed to offer different views on the world 20:38:04 Esperanto bonas por poezio, mi pensas. 20:38:26 esperanto is terrible simply because of the suffixes :) 20:38:35 not enough variety 20:38:39 At first, I kept getting frustrated by that lack of HoF in English. 20:38:40 Ne, ne, ne. Tre bona! 20:38:42 of course, that's not really an issue 20:38:55 just write unrhymed poetry, like many natural langs do 20:39:05 (japanese) 20:39:13 but small vocab is also an impediment 20:39:15 はい。 20:39:19 Pikhq: ? 20:39:29 you just said an empty line! 20:39:35 No, I said "Hai". 20:39:40 in Japanese? 20:39:48 Not my fault you don't do Unicode. 20:39:49 Yeah. 20:39:54 i have a crappy font 20:40:01 Fixedsys 20:40:15 a.k.a Fixe-days :-P 20:40:27 anyway having many languages is nice :) 20:40:35 Jes. 20:40:39 but not stable 20:40:47 SimonRC: well, no 20:40:55 SimonRC: having many languages is more stable than having one 20:41:08 if you have one, it will break apart into several 20:41:15 SimonRC: The history of the human race would like to come up and tell you about this bit about "always having multiple languages". 20:41:38 I meant it isn't stable *now*. 20:41:44 SimonRC: latin is an excellent example, and it's happening slowly with spanish and english 20:41:47 we seem to be heading for a few dozen 20:42:02 SimonRC: hopefully more 20:42:13 lament: gobal communications may slow down the differentiation 20:42:18 SimonRC: there's a lot of, for example, tiny european languages that coexist with the main language and aren't dying 20:42:24 (catalan and such) 20:42:27 hmm :-S 20:42:30 ah, point 20:42:55 a whole LOT of langs are dying in africa and south america and australia 20:42:59 they will most likely die 20:43:45 i believe there's something like 6000 at the moment and we're heading for 600 very very soon :( 20:43:58 but 600 is still decent 20:44:45 I get the feeling that the number of languages in existence is cyclic. . . 20:45:02 Pikhq: no 20:45:02 We got a ton of languages dying or converging at one point, and later, we get them breaking up. . . 20:45:14 Pikhq: no, globalization makes it smaller 20:45:23 Pikhq: it's been declining for a while 20:45:33 (discovery of america was a biggie there) 20:45:39 Yeah, it *does*, but I can't help but feel that it more changes the intensity of the cycle. 20:46:05 Pikhq: when latin broke apart, the number of parts was much smaller than the number of languages that died as latin expanded 20:46:07 next cycle starts when when the human race disperses into outer space 20:46:10 *when 20:46:30 Pikhq: we used to have many small tribes living pretty much separatly 20:46:40 Pikhq: so, a huge number of languages, each one with only a couple hundred speakers 20:46:48 this is still the situation in some parts of the world 20:46:48 lament: Yeah. The increasing globalisation *changes the intensity* of the cycle. 20:46:58 all these tiny languages will surely die 20:47:10 (outer space though) 20:47:15 no, it changes the basic isolation parameter 20:47:26 You don't disprove my point by proving it; you *really* don't. 20:47:31 Pikhq: you think things like the internet do nothing to decrease the number of languages? 20:47:56 and to "stabilize" existing ones 20:48:01 relatively speaking 20:48:12 lament: Of *course* I do. It's just that that means that when the cycle goes around to *increase* the number of languages, there will be fewer languages at *that* peak than the previous one. 20:48:20 the internet _could_ stabilize a language that was thinly dispersed 20:48:23 spanish, for example, was falling apart steadily 20:48:31 but now the process is slowed down by media and pop culture 20:48:35 in finland it's mostly the less intellectual ones that adapt english into their spoken finnish 20:48:42 as people in spain watch latin american movies, etc 20:48:44 intellectual? 20:48:45 hmm 20:48:57 Although the languages would probably split apart *less* simply because of globalisation, it will still happen. 20:48:57 i doubt each and every word i write. 20:49:02 (especially with the smaller ones) 20:49:33 usually languages split after a big expansion of a single language followed by the collapse of the associated empire 20:49:34 Consider Esperanto. . . And the *class* of languages that have formed around it, the Esperantidons. 20:49:38 it does not change the _intensity_ of the cycle but its balance point 20:49:48 oerjan: Fair enough. 20:50:06 and we don't yet know whether the balance point has shifted so far that it is now 1. 20:50:19 it's "cyclic" in the same death as the "circle of life" is cyclic 20:50:27 it helps to think of languages as living things 20:50:48 they practically are 20:52:23 (thinking of them as species is more accurate but less exciting) 20:52:25 like bacteria perhaps, which also have the ability to merge genetic material 20:52:38 i just removed about a grapeful of my hair 8| 20:53:18 you measure hair by the grapful? 20:53:29 the reason artificial languages can't work is that they'll stop being artificial as they're used 20:53:30 oklopol: that may or may not be a bad thing, dependent on whether you are a good self-hairdresser... 20:53:37 well... it's a big ball 20:53:47 lament: not if that's not allowed. 20:53:52 oklopol: not allowed?? 20:53:56 !! 20:53:57 Language Police? 20:54:00 sure 20:54:04 GregorR and the like. 20:54:07 lament: that's what has happened with several signed languages, i guess 20:54:11 oklopol: what arrangement is you hair in? 20:54:13 oerjan: correct 20:54:19 oerjan: that's a good example actually 20:54:21 lament: A good few artificial languages are just *meant* to be artificial at the start, with the *hope* that they'll become natural. 20:54:21 it's long and all around. 20:54:30 Pikhq: well, the problem is 20:54:30 hm 20:54:36 Pikhq: say you have esperanto, it's nice and regular 20:54:45 Not true, but anyways. 20:54:56 Pikhq: if people actually spoke it, it would become irregular in no time 20:55:03 Pikhq: as i understand, this has already started to happen 20:55:10 this did happen to sign languages 20:55:16 It's also forked into the Esperantidos. . . 20:55:42 (Some, like Ido, are mutually intelligible, so are more like dialects) 20:55:50 someone comes along and decides to add voicing harmony, then they dike out the voicing distingtion on sybilants, then fuck around with it some more, and before you know it, it's and irregular mess 20:56:26 SimonRC: many things happen naturally, without anybody specifically "deciding" to do stuff 20:57:10 you know what I mean 20:57:36 the only way to avoid changing a language is to not use it :) 20:57:51 (case in point: hebrew) 20:57:58 however some language changes probably really started as deliberate in-jokes 20:58:16 Or to make it so delicate that a change will tumble the whole thing down. . . 20:58:18 hebrew was revived after 2K years of beind dead 20:58:34 eek! zombie language! 20:58:35 so it is less "evolved" than other languages 20:58:49 Some sort of esoteric natural language. . . 20:58:58 the people responsible for revival actually made up a whole bunch of words 20:59:04 like 'kettle' 20:59:11 acbg,j. 20:59:13 for things that weren't around 2000 years ago 20:59:18 Pikhq: if you make it too delicate then it will not work in noisy environments 20:59:42 oerjan: You could just as well make the *grammer* far to delicate, instead of the phonemes. 20:59:45 o 20:59:45 o 20:59:45 o 20:59:54 wrong chan. 21:00:07 Pikhq: people will just simplify it then. 21:00:19 this is happening in many languages 21:00:49 Pikhq: but if there is redundancy then there _will_ be possibility for compression 21:00:49 eg latin lost its cases and several verb tenses 21:01:40 Hmm. . . The Malbolge of esoteric languages? 21:01:47 Err. 21:01:47 oerjan: and if there's no redundancy, people will introduce it, because redundancy is useful 21:01:48 Spoken. 21:02:02 although several new tenses were added, so romance languages may actually be more complicated on that point 21:02:11 oerjan: i don't think they are. 21:02:20 oerjan: and spanish is losing some tenses too 21:02:33 well, lost 21:02:37 lament: i just recall someone saying so 21:03:18 it may depend on if you count the compound tenses as well, i guess 21:03:24 *whether 21:04:37 spanish lost future subjunctive 21:04:45 "The future subjunctive is rarely used in modern Spanish and mostly appears in old texts, legal documents, and certain expressions" 21:05:07 (it's a simple tense) 21:06:25 most recent changes in finnish are just that a few complex tenses have died because the majority of finnish ppl don't know how to use them 21:06:28 one of the tenses formed after Latin from merging infinitive with haber, i guess? 21:06:32 not tenses 21:06:36 ...things-. 21:07:37 -!- Trey_ has joined. 21:08:10 -!- Trey_ has changed nick to W|cked. 21:13:48 W|cked: are you one of the language-the-shall-not-be-named devs 21:13:51 ? 21:14:36 (the actually-nothing-wrong-with-it-but-getting-excessive-attention language) 21:20:39 lolcode? 21:20:44 HAI 21:21:02 and no :( 21:28:21 Did you hear about their 2-armed IF? 21:28:32 like an if-else in C 21:28:35 ? 21:29:14 W|cked: Due to various compromises between everyone's different ideas, it comes in 72 different forms, all functionally identical. 21:29:34 I was on the comittee that decided that 21:29:55 Eris a god who gets results. 21:30:25 For what language are we talking about? 21:30:28 lolcode? :x 21:30:53 yes 21:30:59 You're joking right? 21:31:26 no 21:31:36 example? 21:31:38 I'll dig out the description 21:31:45 kk 21:32:00 note that they are not 72 _completely_ different forms, just a form with several independent variations 21:32:05 we voted in the following: "IZ [?] [(.|\n) YARLY] (.|\n) (.|\n) [NOWAI (.|\n) ] KTHX" 21:32:13 2*3*2*2*3 = 72 21:33:29 a lot of that comes from treating . and \n as equivalent. 21:33:39 true 21:33:50 which actually sounds sensible. 21:34:15 we also decided thaat everything is a 1d array, I think 21:34:18 haskell does the same with ; and \n 21:34:24 oerjan: erm, kinda 21:34:36 for the right definition of \n 21:34:49 actually it has some slightly-compilcated rules about turning whitespace into ;{} 21:34:58 ;{} 21:35:08 the grammar is in terms of {}; , not whitespace 21:35:53 without that you get 2*2*1*1*2 = 8 21:36:14 python may also be similar 21:36:33 but simpler 21:36:58 -!- jix_ has quit ("CommandQ"). 21:38:17 what's that YARLY about? 21:38:28 oh, yeah really 21:39:07 -!- iamchrist has changed nick to aarcane. 21:39:39 "noway" is "else if(false)"? 21:39:45 *NOWAI 21:40:26 IZ - YARLY - NOWAI - KTHZ = IF - THEN - ELSE - END, i guess 21:41:00 not _that_ strange, apart from the variations on YARLY 21:41:46 why are we discussing lolcode 21:41:57 * W|cked stammers 21:42:01 hm, in fact that is a bit broken, you can have ? . YARLY 21:42:02 W...ww.wwhat lolcode 21:42:58 SimonRC: you have some kind of unhealthy interest in this language. You keep bringing it up. 21:43:07 maybe 21:43:32 at least edit its esolang page then :) 21:44:29 hard to do when it is still under construction 21:44:33 ICBA 21:44:39 SimonRC: Learn a less odd language, like assembly. 21:45:10 lolcode doesn't seem particularly odd from what i've heard about it 21:45:25 it seems the developers are not knowledgeable enough to introduce non-standard features 21:45:40 (not knowledgeable and not imaginative enough) 21:45:49 Fine. Learn a *more* odd language. 21:45:54 Like PEBBLE. 21:58:23 how do you lot remember who everyone is on this channel? 21:58:31 there are so many here now 21:58:57 well, i'm lament 21:59:02 and i'm pretty sure you're SimonRC 21:59:05 yes 21:59:07 *sigh* 21:59:11 those others, i have no idea 21:59:18 :D 21:59:19 oh, oerjan is oerjan 21:59:36 but I forget things like whether GregorR or RogerTheGreat is the on with the hats. 21:59:44 That would be Gregor. 22:00:07 mst of you blur together a lot for me 22:00:18 i'm the one who has far too many towels. 22:00:30 Even me, Mr "I <3 PEBBLE to much"? 22:00:46 heh 22:01:32 well, do you forget things like that about people outside the net? 22:02:53 gregorR should be easy, we have pictures of him. 22:03:50 rogerthegreat is a bit vague to me too. 22:06:30 i guess information sort of accretes on people until it reaches critical mass 22:06:40 suppose so 22:07:17 oerjan is the gay norwegian farmer 22:07:30 and fizzie is the retired scuba diver with 7 cats 22:07:41 * Pikhq is? 22:08:21 you're just a blur. 22:08:34 Pikhq is the obnoxious 9 year old with plans for world domination. 22:09:27 oh, right. 22:09:34 -_-' 22:09:48 Feeling 'complemented' here. 22:10:36 Lament is the Russian mafia hitman. 22:11:11 people who know that little factoid tend to not live for very long 22:11:35 Fuck. 22:11:48 oerjan: congrats, you just doomed everyone in the channel 22:12:24 oh that's ok, just part of my plans for world domination. besides i had to kill them anyhow since you revealed i was gay. 22:13:04 i have a complete personality assigned to all of you. 22:13:07 i thought that was public knowledge, hence the oerjan.isgay.com website and all that 22:13:21 it just might be biased for those who talk little. 22:13:33 yes 22:13:42 let's just ban all those who talk little 22:14:59 lament... i think of you as a connection between functional and imperative programming... i have no idea where that has come from :) 22:15:02 indeed i had to move out of the closet. it got too full of towels. 22:16:11 plus, i have a who-is-friends-with-whom diagram in my head, i guess deduced from conversations of small groups 22:16:54 I mostly play music and take pictures and do no esoteric programming. 22:17:01 I did, however, take a course with cpressey at one point. 22:17:09 oh, ah, lament is friends with GregorR yet talks about math, GregorR i've mostly seen talking about c++. 22:17:25 (not that cpressey is ever around) 22:17:28 or D, or plof 22:17:30 lament: you have a does-a-lot brand on you. 22:17:43 talks-a-lot maybe 22:17:45 :) 22:17:57 I can't remember which of you is the other one who konws Haskell... 22:18:01 oh, and i put up falsebot which inspired egobot 22:18:02 oerjan: 22:18:04 *-: 22:18:06 * oerjan raises hand 22:18:10 i know haskell 22:18:10 hmm 22:18:13 also... lament 22:18:14 yeah 22:18:16 hmm 22:18:22 and... SimonRC i guess, a bit 22:18:23 or? 22:18:24 i also like python :) 22:18:30 bah 22:18:56 "Oooh, like, we can do duck typing. Yay!" 22:19:19 where is that ehird guy again? i finally got his little language implemented after i switched from Perl to Python 22:19:26 and there is no conflict between cowboy.draw() and sprite.draw(), nosiree 22:19:51 (note: Haskell can resolve that ambiguity just fine) 22:20:27 with modules, but then so can python 22:20:36 nah, python isn;t a bad language at all 22:20:40 oerjan: i made some programs with sadol when was around, and he then disappeared for a few months 22:20:49 anyway, the creator 22:21:11 i guess that'll happen to you too 22:21:19 It's just that my experienc of it is spending half an hour implementing some algebraic data types, then realising that it would be easier in a language with native support for the darned things 22:23:20 i am sure some people have the opposite experience with objects in a functional language 22:28:00 true 22:29:44 yes, me 22:30:11 why do i still have to write essays on paper... i now have to erase about 70 words just to add one sentence i accidentally left out. 22:30:22 hmm 22:30:30 i'm so in the conversation. 22:30:38 you are not allowed to use a printout? 22:30:47 nope. 22:32:16 do it on computer first, then copy it out longhand? 22:32:48 yeah... that's what i should've done. 22:32:57 did that last time 22:33:13 i finished the essay right on time, the night before i should've returned it 22:33:34 but it took me 6 months to finally copy it on paper and turn it in :) 22:35:14 plus this makes no sense since my handwriting is undecipherable 22:57:17 -!- GregorR-L has joined. 22:58:09 -!- sebbu has quit ("@+"). 22:58:17 * Pikhq still doesn't appreciate being called a 9 year old. . . 22:58:26 That's an insult to 9 year olds everywhere, I fear. 22:58:59 would 99 year old be better? 22:59:15 I'm not quite that senile. 22:59:26 sez you! 22:59:49 You can call me that if I get a hip replacement. 22:59:53 but your perception is clearly distorted by your condition. 23:01:48 Of course it's distorted by my 17-year-old-ness. 23:02:53 well, 17 year old dogs are often senile. 23:03:13 (you thought no one knew you were a dog on the internet?) 23:03:15 I'm a member of Homo sapiens, last I checked. 23:03:26 i thought only oerjan was homo 23:03:28 . . . Fine. I'm only a dog when I'm online. 23:03:35 When I'm offline, I change species. 23:03:46 a weredog, ok 23:04:02 And a genius one at that. 23:10:11 wow, ich bin fucking fertig :) 23:11:14 following conversations and playing irc trivia i write 1 wpm on average 23:12:10 i'm pretty sure i'll never have to write another essay in german or swedish, excluding matriculation. 23:13:01 One word per minute? 23:13:05 That's a bit. . . Slow. 23:13:12 und there war viel rejoicing. 23:13:46 ARGH!!! GERMANISH! 23:15:38 it's a bit slow, that exactly was my point 23:16:12 of course, standard deviation is needed before jumping into conclusions. 23:16:24 germany outlawed hacking tools 23:16:26 Oh, you mean the average for essay writing. . . 23:16:28 I blame IrC. 23:16:43 lament: I think their definition is vague enough to include the human brain. 23:16:55 Pikhq: have you seen Folkspraak? 23:17:36 No, I haven't. 23:17:44 Why would I care about the people's speaking? 23:18:07 usually you hear it, now see. 23:21:16 it was an auxiliary Germanish language that we discussed on the conlang mailing list years ago. I am surprised to see it has a (disputed notability) Wikipedia article, and (not as surprisingly) has split into several versions. 23:21:24 tonight, i'm gonna go to sleep early! ------> 23:21:59 *not 23:22:58 -!- CakeProphet_ has quit (Remote closed the connection). 23:27:39 Pikhq was on a conlang list? 23:28:14 no i was 23:28:27 * SimonRC too 23:28:39 I am on CONLANG-L and the ZBB. 23:34:37 what the hell 23:34:41 quoting wp: "there is no article in Latin, Sanskrit, Persian or in some modern Indo-European languages such as standard Russian and Czech." 23:34:49 what's this non-standard russian that has articles 23:42:29 oh, russian wikipedia has some info 23:42:48 you mean it actually exists? 23:43:05 (that non-standard russian) 23:43:39 the example given is from late-1600s church language. 23:43:58 Anybody know of a good algorithm/library for comparing images more intelligently than just pixel differences? 23:45:20 the original slavic church language was old Bulgarian, wasn't it. and Bulgarian has articles. 23:45:39 not that there is necessarily a connection. 23:45:42 yes, that's how it got there. 23:45:47 yes, there's likely a connection. 23:50:07 what does "skoal (dip) declension" mean? It's in the article on Bulgarian. 23:50:15 (i'm guessing case) 23:50:59 i don't understand. 23:52:19 the reason i am not sure if there is a connection is because i don't know how recent Bulgarian articles are 23:53:04 it was changed from "noun" to "skoal (dip)" without comment. 23:54:36 i'll change it into "case", me thinks. 23:55:00 GregorR-L: Raster->SVG, diff svg1 svg2 23:55:01 :p 23:56:07 ......................................... no :P 23:56:53 Hmm. . . You *could* do something a bit lengthy by comparing color values, edges, etc. . . 23:57:01 But I'm not sure that's "Good".