00:03:13 AI has been solved? 00:03:18 Hope it's Friendly. 00:03:49 No, it's just some kook. :P 00:04:23 Oh, it's been "solved in theory". I wonder what that means. 00:04:39 It's some tiny inscrutable forth program, and a javascript page that only works with MSIE. 00:05:15 LOL, if you click "Terminate" 00:05:17 It pops up 00:05:18 The AI Mind is a living, sentient creature. You may unclick your decision. 00:06:18 TODAY is Friday, December 19 2008 12:36:40 PM ** Stopped ** 00:06:19 AI-Mind Previous Thought - AI CREATE IDEAS 00:06:21 xDxDxD 00:06:23 http://aimind-i.com/ 00:06:57 -!- Corun has quit ("This computer has gone to sleep"). 00:07:15 The Mind goes into hibernation state (Sleep) each night at 11:59 PM and wake up at 5:59 AM 00:07:15 unless it detects a keyboard entry. Then it awakes and remains awake till the following night. 00:11:45 -!- jix has quit ("..."). 00:28:40 so yeah. new blog. huzzah./ 00:28:42 http://wellnowwhat.net/blog/ 00:28:43 :P 00:28:52 blogs. how 2006. 00:28:58 :P 00:29:00 lol, wordpress. 00:29:04 How 2005. 00:29:07 yeah yeah 00:29:07 :p 00:29:23 * ehird huddles off to his written-in-Haskell tumblelog on his HD 00:29:52 i dont like the whole microblogging thing. i dont have microbloggable ideas. 00:29:56 i rarely tweet. 00:30:26 tumblelog != microblog 00:30:36 oh it so is 00:30:42 tumblelog = (blog - crap) + links + quotes + videos + pics. 00:30:54 tumblog 00:30:59 tog 00:31:06 00:31:19 i have a tumblr account. i dont like it much. 00:31:30 tumblr is shit. 00:32:21 anyway 00:32:30 tumblelogs are short form blogs. 00:32:35 nope, 00:32:39 yep? 00:32:50 ok, plenty of mixed media too 00:32:51 you're wrong. have a nice day :P 00:32:54 uh no? 00:33:00 A tumblelog is a variation of a blog that favors short-form, mixed-media posts over the longer editorial posts frequently associated with blogging. Common post formats found on tumblelogs include links, photos, quotes, dialogues, and video. Unlike blogs, tumblelogs are frequently used to share the author's creations, discoveries, or experiences while providing little or no commentary. 00:33:04 straight from the wiki. 00:33:06 they're also wrong. 00:33:13 note: i use terminology how the fuck I want. 00:33:27 so basically you're an idiot. 00:33:45 hey, all the cool people do it. 00:33:46 like oklopol. 00:37:13 -!- icefox has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 00:39:58 -!- icefox has joined. 00:40:38 -!- psygnisfive has changed nick to p5[cafe]. 00:49:34 just like humpty dumpty 00:50:32 p5[cafe]: which wiki? :-P 00:51:20 Then again, I guess people do often refer to communication media themselves rather than the content providers. 00:51:43 I heard it on the radio, I saw it on TV, I read it online, I found it on the wiki. 00:52:27 People don't do that and expect others to know which radio station or TV station or web site or wiki they're talking about, though. 00:52:33 it came through the atmosphere 00:52:55 I perceived it via some waves. 00:53:12 waves, dude 00:54:20 actually, for 99% of the world, "i found it on the wiki" is fairly unambiguous 00:54:40 First, an emitter produced some waves. Then a converter converted the waves. Then a converter converted the waves. Then a converter converted the waves. Then a converter converted the waves. Then, lo and behold, they were inside my sensory organ. 00:54:53 True. There aren't all that many special-purpose wikis out there. 00:55:57 Still, I use Wikipedia, Wiktionary, the B Nomic Wiki, and, occasionally, the Esolang Wiki. 00:56:25 Less than an hour ago I was looking up Spanish words on the Spanish Wiktionary. 00:59:04 Well, I have to go do things. See you later tonight, possibly, or else tomorrow. 01:14:44 -!- oerjan has quit ("Lost terminal"). 01:55:13 kerlo: the one and only! 01:55:18 -!- p5[cafe] has changed nick to psygnisfive. 02:45:02 -!- psygnisfive has quit (Remote closed the connection). 04:42:20 -!- upyr[ema` has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 04:47:59 -!- CakeProphet has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 04:50:30 -!- CakeProphet has joined. 05:38:20 -!- icefox has quit. 05:57:50 -!- psygnisfive has joined. 07:44:22 -!- olsner has joined. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 09:37:20 -!- olsner has quit ("Leaving"). 09:43:59 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined. 10:01:50 -!- GreaseMonkey has quit ("Client Excited"). 10:16:33 -!- lifthrasiir has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)). 10:43:49 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Remote closed the connection). 11:11:57 -!- jix has joined. 11:25:41 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined. 11:31:46 -!- BeholdMyGlory has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 11:57:12 -!- DH_ has joined. 12:08:09 is everyone asleep? 12:09:36 Yes. 12:09:40 But I'm sleeptyping. 12:10:27 interesting. That like stereotyping in Mono? 12:11:18 ffffffffffffffffff 12:49:25 no 12:49:39 I'm awake but a bit busy 12:57:48 -!- KingOfKarlsruhe has joined. 13:25:31 -!- upyr[emacs] has joined. 14:10:04 -!- DH_ has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 14:38:44 -!- kwufo has quit (Remote closed the connection). 14:41:45 -!- icewizard has joined. 14:49:30 hi icewizard 14:49:37 you new? :) 14:49:48 hi ehird 14:49:53 hi 14:51:36 is there any other interesting language feature i should consider? 14:51:58 except pure functions since my language is imperative 14:52:18 Lazy evaluation. Getting it to work in an imperative language is hell on earth, but it's still cool :-P 14:52:31 D has a sort of lazy evaluation 14:52:36 True. 14:52:38 but it works more like a delegate 14:52:46 You can't really do things like infinite lists without pain, though. 14:52:46 hi ehird 14:52:56 ktne: extensible syntax? 14:52:59 well, i never quite got infinite lists 14:53:00 Lisp-style macros? 14:53:07 ehird: yes, proper macros are planned 14:53:25 OK. ktne: make them more generalized, so the syntax is essentially completely extensible? 14:53:32 That'd be neat, and it'd only have overhead if you actually used it. 14:53:36 And even then only at compile-time. 14:53:52 my idea is to make something like this: 14:54:04 Is there an esoteric language similar to forth? 14:54:06 not actual code, just pseudocode 14:54:14 icewizard: yep, see FALS. 14:54:17 *FALSE 14:54:23 Thanks 14:54:25 def my_macro(string):string .... {function body} 14:54:35 ktne: yeah, except 14:54:39 you can't use that nicely 14:54:39 so the macro is a function that takes a string and returns a string 14:54:42 e.g. a new control structure 14:54:47 foobarbaz (foo) { ... } 14:54:47 then at compile time 14:54:50 yes 14:54:51 you can't define that with yours 14:54:52 also 14:54:54 Pseudocode: that's be a neat name for an esoteric language :-) 14:54:54 surely you can 14:54:55 manipulating code as a string is hell 14:55:00 my idea is to take 14:55:03 you want to give the macro an AST 14:55:10 everything between {} as a string 14:55:14 yes i need ast 14:55:27 I'd just expose the parser at compile-time. Then, macros can go in a library on top of that. 14:55:54 well, ok, wait a sec to tell you about the syntax 14:56:19 basically all parentheses have to be balanced 14:56:35 Even in strings? 14:56:38 and strings must be closed 14:56:42 no, not in strings 14:56:48 Ok, well, this sounds like very conventional syntax. 14:56:53 yes 14:57:01 I just mean: Give the programmer a way to extend the parser at compile-time. 14:57:07 Heck, expose the whole compiler. 14:57:12 wait a sec 14:57:13 Then macros can just be a small library 14:57:20 the macro is any function 14:57:27 That won't work. 14:57:30 that is marked as a macro using a flag 14:57:35 You'd have to compile the code before you compile the code. 14:57:42 well of course 14:57:52 it's just that it's dynamic 14:57:55 it's not a static language 14:58:04 Lisp is dynamic,too. 14:58:05 -!- icefox has joined. 14:58:09 And it has macros separate from functions, entirely. 14:58:21 each function is compiled when entered 14:58:35 or at least when it's flagged as a macro 14:58:50 then that function will be usable in two ways 14:59:08 at the start of a statement without ; or a statement containing {} 14:59:13 so if your macro is my_macro 14:59:31 or until newline if nothing else is present 14:59:34 then those will be preprocessed by the macros 14:59:46 my_macro ... any string ... 14:59:47 I dunno. It sounds like a hack. 14:59:50 my_macro ..... ; 14:59:52 A huge, ugly hack. 14:59:58 my_macro (asdasd)asd ... {}; 15:00:03 it's not 15:00:12 those are the ways in which a macro can be used 15:00:18 I would really, really just expose the compiler at compile-time. There's no reason not to. 15:00:36 because there is no compiler 15:00:45 i plan to run it using a llvm jit 15:00:50 there is no type checking and such 15:00:57 just at runtime 15:02:37 my main question 15:02:37 if there isn't a compiler your language doesn't exist 15:02:41 you either have a compiler or an interpreter 15:02:42 should the macro be processed 15:02:48 it's interpreted 15:02:53 be processed when the function is called 15:02:58 or when the function is declared 15:03:11 if the function is processed when called, then the macro can expand in function of function arguments 15:03:15 otherwise it's fixed 15:04:11 can expand in function of function arguments -> can expand depending on the actual value of function arguments 15:04:34 i guess that would be more powerful but also somewhat slower, eventually it should be cached 15:05:13 usually lisp macros are all at compile time, right? 15:05:18 that would be declaration time 15:05:41 FALSE looks ugly. What's the most aesthetically pleasing esoteric lang? 15:05:44 this one will be probably on call time 15:05:56 icewizard: that whitespace langauge? :) 15:06:26 Urgh :-( 15:07:17 Unlambda: Your Functional Programming Language Nightmares Come True 15:07:23 http://www.madore.org/~david/programs/unlambda/ 15:07:40 check that one 15:08:29 icewizard: BCT 15:08:37 http://esolangs.org/wiki/BCT 15:09:03 -!- jix has quit ("..."). 15:09:45 ehird: so? 15:09:52 what do you think? 15:10:10 ktne: I still prefer the idea of an extensible parser at compile time 15:10:19 It nets the same effect, but without the hack, and with more oppertunitiess 15:11:08 not necesarily 15:11:17 it won't have the same effect as a call time expansion 15:11:30 umm, and it shouldn't 15:11:32 that's not a macro 15:11:42 why it's not a macro? 15:12:00 hmm 15:12:06 macros are compile-time expansion 15:12:07 i can see why it wouldn't be a macro 15:12:28 i guess i will have to add both of them 15:12:32 why? 15:12:38 you can build call-time from compile-time 15:12:42 one of them will be just a sort of eval 15:12:43 i believe 15:13:00 -!- icewizard has quit ("http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client"). 15:13:06 you cannot build call-time from compile-time because call-time can make use of actual passed arguments 15:13:15 uhhh 15:13:19 i think you need to try lisp macros 15:13:21 because you absolutely can 15:13:33 yes but they look less powerful 15:13:39 than call-time expansion 15:13:45 wrong. 15:13:50 compile-time expansion is just constant call-time expansion 15:13:58 ...nope 15:14:07 i cannot see any case where it would be otherwise 15:14:53 i mean, any compile-time expansion will have the same result as a call-time expansion that does not make use of actual values of passed parameters 15:15:09 I disagree strongly, have you _tried_ lisp macros? 15:15:13 fun(a,b) { macro {..} ...} 15:15:45 now, if this is call-time then the macro can make use of actual value of a and b 15:16:18 at compile time it cannot make use of their value, unless it's expanded in a piece of code that has "if (a==..) then {..} else {...}" 15:16:27 uuhh, that's not a relevant example 15:16:37 ok, then what would be such an example? 15:17:08 well, generally macros aren't used like that 15:17:23 how are macros used then? 15:17:50 try googling for lisp macros, here's one good article: 15:17:59 http://www.defmacro.org/ramblings/lisp.html 15:18:00 well i think i'm quite familiar 15:18:10 and this is why i do not understand your objection 15:18:24 except the AST-tree objection 15:18:28 it's your language, anyway. 15:18:42 i don't say that i disagree with you 15:18:49 because i don't understand your objection :) 15:19:45 my idea is that the function would make use of a stdlib function to parse the string into an ast tree 15:19:52 Ew. 15:19:59 instead of it being provided as part of the compiler 15:26:18 ehird: if i try to preparse something as an AST tree before feeding it to the macro 15:26:35 ... then you need an extensible AST to allow advanced macros. 15:26:37 then i have arbitrary limitations on the syntax that it can process 15:26:44 And macros can be built on top of an extensible AST themselves. 15:26:47 note that lisp doesn't have this issue 15:26:48 Thus, extensible parser at compile time. 15:27:07 because lisp doesn't use an internal representation that is different from the syntax representation 15:28:18 but because my syntax representation is not the same as internal representation i cannot preprocess the code as an AST tree before feeding it into the macro 15:28:21 do you get me? 15:28:32 Yes. 15:28:36 But only 15:28:41 because of your self-imposed limitations on the parser. 15:28:57 actually there is no limitation, it's the opposite 15:29:10 the parser is a stdlib function that is called by the macro 15:29:21 on the parts of the code that are known syntax 15:29:35 the macro has to handle the other parts of the macros that cannot be parsed by the standard parser 15:30:04 because there is no limitation on what form the syntax might take it is not possible to pass it first to the parser 15:30:08 I disagree with the option you're taking, it's your language, and I can't seem to convince you. So, fine. 15:30:27 ok, le's suppose we have a macro called regex 15:30:30 regex ... ; 15:30:45 this will compile that regex as some sort of object that does string matching 15:30:53 how could that be preprocessed by the parser? 15:31:06 it's not anything resembling common language syntax 15:31:07 because at compiletime you can extend the parser 15:31:10 and you add any syntax for regexs 15:31:11 it's a whole different langauge 15:31:17 even something more convenient 15:31:19 like R/.../ 15:31:40 then you add a function to compile that AST to the base language 15:31:40 tada 15:32:34 well that is for inline identifiers 15:32:40 -!- mib_9uywpz has joined. 15:32:41 i mean, for inline code 15:32:57 no. 15:32:59 it can be for anything. 15:33:07 for example such inline macro expansion would be any 0x followed by any number of 0 and 1 and ending in 'b' 15:33:12 want plain macros to just add a control structure? you can put that in a library! 15:33:13 0x01010101b 15:33:17 that extends the parser 15:33:34 it's the more general, purer solution, it has more useful oppertunities, it's less of a hack, and it's better 15:33:34 -!- mib_9uywpz has quit (Client Quit). 15:33:45 the problem with that is that it assumes that the inner code can be preprocessed first 15:33:53 but it cannot be 15:34:04 think about this: 15:34:10 excuse me. you are writing a parser anyway ,right? 15:34:15 a parser can parse the syntax 15:34:25 i'm giving up now, there's obviously no way I can convince you 15:34:29 you define an inline macro (let's say by expanding the parser) that handles all those binary numbers i described above 15:34:53 then you have a macro called my_macro that takes a block of code as parameter, maybe this is a control statement macro 15:35:10 now let's suppose we try to work with this: 15:35:23 my_macro { 0x1010101b 0x10010101b ; 0x10010101000b } 15:35:35 sure. 15:35:46 the question is, what shall my_macro be fed with? 15:36:12 if the parser is extended 15:36:27 then those binary numbers would be preprocessed 15:36:36 then a list of three binary numbers would be prepared 15:36:41 I'm saying REMOVE MACROS 15:36:46 macros can be made as syntactic extensions 15:36:47 just like that one 15:36:50 and this list would be fed into my_macro 15:36:52 make a library to make defining macros easier 15:37:07 but 15:37:18 -!- Hiato has joined. 15:37:25 the problem with this is that it makes assumptions on what those particular strings mean in the my_macro ASL 15:37:31 i mean DSL 15:37:31 no it does not 15:37:35 it does 15:37:36 -!- KingOfKarlsruhe has quit (Remote closed the connection). 15:37:41 because you cannot assign any other meaning to it 15:37:43 you can easily make it not parse the binaries with a parser 15:37:57 if you don't know how, well, I seriously doubt your skills in compiler construction 15:37:58 ok, but what about all other macros? 15:38:06 whta 15:38:09 *what 15:38:11 the point is that you cannot make absolutely any assumption 15:38:21 umm. you don't. 15:38:21 you cannot preprocess that at all 15:38:27 sure you can. 15:38:33 anyway, I give up, do itthe other way. 15:38:37 instead you pass that as a STRING to the macro 15:38:48 then the macro calls the standard parser on the parts that follow common syntax 15:39:11 and the standard parser will parse those binary numbers into binary AST nodes 15:39:20 binnum ast nodes 15:40:15 this is all because you cannot preprocess the inner macros 15:40:30 you have to leave all processing in the hightest outer macro 15:40:53 that higher outer macro will make all necesary calls, like to preprocess any existing inline forms like binary numbers for example 15:41:14 otherwise you have to make assumptions on what the actual macro content is, which you cannot do 15:41:32 no 15:41:46 ehird: you would have to manually specify the list of all exceptions 15:41:52 errr, no 15:41:55 then? 15:42:13 how do you disable binary number handling inside the macro? 15:42:33 either you're handling regular code in the block, or you're not putting a code node in there, you're putting your custom node. 15:43:14 but the problem is that only the higher outer macro knows what ast node the code between {} represents 15:43:29 ... so you put that in its ast definition 15:43:31 this is reall ysimple 15:43:55 yes but you cannot preprocess the content of the block 15:44:17 -!- BeholdMyGlory has joined. 15:44:24 because the content can be processed using only the higher outer macro because that's the one that determines the meaning of the inner block 15:44:39 -!- MigoMipo has joined. 15:45:19 ok, brb 15:58:02 -!- FireyFly has joined. 16:05:22 -!- ais523 has joined. 16:12:07 -!- DH_ has joined. 16:17:27 -!- kwufo has joined. 16:18:20 -!- icefox has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 16:19:19 -!- icefox has joined. 16:40:07 -!- icefox has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 16:40:36 -!- icefox has joined. 16:52:59 -!- Hiato has quit ("Leaving."). 16:56:26 -!- DH_ has quit ("Trillian (http://www.ceruleanstudios.com"). 17:40:38 -!- lifthrasiir has joined. 17:53:39 -!- Slereah2 has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)). 17:55:34 -!- Slereah2 has joined. 17:57:34 -!- oerjan has joined. 18:20:19 -!- Hiato has joined. 18:20:58 -!- Hiato has quit (Client Quit). 18:37:55 -!- psygnisfive has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)). 18:39:31 -!- KingOfKarlsruhe has joined. 18:59:42 hi ais523 18:59:47 hi AnMaster 19:08:40 -!- olsner has joined. 19:09:23 >>> float("inf")*float("inf") 19:09:25 inf 19:09:25 >>> float("inf")**2 19:09:25 OverflowError: (34, 'Result too large') 19:10:02 haha 19:10:55 >>> inf**0 19:10:55 1.0 19:12:48 -!- Hiato has joined. 19:16:54 -!- KingOfKarlsruhe has quit (Remote closed the connection). 19:29:25 -!- oerjan has quit (brown.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 19:29:25 -!- Hiato has quit (brown.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 19:29:25 -!- Slereah2 has quit (brown.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 19:29:25 -!- MigoMipo has quit (brown.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 19:29:26 -!- Leonidas has quit (brown.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 19:29:33 -!- Hiato has joined. 19:29:33 -!- oerjan has joined. 19:29:33 -!- Slereah2 has joined. 19:29:33 -!- MigoMipo has joined. 19:29:33 -!- Leonidas has joined. 20:03:09 -!- Hiato has quit ("Leaving."). 20:10:01 -!- kar8nga has joined. 20:27:12 -!- oklopol has joined. 20:52:34 -!- MigoMipo has quit ("QuitIRCServerException: MigoMipo disconnected from IRC Server"). 21:10:25 -!- icefox has quit. 21:18:06 "interactive gopher"? 21:18:11 see zzo38's latest esowiki edit 21:18:26 -!- ais523 has changed nick to CourageWolf. 21:18:30 -!- CourageWolf has changed nick to ais523. 21:20:41 -!- FireyFly has changed nick to Zetro. 21:23:21 -!- Zetro has quit (Nick collision from services.). 21:25:34 -!- FireFly has joined. 21:25:45 * oerjan swats FireFly -----### 21:26:06 :< 21:26:18 are those <'s wings? 21:26:31 or tiny legs? 21:26:38 Or a really sad mouth? 21:29:42 I'd like to see a language where the variables are named by positive integers from 0 and up, that each start with its respective value as its default value, and where those variables are the only way to modify the variables.. Eg. no native numerals. 21:29:51 Hm 21:29:53 FireFly: http://esolangs.org/wiki/Forte 21:30:02 oh, also control flow's done that way 21:30:15 and it messes up arithmetic: 21:30:22 10 LET 4=5 21:30:27 20 PRINT (2+2)+2 21:30:29 prints 7 21:30:52 :( 21:30:55 Someone beats me to it 21:31:00 sorry, that was me 21:31:01 Ah 21:31:03 I like Forte, though 21:31:03 Someone was you 21:31:04 :) 21:31:17 also notable is that it has no known implementations in /non/-esoteric languages 21:33:49 40 PRINT 6*9 21:33:49 This now outputs 42, as 9 has the value 7. 21:33:55 That's more correct 21:38:45 no, that's exactly as correct :D 21:47:55 Has anyone ever tried to implement Sir. Cut? 21:54:19 Back. 21:55:27 also, I'd ignore zzo38 most of the time 21:55:38 Some of his langs are fun but apart from that he's pretty loony. 21:55:48 (In the boring sense rather than the esoteric sense.) 21:56:14 seeing his latest comment, umm, it certainly isn't english. 21:56:34 http://esolangs.org/wiki/BrainClub 21:56:40 his stupid web browser supports that, lol 21:56:48 it's just forth. 21:56:50 ugly forth 21:58:07 Although sometimes zzo38 says deep things. 21:58:08 "// These numbers are just examples. In reality they would be stupid" 21:58:58 speaking of which, I made a toy lazy SKI interpreter in C to help impomatic understand SKI. 21:58:59 http://pastie.org/385352.txt?key=12g4muwehv2sg6qieyv3w 21:59:02 Requires Boehm GC. 21:59:28 Not speaking of which at all actually butthere you go 21:59:57 hmm 21:59:59 actually it's broken 22:00:08 non-combinator constant expressions never terminate 22:00:09 * ehird fixes 22:03:59 http://pastie.org/385435.txt?key=y4wsv9nkgik3jmeaixmqdg 22:04:59 ```sii``sii is fun with laziness 22:05:00 ``i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i``sii`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i`i``sii 22:05:44 It goes thusly : http://membres.lycos.fr/bewulf/Russell/Loop.jpg 22:05:45 :D 22:05:59 Yep 22:06:09 It's a lovely pattern 22:06:31 Wonder if there's an infinite loop that doesn't grow lazily 22:07:29 Laziness, eh? 22:07:34 Yes. 22:07:37 We're all very lazy. 22:07:49 That's the whole reason for Lazy Bird 22:07:51 ais523: hi 22:08:01 Slereah2: Erm, lazy SKI is not an innovative concept 22:08:13 ehird : I know 22:08:20 oh 22:08:28 But it still is the reason behind it :3 22:08:35 lazy SKI: when you go straight to the after-ski 22:08:39 Huh, ```sii``sii somehow stays in constant space in my interp 22:08:44 ```sii``sii -> ``i``sii`i``sii -> ```sii`i``sii -> ``i`i``sii`i`i``sii 22:08:46 Really, it started out as me trying to make Unlambda on a Turing machine. 22:08:48 Great. 22:08:52 kerlo: Yes. 22:08:54 And you guys told me "this is wrong, this is lazy" 22:08:56 Oh, wait. 22:08:58 Now it's growing in space. 22:09:02 And I was all like "What the fuck is lazy?" 22:09:08 Less than a megabyte thoooo 22:09:39 I conclude that this will eventually overflow the stack. 22:09:44 If you wait like 5 billion years. 22:10:10 ehird: it's square root growth, isn't it. 22:10:23