00:00:18 BLORP 00:01:00 I was over at a friends' yesterday, and they were playing Rock Guitar Band Hero Idol Game. They told me to play, and I said I only would if I "sung" by playing the melodica through the mic. 00:01:08 Long story short, five-minute guitar solo to Free Bird on melodica: Best idea ever? 00:04:42 Gregor: YES. 00:08:57 Gregor: :D 00:09:41 They play in some club every Tuesday. If I can figure out a reasonable approximation in a day, I could troll a whole crowd of people who think they're musicians. It would be ... quite entertaining. 00:11:08 -!- augur has changed nick to AaronBurr. 00:11:14 -!- AaronBurr has changed nick to augur. 00:11:54 Sgeo: why don't you deserve an A? you know the material, right? 00:13:33 Mathnerd314, do people who put off half a semester's worth of work for the last 48 hours or so ... beyond what should have been the absolute deadline, deserve As? 00:13:45 ineiros: http://wiki.hey0.net/index.php/Flatfile_Configuration#kits.txt 00:14:03 Sgeo: "easy A" 00:14:06 Sgeo: yes, if you've learned the material. 00:14:06 Is getting this A really going to be a decent punishment for my brain? 00:14:23 Mathnerd314, I answered a chapter's review questions without even looking at the chapter 00:14:43 Sgeo: excellent! 00:14:51 (assuming you got them right) 00:14:56 They're not "What is X Y Z" sort of things 00:15:16 They're more out-of-the-box. They test creativity and some understanding, I guess, but not knowledge 00:15:25 Sgeo: We already know your university is crap. 00:16:30 Sgeo: yeah, that chapter seems pretty useless 00:16:59 -!- MigoMipo_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 00:17:36 example question, just to confirm? 00:21:55 "Most people think of security as a cost to projects, products, or services: the cost of analyzing a system for vulnerabilties, the cost of providing products or processes to detect unwanted activities, the cost of products or processes to prevent or mitigate wanted activities, and so on. But security can also be considered a benefit, such as when adding security to a product attacts more customers or enables a provider to raise a product's p 00:21:55 rice. Discuss the various ways that security provides economic benefit, not only to an enterprise but also to a nation." 00:24:02 -!- Sgeo has left (?). 00:24:06 -!- Sgeo has joined. 00:25:40 elliott: What else leads us to believe his university is crap? 00:26:29 Sgeo: what's the course on? "Ethical implications of software" 00:26:33 pikhq: the fact that it's crap 00:26:42 does it have an IRC network or channel> 00:26:44 ? 00:26:46 coppro: I'm asking for details. 00:26:49 all the cool unis do 00:26:56 pikhq: All his courses are taught by stupid people. All his courses have stupid people in them. 00:26:58 (we got a Christmas card from Oxford this year!) 00:27:07 pikhq: It's Random State University with thousands upon thousands upon thousands of students. 00:27:11 coppro: what's MIT's irc channel? 00:27:19 pikhq: And he's in a course titled "Computer Information Systems" (IIRC). 00:27:30 pikhq: Or something similarly not-*even*-software-engineering course. 00:27:45 elliott: Okay, so... He could do *worse*, but we're not exactly talking good here. 00:28:10 Mathnerd314: dunno 00:28:13 but they better have one 00:28:24 Sgeo: what's the course on? "Ethical implications of software" 00:28:25 :D 00:28:32 * coppro usually twitches at the mention of software engineering 00:28:34 *cough*University of Phoenix*cough* 00:28:36 s/ethic/economic/ 00:28:56 if MIT has an IRC channel they'll be too elitist to let anyone else know about it :) 00:29:19 * pikhq usually twitches at the idea of programming being a lecture-teachable skill rather than being a hard-earned craft. 00:29:30 pikhq: I twitch at that too 00:29:33 coppro: so what unis *do* you know with IRC channels, since you clearly have a small sample size? 00:29:41 Mathnerd314: McGill, UW, and Oxford 00:29:56 coppro: Up there with the idea that a CS degree is a course in programming. 00:30:02 pikhq: oh god 00:30:07 brick science! 00:30:32 pikhq: the university of phoenix is the anticool 00:31:00 Cryptography and Computer Security is the course 00:31:16 Degrees from the Crazy Drunk Hobo School of Dubious Merit are more valuable. 00:31:34 Sgeo: did you cover buffer overruns in extreme detail? 00:31:54 No. Unless I skipped that material by accident 00:31:58 pikhq: CS ought to be part of math, and programming should either be part of engineering or obliterated as a profession 00:32:07 Since I didn't real much of the textbook like I was supposed to 00:32:10 Mathnerd314: like at my school! 00:32:10 Mathnerd314: CS in my mind *is* a field of mathematics. 00:32:14 Sgeo: your course is fail then 00:32:21 Mathnerd314: And programming is quite obviously a craft. 00:32:22 CS absolutely is a field in mathematics 00:32:31 programming is a craft 00:32:35 Mathnerd314: To which engineering can be applied. 00:32:38 an SE degree is debatably a programming degree 00:32:46 but that's more okay 00:32:49 since it's engineering 00:32:52 hmm, ok. 00:33:15 What, do you want to read the paper I wrote? 00:33:22 pikhq: CS ought to be part of math, and programming should either be part of engineering or obliterated as a profession 00:33:26 lol @ the latter. 00:33:31 CS is already mathematics (at decent places). 00:33:34 obliterated by an AI 00:33:38 Sgeo: you wrote a paper? is it full of complete BS? 00:33:41 software engineering (i.e. programming) is a perfectly valid discipline. 00:33:42 elliott: decent places are few and far between 00:33:43 Mathnerd314: it's not a "paper". 00:33:56 coppro: 90% of everything is crap, but you avoid it, don't you? 00:34:03 Mathnerd314, it's full of not very in depth discussion about a somewhat random hodgepodge of topics 00:34:16 If it were up to me, "CS" would be dubbed "computational mathematics" or some such. 00:34:24 elliott: yes 00:34:36 pikhq: CS and CM are two separate disciplines at UW, actually 00:34:41 Sgeo: then no. I think I've heard enough to know that taking that course is not worthwhile 00:34:53 CM courses have a high overlap with CS and AM 00:34:55 pikhq: CS is "computing theory". 00:34:56 coppro: ♥ 00:35:04 Note: not the same as computability. 00:35:06 http://www.ucalendar.uwaterloo.ca/1011/COURSE/course-CM.html is the CM courses 00:35:19 pikhq: CS is not about computers and it is not a science; it is about computing, and it is a field of mathematics -- computing theory. 00:35:24 "computing theorist" isn't as catchy though. 00:35:29 (How about "mathematician" instead.) 00:35:43 elliott, are you sure that the plot for this DS9 episode wasn't cribbed from VOY? 00:35:56 Sgeo: Almost certainly the other way around. 00:36:04 Sgeo: Which episode? 00:36:06 Sgeo: VOY gleefully cribbed stuff poorly. 00:36:11 Captive Pursuit 00:36:15 DS9 is 99.99999% good and Voyager is like 100 - epsilon% bad, so. 00:36:24 when I look at the CM courses, though 00:36:26 Sgeo: 1993. It predates Voyager. 00:36:27 I don't quite see the point 00:36:27 coppro: how does applying there work? are there a lot of US students? 00:37:04 Mathnerd314: Probably quite a few; it's not terribly hard for a US student to go to Canada for school. 00:37:12 bonus: Canada 00:37:31 pikhq: thus the question :p 00:38:02 Mathnerd314: applying? what about it? 00:38:07 you apply, you might get accepted... 00:40:16 hmm, nvm then 00:40:34 or do you mean to specific programs? 00:41:44 also, Mathnerd314, where do you go to? 00:41:58 * Mathnerd314 is in HS still 00:42:01 (there are a fair number of US students at UW, btw) 00:42:02 oh right 00:42:13 fizzie: Vorpal found your throne. also me. 00:42:14 if you're considering applying to UW, I definitely recommend it 00:42:21 grade 11? 00:42:24 you apply, you might get accepted... 00:42:24 hmm, nvm then 00:42:30 Man, if I might get /rejected/, what's the point! 00:43:00 coppro: no, senior with a procrastination habit :p 00:43:21 Mathnerd314, try not to turn into me 00:43:34 Mathnerd314: oh. You'd fit in perfectly then! 00:43:45 Sgeo: parents are reviewing essays ATM 00:43:46 all your highschool year names are stupid 00:44:11 elliott: which name would this be? 00:44:17 fizzie, it seems it is next to the cube being built 00:44:32 I concur with elliott 00:44:39 Mathnerd314: freshman sophomore junior senior 00:44:40 wth 00:44:43 especially sophomore 00:44:51 coppro: and then it STARTS OVER AGAIN AT "COLLEGE" WHAT 00:44:58 Oh yeah, I'm a freshman. But last year I was a senior! 00:45:15 grades, forms, or years please 00:45:39 Considering how screwed up my college experience has been, I don't like to use those terms 00:45:44 coppro: don't forget the missing metric system either :p 00:47:09 that one is just funny 00:47:16 Sgeo: you should see UW 00:47:27 hm? 00:47:39 nth year doesn't even mean much 00:47:47 because of co-op, failures, etc. 00:49:16 Considering how screwed up my college experience has been, I don't like to use those terms 00:49:17 what 00:49:37 elliott, first few semesters, didn't have a full course load 00:49:38 etc. 00:50:01 oh, that too 00:50:07 it's kind of funny, actually 00:50:31 the registrar's office tries to keep track of which term you are in by assigning "1A" "1B" "2A" to people but half the time it doesn't work 00:50:49 (and "4C" and "4D" terms happen) 00:50:57 even though those are officiall still 4B 00:51:02 UW might be fun to go to. 00:51:20 it is 00:51:43 I'm biased though, I like Canada :P 00:51:59 Mathnerd314: you should apply! 00:52:04 Ilari, skyping again? 00:52:35 coppro: looking at the admission stuff; confusing website 00:52:49 Mathnerd314: OUAC? 00:52:51 yeah 00:54:39 btw, if you are thinking of both CS and math, the thing about CS is it's harder to get into (you can't just declare it) and you need to pay extra $$. They won't let you in after long enough because of the $$ and they won't generally let you take upper-year CS courses without approval if you aren't in CS; also they get pissed if non-CS students try to take too many because they want your $$. 00:55:44 sounds like the best thing to do is stay the hell away from CS 00:56:05 j-invariant: some of the upper-year CS courses are awesome 00:56:07 yeah, I think I'll stick with the nice US schools where you can switch majors anytime you feel like it :p 00:56:18 coppro: whice ones? 00:56:52 Mathnerd314: non-CS non-Acturial Science math majors are a la carte 00:57:10 j-invariant: trains, compilers, programming languages, formal languages and parsing, graphics... 00:57:23 what's trains? 00:57:55 real-time programming 00:59:46 coppro: colleges I'm applying to have all those and more, so not too worried about missing anything 01:00:06 you are missing something :D 01:08:59 yep, but I'm guessing it's mainly the pain and suffering of another college app 01:09:32 -!- wth has joined. 01:11:16 -!- wth has left (?). 01:18:48 -!- variable has quit (Read error: Operation timed out). 01:20:27 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 01:21:24 -!- variable has joined. 01:35:20 yep, but I'm guessing it's mainly the pain and suffering of another college app 01:35:34 Mathnerd314: ah yes, the famous "Wrestling A Snake With Spikes All Over It To Death" test 01:35:37 coppro can tell you all about it 01:37:14 -!- cheater99 has joined. 01:37:37 -!- wareya_ has joined. 01:39:40 -!- wareya has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds). 01:39:40 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 01:40:58 -!- pikhq has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds). 01:42:01 -!- pikhq has joined. 01:44:27 -!- j-invariant has quit (Quit: leaving). 01:47:03 -!- j-invariant has joined. 01:51:36 elliott: I did exactly one application. It took an hour for the formal application, and like 2 hours for the extra info form 01:51:51 coppro: And then you had to wrestle a snake with spikes all over it to death, yes? 01:54:29 elliott: nope 01:54:47 Mathnerd314: Look at how they lie. 01:55:13 coppro: but you're from Canada 01:56:22 -!- cheater99 has joined. 01:58:45 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:01:30 Mathnerd314: that's true 02:01:46 Mathnerd314: oh, I also had to mail them a transcript 02:02:06 Mathnerd314: I don't know about the process for foreign students, but I can't imagine it being much different from what I went through 02:02:26 since I was out-of-ontario 02:02:59 .win 2 02:03:01 whatever. 02:03:17 * Mathnerd314 distracts himself with supercompilation 02:03:27 supercompilation? 02:04:59 yeah, never heard of it before, but it sounds ool 02:05:00 *cool 02:07:46 Meh. Specialisers are the only decent compilers. :p 02:08:10 what's the difference ? 02:08:26 j-invariant: well nobody really knows what "supercompilation" means. 02:08:33 sometimes it means specialisers, sometimes i have no idea what the hell it means 02:10:23 ;5;54 02:11:34 elliott: managed to define products in terms of universal cone btw 02:11:40 j-invariant: awesome 02:14:34 elliott, again mc 02:15:21 -!- cheater99 has joined. 02:17:41 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:21:30 elliott: theoretically.. one could implement all sorts of categories and instance their limits etc etc.. at this point 02:22:05 not sure if it's a good idea though 02:30:01 categories? 02:30:07 like Set? 02:31:09 Quadrescence: youre such a dickface. lol 02:31:24 why 02:31:28 haha 02:32:51 your little temper tantrum against haskell 02:33:04 i want my mommy! 02:33:44 :P 02:33:49 when was this? 02:33:51 I must read logs 02:34:26 -!- cheater99 has joined. 02:34:35 coppro: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/es29o/the_air_on_which_haskell_programmers_seem_to/ 02:35:30 Has it been proven that all imperitive data structures have an equally efficient functional version? 02:37:08 -!- j-invariant has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 02:37:08 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:37:51 Sgeo: iteration is equivalent to recursion? 02:39:31 hmm? 02:39:58 I know there's an efficient functional queue, but can the same be said of all other data structures? 02:41:06 it depends on what you mean by "efficient" "functional" and "data structure" 02:43:18 "as fast as C" "written in haskell" "uses 'data'/classes" 02:43:35 lol 02:43:37 equiv time complexities 02:46:05 Quadrescence: do we get to design CPUs that are optimized for functional code not imperative code 02:46:07 ? 02:46:17 because if not, then C will always have the possibility for advantage 02:47:10 Is there a way to pretend that microoptimizations don't exist? 02:47:42 -!- j-invariant has joined. 02:49:01 -!- augur has changed nick to World. 02:49:06 -!- World has changed nick to augur. 02:50:34 Quadrescence: do we get to design CPUs that are optimized for functional code not imperative code 02:50:36 augur: Please yes. 02:50:42 elliott: :3 02:50:47 Quadrescence: youre such a dickface. lol 02:50:48 concurred 02:50:54 ive tried to think of ways to do this, actually 02:51:01 Sgeo: the opposite 02:51:12 "thrive reeks of foul stench of cargo cult" are words that could only come from reading the loper os blog waaay too much. 02:51:16 augur: http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/reduceron/ 02:51:23 Sgeo: you need mutation for ceratain things 02:51:29 elliott: the only thing i can think of is something that does in-place rewrites of ASTs 02:51:31 night → 02:51:37 j-invariant: not really true? 02:51:39 augur: http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/fp/reduceron/ 02:51:47 augur: it does lazy graph reduction 02:51:55 interesting! 02:52:01 augur: implemented on FPGA etc. 02:52:05 memos are very interesting 02:52:06 sexy 02:52:16 augur: core language is "typeless", it's basically just graph-rewriting-lambda-calculus 02:52:28 thats an interesting nothing 02:52:36 augur: an interesting nothing? xD 02:52:42 elliott: persistent vs ephemeral 02:52:42 .. 02:52:52 notion 02:52:55 j-invariant: well sure 02:52:56 Has it been proven that all imperitive data structures have an equally efficient functional version? 02:53:02 stupid fingers 02:53:19 Sgeo: theoretical results IIRC suggest that functional languages are "inherently" less efficient than imperative ones in certain cases ... at least that's what Okasaki says, but: sufficiently smart compiler. 02:53:32 also, as Okasaki goes on to prove in his book... yes, basically, all the structures you can think of have efficient functional versions. 02:53:52 -!- cheater99 has joined. 02:54:15 coppro: yeah I already did Set though 02:54:35 j-invariant: what's Set's limit? 02:54:48 coppro: huh? 02:54:55 21:21 < j-invariant> elliott: theoretically.. one could implement all sorts of categories and instance their limits etc etc.. at this point 02:55:00 you said you did Set? 02:55:12 Quadrescence: lol 02:55:30 limits: terminal and initial object, products, sums, equaliziers lots more things too 02:55:37 Quadrescence: did it ever occur to you to simply define Monoids over Num rather than over Int 02:55:39 set has them all 02:55:52 coppro: REEKS OF FOUL STENCH 02:56:14 coppro: i wouldn't bother talking to Quadrescence anyway considering he's never once talked about esolangs. or done anything other than be irritating really. 02:56:30 but I didn't implement any limits 02:56:30 but hey, i respect anyone who likes wasting their time :p 02:57:24 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:57:30 j-invariant: well then why did you say you did it already? 02:57:42 "one could implement all sorts [...] and instance their limits [..] at this point" 02:57:45 one *could* 02:57:55 21:53 < j-invariant> coppro: yeah I already did Set though 02:58:22 coppro: he already implemented Set, not found its limit. one would presume. 02:58:50 limits 02:59:40 elliott, so you respect me for the unpaid project I worked on? 02:59:49 Sgeo: what? 02:59:53 oh. shut up. 03:04:00 coppro: do you know much category theory 03:05:29 elliott: I am starting to doubt whether it really does magically solve all problems :/ 03:05:51 j-invariant: yes 03:05:54 j-invariant: It does! If you believe in it. 03:05:55 j-invariant: I'm just trolling 03:06:02 heh 03:06:40 elliott: that's what I hate about christmas - "if you just beleive in something with zero evidence or reasonable explanation... then you will find it!" 03:06:46 christmas films* 03:06:57 j-invariant: like religion! *ducks* 03:07:18 well it's probably a general flaw of human thought 03:07:29 but why celebrate it... 03:08:38 elliott: it's the same with the loch ness monster, there's even a film that pulls this 03:08:48 thankfully it's possible to overcome our cognitive biases ... but very hard 03:08:50 j-invariant: gh 03:08:52 *ugh 03:13:56 -!- cheater99 has joined. 03:14:21 UFO films don't usually do that though 03:17:09 that's more like science fiction 03:17:30 yeah 03:20:12 -!- cheater99 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 03:25:33 -!- cheater99 has joined. 03:29:07 -!- p_q has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep). 03:29:17 pikhq: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pikachurin 03:29:20 pikhq: Please /nick pikhqrn 03:30:40 new mcmap out. :p 03:30:45 Relevant only to noansi users. 03:40:28 -!- Wamanuz4 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 03:46:52 -!- bsmntbombdood has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 03:47:23 -!- bsmntbombdood has joined. 04:08:56 elliott: you should put algebra on these categories : 04:09:19 j-invariant: yeah that does not sound painful at all :D 04:09:24 elliott: it will sort of be like a 20x more difficult version of what you did before.. 04:09:26 maybe if i get this algebra thing working nicely 04:12:05 Silly question: what is the difference between an FSA and a Turing Machine? is it the unboundedness of the memory ? 04:13:08 variable: yes pretty much 04:13:20 variable: a finite state machine can be written as a huge table of "state1 -> state2" 04:13:36 variable: e.g., for your computer, assuming no IO devices, the contents of registers, RAM, disk, etc. 04:13:41 to the new contents, after executing one instruction 04:13:48 this list is finite since your RAM/disk are finite 04:14:13 variable: of course you won't find a real turing machine ... but TC languages are more interesting than FSAs generally 04:14:54 [20:55.10] Quadrescence: did it ever occur to you to simply define Monoids over Num rather than over Int // Did it ever occur to you that a monoid might not actually support what Num does? 04:15:14 um since Int is a Num ... 04:15:40 ............... 04:15:41 variable: http://esolangs.org/wiki/Finite-state_automaton 04:15:48 elliott, I just read that 04:15:52 variable: heh :) 04:16:26 elliott: r u implying i should declare all Num t as monoids 04:16:33 variable: if you think you have a fairly good grasp on what turing completeness is, why not let my languages plunge you back into deep confusion: http://esolangs.org/wiki/Befunge/index.php http://esolangs.org/wiki/Brainfuck/w/index.php%3Ftitle%3DTalk:Brainfuck/index.php 04:17:16 (http://esolangs.org/wiki/Talk:Befunge/index.php has a proof that the first is simultaneously TC and not, depending on your definition) 04:17:24 oh hello Quadrescence 04:17:30 hey bsmntbombdood 04:17:30 i heard you where stirring up some shit 04:17:35 yeah i guess so 04:17:54 -!- poiuy_qwert has joined. 04:18:28 elliott, my understanding of a TC language is that given unlimited memory it can compute any algorithm - is that correct? 04:18:36 variable: Define algorithm :) 04:18:48 variable: a turing complete language can emulate a turing machine 04:18:48 variable: The most common definition is that you can simulate any Turing machine in it. 04:18:51 variable: This, however, has ambiguity. 04:18:53 Quadrescence: Uh, no. 04:18:57 um yea 04:18:59 Quadrescence: There are plenty of non-universal Turing machines. 04:19:04 Quadrescence: So. No. 04:19:07 yes 04:19:12 I don't understand Brainfuck/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brainfuck/index.php :S 04:19:17 And being able to simulate one doesn't make you TC. 04:19:18 j-invariant: why not? 04:19:19 A universal turing machine can emulate any turing machine - correct 04:19:30 variable: yes. 04:19:46 variable: but when you step outside of things that are strictly turing machines and try and relate this concept to other languages it is difficult :) 04:19:46 does the implementation really do what it says? 04:19:59 j-invariant: yes (but it's written in Scheme-1, which has only super-Turing implementations) 04:20:06 j-invariant: note the "H" procedure, it's a Turing halt-checker 04:20:16 see http://esolangs.org/wiki/Banana_Scheme 04:20:35 curious: which class should I expect to learn this stuff in? 04:20:35 ah I didn't notice "Scheme-1" was something special 04:20:58 variable: computability theory 04:21:04 /theory of computation 04:21:15 * variable didn't see that on my course list :-\ 04:21:18 * variable looks again 04:22:27 j-invariant: btw if you do (define (H n p) #t) that interp actually works 04:22:34 but of course just loops forever on invalid programs ;) 04:23:24 elliott, Automata theory and Formal Languages 04:23:25 ? 04:23:32 variable: look for anything with "computation" in the name like "languages and computation" or intros to computer science theory 04:23:42 variable: pretty much, yep 04:23:48 yeah that might have it 04:23:50 :-( 4 more years 04:23:51 variable: see e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automata_theory#Classes_of_automata 04:24:06 * variable wishes I could that class now 04:24:21 elliott, oh - perfect 04:24:25 I was looking for such a list 04:24:27 variable: #esoteric suffices pretty well for learning this stuff, it's just a bit of a random walk so it takes time ;) 04:24:28 variable: you can, just get a book 04:24:30 well that list isn't really perfect. 04:24:33 elliott: should implement scheme-n in Coq 04:24:40 j-invariant: heh. NO :) 04:24:45 Quadrescence, recommendations ? 04:24:49 elliott: just make it so that executing a program is interactive theorem proving 04:24:49 j-invariant: (you could with axioms but it wouldn't construct ofc) 04:25:19 variable: what do you know already, both in math, and compsci? 04:25:28 Quadrescence, formally or informally? 04:25:32 informally 04:25:58 g'nigh' 04:26:06 I know most major programming languages and a few esoteric ones. I've read an operating systems book cover to cover 04:26:15 and I get how programming languages are compiled 04:26:20 thats about it 04:26:22 variable: Do you know the lambda calculus? 04:26:28 math is <= calc 04:26:49 * variable is a freshmen - so I havn't taken most university math classes yet 04:26:52 -!- elliott has quit (Quit: Leaving). 04:27:31 variable: What programming languages are you comfortable programming in 04:28:44 Quadrescence, any particular book to read on computational theory? or do I need more of a math background first? 04:28:44 and if so which book should I read on that? 04:29:08 variable: well, despite its name, lambda calculus is really just a model of computation 04:29:19 variable: Have you read SICP? 04:30:35 Quadrescence, ? 04:31:25 variable: Read the book "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs"; and do all of the exercises. It will introduce you to a broad array of which are highly beneficial to know before diving into computability. 04:31:42 elliott, see pm 04:31:48 elliott left 04:31:56 [22:26.25] << elliott (~elliott@unaffiliated/elliott) has quit: Quit: Leaving 04:32:59 I'm comfortable in C, C++, Java, PHP, VB/QB (years ago), Bash, a few others. 04:33:11 I know Python, Perl, and a few others - but not that well 04:33:23 "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" ---> which author? 04:33:35 Abelson and Sussman 04:33:46 * variable googles 04:33:49 Don't worry, the book will not rehash stuff you already know 04:33:59 I need to learn Scheme 04:34:12 (i mean, some things you might know, but it's not a Learn To Program In Language X) 04:34:13 http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/ --> ok - that book is now on my list 04:34:33 creative commons textbook 04:34:34 As I said, you should do all of the exercises. If you do, you'll learn a lot. 04:34:34 WIN 04:34:58 Quadrescence, I will 04:35:09 its winter vacation now for me - so I should have time to do so 04:35:44 variable: You'll learn a good deal about computability in it too. So you'll actually have a head start if you decide you want to read pure computability theory. 04:37:03