< 1635984374 459602 :FreeFull!~freefull@user-5-173-152-113.play-internet.pl QUIT : < 1635985323 52690 :Lord_of_Life!~Lord@user/lord-of-life/x-2819915 QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1635985345 609752 :Lord_of_Life!~Lord@user/lord-of-life/x-2819915 JOIN #esolangs Lord_of_Life :Lord < 1635986025 756751 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1635987309 508742 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu JOIN #esolangs * :b_jonas < 1635988585 665368 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock JOIN #esolangs sprock :Maeve Sproule > 1635989032 130001 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07BrainSoup14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89350&oldid=89343 5* 03PixelatedStarfish 5* (+0) 10 < 1635989158 188131 :earendel!uid498179@user/earendel QUIT :Quit: Connection closed for inactivity < 1635993842 303791 :dutch!~DutchIngr@user/dutch QUIT :Quit: WeeChat 3.3 < 1635993930 46541 :dutch!~DutchIngr@user/dutch JOIN #esolangs DutchIngraham :dutch < 1635997331 766874 :monoxane!~monoxane@user/monoxane JOIN #esolangs monoxane :monoxane < 1636002037 574093 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: Ah, Sx(Kz)y = xyz is kind of neat < 1636003654 281497 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: F = \x\y.y; toChurch = \n\f\z. let A = \p. p (\a\b\_\p. p a (f b)) z in n A A F; < 1636004098 145188 :oerjan!oerjan@sprocket.nvg.ntnu.no QUIT :Quit: Nite < 1636004546 607795 :tm512!~tm512@user/tm512 QUIT :Ping timeout: 260 seconds < 1636004607 509230 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :based on S x A B = x B (A B), so if A, B, and A B are all similar then this gives us a nice recursion) and the syntactic accident = F X = F F Y X so we can use pairs for A, B and let F F Y X reduce to some to fulfil the shape requirement. The concrete instance uses Z = f Y. < 1636008243 551595 :tm512!~tm512@50.53.132.213 JOIN #esolangs * :tm512 < 1636008245 995322 :tm512!~tm512@50.53.132.213 CHGHOST ~tm512 :user/tm512 < 1636009702 241236 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh wow, I messed up my definition of K, wow. n A A F should be n A (A A) F instead. < 1636010150 20284 :zzo38!~zzo38@host-24-207-14-22.public.eastlink.ca QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1636010398 739556 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(the other one gives the predecessor instead which is kind of neat) < 1636010506 28750 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: that's really cool! and doesn't even need recursion. < 1636010532 410766 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :mine did: to_church = \toc\n. iszero n C0 (C_succ (to_church (pred n))) < 1636010564 294206 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :that should be to_church = \n. iszero n C0 (C_succ (to_church (pred n))) < 1636010639 309147 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :iszero = \n. n F I S K < 1636010674 500897 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :pred = \n\x\y.n (K y) x < 1636010738 333415 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :yeah it's always nice to get the duplication that recursion requires for free < 1636010957 517921 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :hmm, i thought yours would be smaller in CL size < 1636010990 269770 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I'm only looking at BLC sizes < 1636011008 165834 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :CL size is too volatile and usually bigger anyway < 1636011066 821988 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :to_church = \n\f\z. let tc = \n. isZero_ n z (f (tc (pred_ n))) in tc n; is *a bit* smaller in BLC than the C0/C_succ thing. < 1636011088 122809 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :sorry, I renamed iszero and pred to fit my test file < 1636011170 474806 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :With CL, that's probably not true... because adding and using extra arguments is so expensive. < 1636011231 973900 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :sometimes hand optimized bracket abstraction can improve things < 1636011243 906240 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: So in that spirit, toChurch = \n. let A = \p. p (\a\b\_\p. p a (C_succ b)) C0 in n A (A A) F may be better for CL. < 1636011297 382326 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :oh yes, much shorter < 1636011492 930479 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :i came across these numerals in Wolfram's book on combinators < 1636011499 36302 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :is it worth to manually replace n A (A A) by S n A A? < 1636011521 562135 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :https://www.wolfram-media.com/products/combinators-a-centennial-view.html < 1636011562 922921 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(that looks like a rare pattern so I doubt you'd implement it in an automatic converter) < 1636011589 123711 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :but I don't know < 1636011604 196372 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :no, that S n A A doesn't make a difference < 1636011680 504301 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Ah, right... bracket abstraction will act the same either way. < 1636011705 590252 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :Stephen Wolfram only came up with a size 181 combinator for to_church < 1636011709 598400 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :\A. n A (A A) -> S n I < 1636011744 941315 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :apparently based on applying n to Church numerals 2 and 3 < 1636011813 736608 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :that's S n A, not S n I ?! < 1636011993 15804 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :i wonder if these should be called SK numerals or Fibonacci numerals < 1636012001 716959 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh, right, I stopped too early. It'll be S n (S I I), vs. \A. S n A A = S (S n) I. So it's a bit unclear which is better. < 1636012036 701772 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :since they satisfy (n+2) x y = (n x y) ((n+1) x y) < 1636012072 427861 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(you have two I's in the former, but n is at a deeper depth in the latter.) < 1636012110 690722 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Yeah they do have a Fibonacci vibe. < 1636012135 211392 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :the number of y's in n x y is Fibonacci(n) < 1636012157 711310 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :this just replaces sum in the recurrence by application < 1636012160 803692 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Already visible in S x A B = x B (A B) > 1636012277 53153 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Language list14]]4 M10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89351&oldid=89308 5* 03Elmusfire 5* (+16) 10Added new language > 1636012337 748840 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Rrreplace14]]4 N10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?oldid=89352 5* 03Elmusfire 5* (+6648) 10rrreplace is an esoteric language that uses string substitution in a functional way. > 1636012433 650512 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Rrreplace14]]4 M10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89353&oldid=89352 5* 03Elmusfire 5* (+1) 10typo < 1636012658 874798 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: Hmm, I don't think I have you abstraction elimination code... what sizes do you get for to_church and toChurch? < 1636012715 801097 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :well, i have to manually adjust for the SK Y combinator of size 12:( < 1636012730 991988 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :or does `blc comb` mostly do it? < 1636012748 158074 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :then my to_church comes out at 69 < 1636012802 268795 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :and yours at 60 < 1636012827 671205 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :i actually use ./blc bcl and divide output length by 3 < 1636012874 24805 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :ah, we're just counting combinators. < 1636012915 244632 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :yes, but we could count bits as well. which is nearly purely linear < 1636012927 155821 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :at 3n-1 bits < 1636012939 822810 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :and I need to use the right `succ` too < 1636012957 948610 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :the newline at the end of bcl output bumps that right up to 3n < 1636012970 667306 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(\n\f\x. n f (f x) is worse than \n\f\x. f (n f x) in CL) < 1636012998 766029 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :yes, i use C_succ = \n\f\x.f (n f x); < 1636013007 436697 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :for that reason < 1636013027 802680 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :bcl just doesn't care < 1636013038 355468 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :oops < 1636013040 621086 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :blc I mean < 1636013088 245635 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I guess I should prefer \n\f\x. f (n f x) for beaing lazier. < 1636013116 820971 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :yes, it's always seemed the more proper order to me < 1636013124 640396 :hendursa1!~weechat@user/hendursaga JOIN #esolangs hendursaga :weechat < 1636013134 854631 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :applying the extra f at the end rather than at the start < 1636013262 631056 :hendursaga!~weechat@user/hendursaga QUIT :Ping timeout: 276 seconds < 1636013528 202316 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :anyway nice to see a Wolfram book that's not reinventing science :P < 1636013586 745748 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :"thought-provoking and broadly accessible" I can believe... I imagine that's also actually true for the ANKS of book. < 1636014028 831146 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :maybe you want to go after his $20k prize: https://combinatorprize.org/ < 1636014088 955047 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Hmm, does he cite Johannes Waldmann's thesis? < 1636014131 151482 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :he's not much into citing other people:( < 1636014193 644606 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :but he does have Waldmann in the references < 1636014239 455338 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(it's almost exclusively on the S combinator, https://www.imn.htwk-leipzig.de/~waldmann/pub/) < 1636014253 431610 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(no anchor, sad) < 1636014330 563914 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Yeah attributing the idea that this might be TC to himself doesn't feel right to me at all. < 1636014378 798872 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :did Johannes come up with that 39x39 table? < 1636014428 62761 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :to determine halting behaviour of S-only combinators? < 1636014495 235234 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :his book just says: What was discovered in 2000 is that there's a complete way to test.... and then gives the table < 1636014571 455152 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :for rule 110 universality, he says: with much of the heavy lifting done by a then-research assistent of mine < 1636014578 668274 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :not even a name! < 1636014610 834426 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Hmm there's no table of states in the thesis, I think. He defines lots of auxiliary regular tree languages. I've never thought to count them... < 1636014808 420681 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :2000 matches The Combinator S, Information and Computation 159, 2-21 (2000)... hmm. have I seen that paper... < 1636014911 746496 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :yes,that's one of his 2 references < 1636014945 384671 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :the other is a coauthored 2010 paper on local termination < 1636015005 567385 :Sgeo!~Sgeo@user/sgeo QUIT :Read error: Connection reset by peer < 1636015018 509478 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :oh, he does name Johannes at the chapter end < 1636015052 934999 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :the paper has a grammar, so the table is Wolfram's own doing, I think. < 1636015131 90914 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :he mentions Joerg Endrullis < 1636015158 179954 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :for "The detailed version that I used here" < 1636015167 239424 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :yeah not unexpected in this context < 1636015243 625383 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :one of the coauthors of the 2010 paper < 1636015742 904153 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Anyway I'm not going down that rabbit hole :) < 1636015880 416541 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(I've already managed to stay away from the question whether the word problem for S is decidable for 10+ years) < 1636021385 409546 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :i'll write some sort of blog article about SK numerals... < 1636022919 996631 :Everything!~Everythin@37.115.210.35 JOIN #esolangs * :Everything < 1636025396 443354 :wib_jonas!~wib_jonas@business-37-191-60-209.business.broadband.hu JOIN #esolangs b_jonas :[https://web.libera.chat] wib_jonas > 1636025940 957288 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Rrreplace14]]4 M10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89354&oldid=89353 5* 03PythonshellDebugwindow 5* (+62) 10Lowercase, categories < 1636028348 66126 :arseniiv!~arseniiv@94.41.2.66.dynamic.ufanet.ru JOIN #esolangs * :the chaotic arseniiv > 1636032389 356157 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Lananang14]]4 M10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89355&oldid=89349 5* 03Heptor 5* (+114) 10 > 1636032847 103958 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Lananang14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89356&oldid=89355 5* 03Heptor 5* (+72) 10/* Inbuilt Commands */ > 1636032898 913557 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Lananang14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89357&oldid=89356 5* 03Heptor 5* (+4) 10/* Math */ < 1636033054 663575 :wib_jonas!~wib_jonas@business-37-191-60-209.business.broadband.hu QUIT :Quit: Client closed < 1636033306 463672 :wib_jonas!~wib_jonas@business-37-191-60-209.business.broadband.hu JOIN #esolangs b_jonas :[https://web.libera.chat] wib_jonas < 1636033793 43048 :perlbot!~perlbot@perlbot/bot/simcop2387/perlbot QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1636033793 119307 :simcop2387!~simcop238@perlbot/patrician/simcop2387 QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1636035177 899069 :Everything!~Everythin@37.115.210.35 QUIT :Quit: leaving < 1636036197 498203 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp, int-e: S isn't complete on its own. Wolfram doesn't accept the folklore proof for some reason, probably because it would make him look like a dunce. < 1636036247 551658 :tech_exorcist!~tech_exor@user/tech-exorcist/x-0447479 JOIN #esolangs tech_exorcist :he/him - IT, EN > 1636036654 970470 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Brainfuckn't14]]4 N10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?oldid=89358 5* 034gboframram 5* (+7224) 10Created page with "Brainfuckn't is a tape-based esolang created by [[user:4gboframram]]. The goal of the language was to make a language that is more frustrating to use than [[brainfuck]], but a..." > 1636036764 157452 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Brainfuckn't14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89359&oldid=89358 5* 034gboframram 5* (+11) 10/* Brief Specification */ > 1636036858 57431 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Brainfuckn't14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89360&oldid=89359 5* 034gboframram 5* (+8) 10/* Computational Class */ < 1636039496 370752 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :Corbin: what folklore proof are you referring to? S is not complete because you can't define K in terms of S? Wolfram recognizes that of course < 1636039937 504962 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :yeah part of the exercise is undoubtedly to come up with an encoding for inputs and an acceptance condition; maybe even an evaluation order < 1636039969 735191 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :Wolfram wonders if there are some efficient functions such that embed maps an SK term to an S term, detect maps an S term to a boolean, and extract maps an S term to an SK term, and if SK term t has a normal form nf, then you can reduce embed t to some term s for which detect s and extract s = nf (or something like that) < 1636040053 329175 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :this seems exceedingly unlikely to be possible, but i don't know how to disprove it < 1636040060 654000 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :https://combinatorprize.org/ should really include a proper problem statement (did I miss one?) < 1636040165 955003 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :check https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2021/06/1920-2020-and-a-20000-prize-announcing-the-s-combinator-challenge/ < 1636040236 131286 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :the statement is my own interpretation for what he wants < 1636040349 731389 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :oh the full 39x39 table is actually online too https://content.wolfram.com/uploads/sites/43/2020/12/sw1203img440.png < 1636040354 134565 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :you can intrepret "efficient" either as polytime, or more generously as any primitive recursive running time < 1636040355 891880 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :for whatever that's worth < 1636040406 411467 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :and the reduction strategy used in the above should also be efficiently computable < 1636040408 180432 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Part of the problem is that Wolfram keeps saying "universal" instead of "Turing-complete". This is part of his effort to avoid actually citing real mathematics. < 1636040462 871885 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :For consider the Church-Turing thesis. Given two Turing-complete systems, we should be able to write emulators for each system in the other system, so that we can emulate a system on itself by stacking the two emulators together. < 1636040478 990485 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :it's funny how his books are full of "it seems that", "it appears that", "it looks like" .... :) < 1636040506 596512 :Sgeo!~Sgeo@user/sgeo JOIN #esolangs Sgeo :realname < 1636040508 42019 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :So if S is "universal", then there should be emulations SK -> S -> SK and S -> SK -> S which preserve halting. < 1636040552 877989 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :The latter is trivial with a handwave. So it's the former that we want; how do we emulate SK in S? And so that's what Wolfram has focused on. < 1636040594 345057 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :But now, notice that we still want anything we map from SK into S to come back out in SK working the same way. And *that* gives us leverage, because now we can use folklore about missing K and I to argue that S is not Turing-complete. < 1636040617 690506 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :but it's a non-standard notion of emulation, as he allows a terminating computation to be emulated by a non-terminating one < 1636040693 439889 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Yeah, that's kind of a problem, isn't it? I wonder how he imagines checking whether a computation is complete. < 1636040707 493506 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :That's rather unrestricted (the compiler/detector/decoder scheme), so yeah I don't see how a negative proof could work. < 1636040774 446973 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :As soon as we've done this, then all of the proofs that people give in the comments to Wolfram's challenge post are back on the table, and at least some of them sound convincing enough. < 1636040881 458910 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :How do you prevent this... encode TM in the stabilized part of a non-terminating term. The detector runs the TM for steps, signals success on nontermination; the decoder also runs the TM, extracts input. < 1636040889 299059 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Now... if I put it like that it's clearly cheating. < 1636040923 459558 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :But neither of the parts is Turing-Complete by itself. < 1636040973 303682 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :The S combinator evolution is an essential part if it's ultimately just used as fuel. < 1636041125 150091 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: cute exploit:-) < 1636041200 373848 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :ugh < 1636041205 42907 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :s/nontermination/termination/ < 1636041210 71594 :FreeFull!~freefull@user-5-173-152-113.play-internet.pl JOIN #esolangs FreeFull :FreeFull < 1636041247 402075 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Hm. Here's another approach. From category theory, it's provable that Turing-complete computation cannot be reversed. But because S doesn't forget values, we should be able to reverse a sequence of applications in a tree with only S combinators. < 1636041277 742566 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :This kind of thing is a hard problem to state if you don't want to severely restrict the encoder and decoder. < 1636041333 496995 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :it's easy to make TM reversible with an extra tape < 1636041369 621557 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :or an extra head < 1636041374 811459 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :A fair point. Similarly, while sets and functions aren't reversible, sets and relations are reversible. The chosen model matters a lot. < 1636041388 303221 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :This is another reason why "universal" is a weasel-word for Wolfram. < 1636041609 532297 :daggy1234[m]!~daggy1234@2001:470:69fc:105::d315 QUIT :Quit: You have been kicked for being idle < 1636041767 277605 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Well, S contraction isn't confluent. S(SSS)SS -> SSSS(SS) -> SS(SS)(SS) -> S(SS)(SS(SS)) <- S(SS)(SSSS) and neither S(SSS)SS nor S(SS)(SSSS) can be contracted further. < 1636041775 582709 :hendursa1!~weechat@user/hendursaga QUIT :Quit: hendursa1 < 1636041779 237185 :daggy1234[m]!~daggy1234@2001:470:69fc:105::d315 JOIN #esolangs * :@daggy1234:matrix.org < 1636041785 808916 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :So that's an obstacle to reversal. < 1636041808 632708 :hendursaga!~weechat@user/hendursaga JOIN #esolangs hendursaga :weechat < 1636041894 10351 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh! Okay. Then I have been too facile about this. If S isn't confluent on its own, then that means that we need to consider this non-deterministically. < 1636041944 347119 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Hmm... do you accept the proof that rule 110 is universal? I don't think I do. I think providing an infinite background pattern is too much freedom. < 1636042005 325981 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :I don't think it's any different than allowing a Turing machine to take an input, or allowing a Wang tileset to start with a border on one edge/corner. < 1636042036 840115 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :inputs are finite though < 1636042091 347349 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Corbin: S-reduction is confluent though. < 1636042093 215917 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :That's fair. An infinite *repeating* background pattern would be fine. < 1636042099 452395 :daggy1234[m]!~daggy1234@2001:470:69fc:105::d315 PART :#esolangs < 1636042138 469239 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh, sorry; what's contraction? < 1636042177 254829 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Uh, the inverse of reduction here... why did I pick the term "contraction"... < 1636042198 428404 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Ah because S x y z -> x z (y z) the right-hand side is usually bigger than the left-hand side. < 1636042214 489122 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :So inspired by size. < 1636042230 828833 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh, okay. It doesn't have to be confluent to be reversible. What I'm getting at is that, because all of the data is still there, even a non-deterministic reversible approach is possible. < 1636042235 734430 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :But technically wrong, I should've said "expansion". < 1636042265 824927 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :or "unreduction" :-) < 1636042271 620746 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :If there's a K combinator, then the non-constant input is forgotten, and in an untyped context, we can't just range over what that input might have been; it could have been *anything*. So we can't non-deterministically go backwards. < 1636042292 957353 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Going backwards with S is merely exponential. It's expensive but finite to explore. < 1636042360 619991 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Right. tromp's argument was more to the point anyway. < 1636042378 309429 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(that reversibility isn't an obstacle to universality) < 1636042520 517188 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :It's an obstacle to asserting that something has been *computed*. I'm sure you've heard the argument of the waterfall computer, which "computes" by permuting the positions of atoms; but in order to actually extract computation from a permutation, we must label the inputs and the outputs, and the manipulation of those labels is the actual computation. < 1636042577 523420 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Quantum computers only compute because of how the Born rule works; we measure qubits at the end, irreversibly altering their state. < 1636042655 441801 :wib_jonas!~wib_jonas@business-37-191-60-209.business.broadband.hu QUIT :Quit: Client closed < 1636042676 807500 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Corbin: Well, an extractor could potentially be as simple as labeling the term with a top-down tree automaton and discarding the subtrees for certain trees. < 1636042720 424223 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: Yes, but I view that as just plugging in a K at the top and letting the S terms apply that K over and over, which is known to build all of SKI. < 1636042721 134086 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :If that works (big if, obviously) I'd accept that the actual computation happens in the S calculus. < 1636042784 547488 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I doubt that you can capture that in a finite tree automaton. < 1636042845 993951 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(Gut feeling, no proof.) < 1636042969 859737 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: Here's a large pile of statements; the important part is under "Applicative Systems and Computable Maps". https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2019/08/turing_categories.html If S and K are present, even in a way where S was pre-applied and freeze-dried and K was only mixed in later, then we get a partial combinatory algebra and etc. < 1636043005 508092 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :The root of that is ultimately https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smn_theorem and so that should be our focus. Can we use S to implement Kleene's projections? < 1636043078 356814 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Well, K is one of Kleene's projections! It's the projection which takes two arguments and returns the first one. And it's known that S can't implement K. < 1636043153 857569 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :This completes a proof statement which convinces me that Wolfram's conjecture is false; every Turing category has a K combinator. > 1636043291 273638 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Brainfuckn't14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89361&oldid=89360 5* 034gboframram 5* (-9) 10/* Brief Specification */ > 1636043384 982390 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Brainfuckn't14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89362&oldid=89361 5* 034gboframram 5* (+1) 10/* Brief Specification */ < 1636044061 235355 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :A strong counterpoint is that BCW is Turing-complete and also lacks K. The idea is to replace every value v by a pair where g collects any garbage that would have to be deleted, while the first component just acts as in ordinary lambda calculus/combinatory logic. < 1636044089 325456 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :(as usual pairs are encoded by = \p. p x y) < 1636044694 566968 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :I haven't seen this before and I'm having trouble working it out myself. Could you show me how I or K are encoded? < 1636044814 511668 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :something like http://paste.debian.net/1218221/ < 1636044844 294793 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :that feels overcomplicated, actually < 1636044901 290416 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Note on variable names: px = pair encoding x; x = the original x; gx = garbage associated with x. < 1636044937 243347 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh. I'll keep working it out for myself, but I was hoping for expressions in B, C, and W. < 1636044951 525561 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :That would be totally uninstructive < 1636044999 482752 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :It would be totally constructive, though. < 1636045198 265675 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: I want to buy your argument. Even with it, I think I can refute the idea that this would work for S. The problem is, roughly, implementing S with S. < 1636045284 721338 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Let's suppose for contradiction that there's two expressions in S, called big-S and big-K, which implement SK and are therefore make S universal. In order to do this, we'd use the same application for big-S and big-K as with just S, except maybe our application needs an intermediate glue, also made wholly of S, in order to function. < 1636045345 545574 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :There's a smallest such big-S and big-K, since we're working with finite expressions. But the smallest big-S is just S itself. This reduces the problem to whether big-K can be implemented with just S, which is just the question of whether S alone implements K. < 1636045608 317821 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Oh I need I as well, don't I. < 1636046139 943107 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :yes, to the extent that I = W K < 1636046230 889626 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :but isn't I also B C C ? < 1636046296 95363 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :How? B C C x = C (C x) < 1636046319 504782 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :B C C x y z = C (C x) y z = C x z y = x y z < 1636046350 645254 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock QUIT :Ping timeout: 260 seconds < 1636046726 493207 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Corbin: so, [K] = C (W (B (C I) (B (C I) (C (B C (B (B C) (W (B (C (B B B)) (B (B (B (C I))) (B (B B) (B B))))))) I)))) I (B C (C I)) < 1636046842 802216 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :yay it's actually correct. < 1636046975 640236 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :This implementation isn't very good, it encodes W as B W (C (B B C) I) :) < 1636047082 563923 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Okay, and that's with I = B C C as above. Makes sense. The size of the trees is definitely foreboding. < 1636047135 66063 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :But unsurprisingly the bad encoding of W itself doesn't matter. < 1636047138 638350 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Consider me convinced. Good work; thank you. < 1636047231 402115 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Unfortunately, I = B C C only works if it's actually applied to 3 more arguments. < 1636047315 970341 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :But that's fine, isn't it? Because at the top, we have a pair which needs one argument to eliminate the pair, and then two more arguments to invoke the LHS and throw away the RHS? < 1636047380 721787 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :So what about the first component of the pair < 1636047386 845596 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :we know nothing about that. < 1636047400 563426 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :But it's the value we actually want to have in the end. < 1636047606 483294 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Hm, I guess. < 1636048262 229365 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: so I hacked BCWI(plus K if erasure is present) abstraction elimination in the blc tool... but I did it by extending the CL datatype with extra constructors for I, B, C, and W. Should I commit or is that too dirty? < 1636048338 518378 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I guess I can make a pull request instead and leave it for discussion. < 1636048353 586427 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :please commit as a different branch for now < 1636048476 515403 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :need to think about best approach. maybe a new datatype with some conversion operators? < 1636048477 459486 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :yeah did that just now < 1636048504 58005 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I mean I pushed a new branch and made a PR for discussion < 1636048547 395934 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I also know almost nothing about this combinator basis... like, are there any interesting optimizations? < 1636048686 838695 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Anyway, at least this way the code won't be lost. < 1636048961 590809 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Huh. By complete coincidence, I just found https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/q/50688/52212 < 1636048997 944336 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :Is the answer just C? And then adding K makes for a better encoding. < 1636049030 109840 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :int-e: I think you could provide a complete answer here, if you'd like the karma. I only feel qualified to leave a comment. < 1636049121 694982 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :I have no SE account. I also lack intuition for how essential or not C is in all of this. < 1636049217 440539 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :What I do know is that B, C, and S have very clear roles in abstraction elimination. Assuming x occurs in M N we have [\x. M N] -> B M [\x. N] if x doesn't occur in M; [\x. M N] -> C [\x. M] N if x doesn't occur in N; [\x. M N] -> S [\x. M] [\x. N] otherwise. < 1636049304 811310 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :And you can get close enough to S from W, B, and C: S a b = W (B (C a) b) > 1636049536 449960 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07User:Pandaqwanda/pixeLang14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89363&oldid=89335 5* 03Pandaqwanda 5* (+258) 10 < 1636049641 420388 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock JOIN #esolangs sprock :Maeve Sproule > 1636049690 884964 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07User:Pandaqwanda/pixeLang14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89364&oldid=89363 5* 03Pandaqwanda 5* (-231) 10 < 1636050369 22491 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1636051598 603296 :zzo38!~zzo38@host-24-207-14-22.public.eastlink.ca JOIN #esolangs zzo38 :zzo38 < 1636052259 625190 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl QUIT :Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz… < 1636053170 941487 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :“ but it's a non-standard notion of emulation, as he allows a terminating computation to be emulated by a non-terminating one” => I don't think that's much of a problem. In PCs before the ATX chasis, programs couldn't turn the power supply off, nor did they have a power-saving mode for the CPU or motherboard, and often had no power saving mode for the CRT either. The main power supply and CRT < 1636053177 42930 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :could only be turned off externally, with no control from a program. Would you argue that those old computers can't do powerful enough computations because they can't decide to halt depending on the result of a computation? I don't think so. (If you want to say that they're not powerful because they have little RAM, that's fine.) < 1636053523 23585 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Or, for a more mathematical argument, consider Underload without the ! and S primitives, which can't delete anything, but is still Turing-complete. < 1636053607 807337 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :or that stupid rule 110 cellular automaton < 1636053611 485467 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :wich just keeps going < 1636053612 917206 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :and going < 1636053614 775441 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :and going < 1636053649 529243 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl JOIN #esolangs * :Textual User < 1636054698 897521 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :“But the smallest big-S is just S itself.” => are you saying that if you already know how to do arithmetic with dollars, then you can't simulate doing arithmetic with dollars and cents, because the smallest thing that can simulate a dollar is a dollar itself, and there's nothing that can simulate a cent if you choose that? < 1636054709 888317 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :Corbin: ^ < 1636054960 81118 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :“or that stupid rule 110 cellular automaton / wich just keeps going” => hmm. if https://esolangs.org/wiki/Infinite_Vector was defined without the :-( operator, so that programs can't halt and in nontrivial programs the memory keeps growing and can never shrink, would you still count it as Turing-complete? < 1636055274 637416 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :btw I'm fine with that aspect of rule 110, it's really the infinite intial state that leaves me dissatisfied < 1636055354 310004 :riv!river@tilde.team/user/river PRIVMSG #esolangs :no one has managed to remove that? < 1636055369 783476 :riv!river@tilde.team/user/river PRIVMSG #esolangs :i guess people aren't really interested in rule 30 < 1636055370 786613 :sprout_!~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:f161:c9c3:b403:49f6 JOIN #esolangs * :anon < 1636055376 816511 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :not that I'm aware of. < 1636055417 154628 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :But I could easily have missed it... I largely don't care. < 1636055450 248280 :riv!river@tilde.team/user/river PRIVMSG #esolangs :it seems like nobody really studies these 1d CAs < 1636055549 75052 :sprout!~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:58cd:ccc2:f66c:e3b QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds < 1636055587 171223 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :maybe 2D CAs are just more exciting to look at < 1636055653 57178 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :a finite control pointer register machine that allocates immutable conses on the heap also can't "forget" anything, though it can lose conses in a way that a garbage collector could free them, and it is Turing-complete. < 1636056722 726018 :int-e!~noone@int-e.eu PRIVMSG #esolangs :tromp: oh you made a suggestion, that sounds reasonable. will revisit tomorrow < 1636056781 903580 :Guest71!~Guest71@2603-8080-4300-7700-e17a-2d6b-ae46-680e.res6.spectrum.com JOIN #esolangs * :[https://web.libera.chat] Guest71 < 1636056817 924504 :Guest71!~Guest71@2603-8080-4300-7700-e17a-2d6b-ae46-680e.res6.spectrum.com QUIT :Client Quit < 1636056873 611961 :Corbin!~Corbin@c-73-67-140-116.hsd1.or.comcast.net PRIVMSG #esolangs :b_jonas: That's a really funny analogy, thanks. < 1636057565 478991 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :there is some difference in scale though. Infinite Vector has to at least double its memory usage in every loop, while a pointer machine might cons logarithmically rarely. < 1636057601 320501 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :or wait < 1636057613 648923 :b_jonas!~x@catv-176-63-3-164.catv.broadband.hu PRIVMSG #esolangs :maybe it's not logarithmic, only nth root if you have n+O(1) registers < 1636058278 667813 :perlbot!~perlbot@perlbot/bot/simcop2387/perlbot JOIN #esolangs perlbot :ZNC - https://znc.in < 1636058369 578029 :simcop2387!~simcop238@perlbot/patrician/simcop2387 JOIN #esolangs simcop2387 :ZNC - https://znc.in < 1636058477 273746 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock JOIN #esolangs sprock :Maeve Sproule < 1636058797 632129 :arseniiv!~arseniiv@94.41.2.66.dynamic.ufanet.ru QUIT :Quit: gone too far < 1636058943 322278 :tech_exorcist!~tech_exor@user/tech-exorcist/x-0447479 QUIT :Quit: see you tomorrow < 1636058994 71978 :sprout!~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:5495:68b3:d03c:732e JOIN #esolangs * :anon < 1636059211 809020 :sprout_!~quassel@2a02:a467:ccd6:1:f161:c9c3:b403:49f6 QUIT :Ping timeout: 268 seconds > 1636059754 415700 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07User:AmNow/Sandbox14]]4 N10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?oldid=89365 5* 03AmNow 5* (+196) 10Created page with "amnows sandbox page im not dead currently == apl stuff == s1 both{} truth{s s=1 : loop s} loop{ss both 1 loop s}..." > 1636059764 765496 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07User:AmNow/Sandbox14]]4 10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89366&oldid=89365 5* 03AmNow 5* (-1) 10 < 1636061352 959215 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock QUIT :Ping timeout: 256 seconds < 1636061772 47320 :delta23!~delta23@user/delta23 JOIN #esolangs delta23 :delta23__ > 1636062173 593383 PRIVMSG #esolangs :14[[07Timers14]]4 M10 02https://esolangs.org/w/index.php?diff=89367&oldid=89242 5* 03Rphii 5* (-190) 10minor feature enhancement < 1636064877 835900 :archenoth!~archenoth@2604:3d09:681:f00:7003:2de4:2fd7:db55 QUIT :Read error: Connection reset by peer < 1636065278 677633 :archenoth!~archenoth@2604:3d09:681:f00:981d:454f:5ac6:9f4 JOIN #esolangs Archenoth :archenoth < 1636066318 378554 :dutch!~DutchIngr@user/dutch QUIT :Quit: WeeChat 3.3 < 1636067255 649920 :archenoth!~archenoth@2604:3d09:681:f00:981d:454f:5ac6:9f4 QUIT :Ping timeout: 264 seconds < 1636067299 247274 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :SK numerals article up at https://john-tromp.medium.com/sk-numerals-9ad1b5634b28 < 1636067303 65610 :tromp!~textual@dhcp-077-249-230-040.chello.nl PRIVMSG #esolangs :feedback welcome < 1636067344 621260 :archenoth!~archenoth@2604:3d09:681:f00:d9c8:22e8:7bd:5ca5 JOIN #esolangs Archenoth :archenoth < 1636067494 795642 :Kit!~NotApplic@2603-6010-a141-6fa3-f20d-b9c2-68e9-3c5d.res6.spectrum.com QUIT :Remote host closed the connection < 1636067513 627620 :Kit!~NotApplic@2603-6010-a141-6fa3-eaa6-d59e-5f72-492a.res6.spectrum.com JOIN #esolangs * :realname < 1636067614 811085 :Kit!~NotApplic@2603-6010-a141-6fa3-eaa6-d59e-5f72-492a.res6.spectrum.com QUIT :Remote host closed the connection < 1636067632 600077 :Kit!~NotApplic@2603-6010-a141-6fa3-97df-ef21-bf61-2344.res6.spectrum.com JOIN #esolangs * :realname < 1636067672 804173 :FreeFull!~freefull@user-5-173-152-113.play-internet.pl QUIT : < 1636067729 645579 :dutch!~DutchIngr@user/dutch JOIN #esolangs DutchIngraham :dutch < 1636068738 825032 :sprock!~sprock@user/sprock JOIN #esolangs sprock :Maeve Sproule < 1636070144 781340 :richbridger!~richbridg@089144202237.atnat0011.highway.a1.net JOIN #esolangs richbridger :realname