|
557
|
1 2003-10-21.txt:00:56:08: <andreou> stevaras that's technically impossible, i've already told you that
|
|
|
2 2005-05-30.txt:02:30:39: <graue> by the way, you technically have a third instruction: whitespace
|
|
|
3 2005-06-02.txt:22:04:51: <cpressey> it's a language family, not a single language, technically, so of course it's a royal mess.
|
|
|
4 2005-06-04.txt:16:17:25: <CXI> well, technically it counts down from 99
|
|
|
5 2005-06-07.txt:00:44:22: <cpressey> well, text files are technically 1d, no?
|
|
|
6 2005-06-07.txt:08:55:21: <lament> dunno what's more technically impressive, that thing or the life turing machine
|
|
|
7 2005-06-11.txt:06:17:22: <GregorR> If you started with >++ you'd be fine, but that may make it unhappy ... it would probably be illegal HTML, technically.
|
|
|
8 2005-07-08.txt:20:44:58: <cpressey> fungebob: the documentation ( http://catseye.webhop.net/projects/befunge93/doc/befunge93.html ) only says that playfield cells are ASCII afaict. and ASCII is technically 7-bits, unsigned.
|
|
|
9 2005-07-27.txt:15:21:19: <int-e> without licenses, noone has the right to use your code in any way, technically.
|
|
|
10 2005-08-16.txt:23:01:14: <GregorR> Technically, UNdead, in that I resurrected to feast on the entrails of the living, but I'm not alive in the common sense *shrugs*
|
|
|
11 2005-10-06.txt:04:39:57: <WildHalcyon_> its a pyramid scheme. Technically, a "legal" pyramid scheme. More to the point though, its complete bullshit
|
|
|
12 2005-10-07.txt:21:14:58: <WildHalcyon> It thinks I pirated this copy of windows, which I technically did, but only because the CD that M$ gave me didn't work, and they refused to give me a new one. Rather than be out $300, I got this one from a friend
|
|
|
13 2005-10-19.txt:23:57:49: <lament> technically, false says that only a-z should be valid variables
|
|
|
14 2005-10-22.txt:03:13:35: <GregorR> (Technically you should use PONG :<hostname>, but localhost works fine)
|
|
|
15 2005-11-25.txt:20:41:06: <calamari> wasn't technically necessary to allow multiple *'s, but it was easy so I did it
|
|
|
16 2006-01-31.txt:03:34:38: <GregorR> Hmm, transforming this grammar, I had to use 7 LL(2)s ... now, do I continue adjusting to try to get it to LL(1), or do I say "Well, technically, it says he'll accept it in LL(2) form" and be done with it :P
|
|
|
17 2006-02-04.txt:06:55:40: <GregorR> Technically you could do that either way, but, if you wrote the parser from scratch, it's LL :)
|
|
|
18 2006-03-04.txt:11:42:57: <fuse> nooga: it's not technically a quine, since the output doesn't look exactly like the original program
|
|
|
19 2006-05-25.txt:04:55:24: <GregorR> Well, the technically correct definition for 'esoteric' is similar to niche, but as applied to languages it generally means that it's designed more to determine whether strange things are possible than to be usable. That being said, some of those strange things that have been tried end up being useful, so an esoteric language can definitely be usable.
|
|
|
20 2006-05-26.txt:07:09:37: <Arrogant> Technically, nothing is passed in, nothing is passed out.
|
|
|
21 2006-06-16.txt:13:50:16: <Keymaker> or technically two logs :)
|
|
|
22 2006-07-27.txt:01:11:58: <AndrewNP> Technically it's infinite.
|
|
|
23 2006-08-06.txt:19:21:20: <Razor-X> ihope: So is EQBF technically ``more'' quantum complete than BF?
|
|
|
24 2006-08-14.txt:01:19:30: <Razor-X> I'm technically non-native and I did the latter.
|
|
|
25 2006-08-14.txt:01:19:43: <RodgerTheGreat> technically?
|
|
|
26 2006-08-16.txt:00:29:05: <CakeProphet> Not sure it was for enforced code style... since technically I could call braces-to-end-keywords a coding style using your definition :D
|
|
|
27 2006-08-29.txt:04:13:28: <GreyKnight> Technically it incorporates every story ever written, and many that haven't been, but obviously the author can only cover so much of the multiverse ;-)
|
|
|
28 2006-08-30.txt:05:31:19: <Razor-X> It's funny, because x / y isn't technically part of the ABNF standard, but it's used everywhere.
|
|
|
29 2006-09-04.txt:03:42:44: <GreyKnight> technically they're different, but the difference is only in the distance between the dots, so they're generally identical
|
|
|
30 2006-09-26.txt:19:05:39: <pikhq> Although *technically* pure functional languages have the same thing going on. :p
|
|
|
31 2006-10-05.txt:00:16:08: <ihope> Technically, "in a /msg" means very little :-P
|
|
|
32 2006-10-05.txt:12:23:20: <oerjan> most likely. technically EOF does not fit in char.
|
|
|
33 2006-10-05.txt:23:53:28: * SimonRC finds out what happens if you write sentances by committee: "Voracious vexillologists believe that the Camelidophobic Esperanto International Association,which is obviously somewhat clever, but technically not very ethical or even subject to the Olympic games of all major holomorphic non-Euclidian institutions of value that are familiar to obsessive ZBBers and recalcitrant anthropomorphic grasshoppers, is concomitantly elucidated, although techni
|
|
|
34 2006-10-05.txt:23:58:57: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
35 2006-10-05.txt:23:59:26: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
36 2006-10-05.txt:23:59:32: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
37 2006-10-05.txt:23:59:38: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
38 2006-10-05.txt:23:59:44: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
39 2006-10-05.txt:23:59:50: <SimonRC> technically not zompist-approved, nor llamatically endorsed within notably ostentatious sub-committees by
|
|
|
40 2006-10-23.txt:04:03:45: <Razor-X> Well, I just got un-busy technically yesterday.
|
|
|
41 2006-10-23.txt:23:44:03: <oerjan> technically i think you can avoid some of the CASVS problems by just using the nominative case in most cases.
|
|
|
42 2006-11-19.txt:22:53:36: <CakeProphet> and in my current projects I'm pretty much the most technically inclined person in the group.
|
|
|
43 2006-11-21.txt:16:33:40: <RodgerTheGreat> although, in my timezone, it's still technically morning.
|
|
|
44 2006-11-28.txt:01:56:37: <Razor-X> Well, it technically is not public domain.
|
|
|
45 2006-12-02.txt:04:22:47: <Razor-X> I know in Scheme the only reason I'd use a macro was if some piece of code kept repeating itself over and over again, or I was in this sort of a position, where it's technically better Lisp-style to use a macro to generate the code instead of having a helper procedure produce a procedure that is evaluated by the outer procedure.
|
|
|
46 2006-12-11.txt:23:19:00: <GregorR-L> Technically no :P
|
|
|
47 2006-12-26.txt:22:53:19: <oerjan> is it even technically possible?
|
|
|
48 2006-12-30.txt:23:39:11: <oklopol> well, technically
|
|
|
49 2006-12-31.txt:02:02:15: <GregorR> Technically speaking, you can implement a o and on method in any class and pass that in instead of an O class *shrugs*
|
|
|
50 2007-01-19.txt:01:11:23: <CakeProphet> it's technically a finite strip of inifitely divisble data with regular segments of "sound" and "no sound"... a binary encoding that can be divided by any ratio.
|
|
|
51 2007-01-23.txt:03:15:49: <CakeProphet> befunge isn't technically RPN... it is stack based though.
|
|
|
52 2007-03-10.txt:21:23:33: <oerjan> so still technically O(1).
|
|
|
53 2007-03-28.txt:18:47:13: <lament> oerjan: the user freely and (technically) knowingly permits the malware to run.
|
|
|
54 2007-04-10.txt:23:47:20: <oerjan> so common lisp _behaves_ as if subclasses can override, although technically they don't.
|
|
|
55 2007-05-28.txt:06:35:20: <GregorR-L> Also, there's still no legal means to declare something as PD short of registering it as such, so most PD stuff isn't technically PD (doesn't matter since that's not really arguable in court)
|
|
|
56 2007-06-02.txt:06:54:55: <Pikhq> So, &(void*)0; is technically invalid.
|
|
|
57 2007-06-02.txt:06:55:16: <Pikhq> (more than technically; I think GCC would shoot me for it)
|
|
|
58 2007-06-04.txt:20:08:58: <CakeProphet> technically, the bf array is just one giant string
|
|
|
59 2007-06-17.txt:02:21:35: <pikhq> *Technically* yes, but it's less-defined.
|
|
|
60 2007-06-25.txt:19:13:48: <RodgerTheGreat> if you read that ad and saved $2, they weren't technically lying
|
|
|
61 2007-07-03.txt:00:25:26: <pikhq> GreaseMonkey: That is technically in violation of Nonlogic's policy.
|
|
|
62 2007-07-04.txt:04:21:10: <pikhq> Although technically you could build almost all of the builtins from (lambda).
|
|
|
63 2007-07-05.txt:00:02:41: <Sukoshi> On an old forum I used to go to, we had a joke going where returning values wasn't technically producing output.
|
|
|
64 2007-07-10.txt:21:42:05: <oklopol> well, they are technically okay, it's just many editors and the command line environment often screw them up
|
|
|
65 2007-07-15.txt:00:41:33: <pikhq> (PEBBLE code, BTW, is technically 100% valid Tcl code, syntactically)
|
|
|
66 2007-07-23.txt:19:35:59: <oerjan> technically, e^(2*pi*n*i) = 1 for all integers n
|
|
|
67 2007-07-27.txt:05:26:59: <Sukoshi> Because objects *are* technically references.
|
|
|
68 2007-08-01.txt:00:11:58: <lament> SimonRC: technically speaking you still need to know what gules is
|
|
|
69 2007-08-09.txt:21:40:44: <ihope> Technically meaningless, but still funny :-)
|
|
|
70 2007-08-19.txt:21:52:01: <Gurami> and technically correct
|
|
|
71 2007-08-26.txt:00:34:41: <oerjan> although technically it doesn't have hands
|
|
|
72 2007-09-02.txt:23:39:54: <ihope> And yes, I technically didn't tell you about string literals :-P
|
|
|
73 2007-09-20.txt:17:39:17: <GregorR> (Of course of course, there are technically grammars that an NPDA can parse that an LALR parser can not)
|
|
|
74 2007-09-22.txt:02:19:15: <edwardk> though technically the haskell version lazily handles the latter pattern
|
|
|
75 2007-10-03.txt:14:32:44: <RodgerTheGreat> that's because my scanner isn't technically large enough for my bristol board
|
|
|
76 2007-10-23.txt:22:58:11: <ehird1> technically if you have the memory my program can support any brainfuck program up to MAX_INT characters
|
|
|
77 2007-10-26.txt:04:52:56: <pikhq> RodgerTheGreat: Technically, *sleep* is a loss of consciousness.
|
|
|
78 2007-10-29.txt:20:47:46: <ehird`> technically i could "optimize" , and . with a for loop
|
|
|
79 2007-11-03.txt:17:41:19: <ehird`> technically, i still need to do the gc
|
|
|
80 2007-11-11.txt:16:52:49: <oklopol> [[--][+]] -> [[-][]] is technically correct, but ...why the fuck does it optimize it like that?
|
|
|
81 2007-11-13.txt:04:26:54: <pikhq> Technically, Rodger would be running a *closely related* engine. :p
|
|
|
82 2007-11-13.txt:19:54:00: <oklokok> asm might technically mean an assembly, as in a mnemonics system... i mean a bytecode system
|
|
|
83 2007-11-17.txt:18:44:32: <ehird`> pikhq: Yes, it's an operator technically.
|
|
|
84 2007-11-20.txt:17:37:31: <Slereah> Well, they technically all are a subset of languages.
|
|
|
85 2007-11-21.txt:16:27:31: <ais523> but this doesn't technically speaking restrict what I/O sequences are allowed, because it can always be stored up until input is needed
|
|
|
86 2007-11-24.txt:19:29:24: <Figs> I mean, it's technically turing complete...
|
|
|
87 2007-12-09.txt:19:24:23: <Slereah> But technically, it is still computation :O
|
|
|
88 2008-01-16.txt:18:20:22: <oerjan> technically he _could_ be called Andrey
|
|
|
89 2008-01-17.txt:03:10:33: <oklopol> technically.
|
|
|
90 2008-01-18.txt:19:34:53: <Asztal> because although compilers would technically accept main not being a function...
|
|
|
91 2008-01-22.txt:15:33:02: <ehird> (technically, the above is what i would respond to if it had said 'christian' or anything else, too)
|
|
|
92 2008-01-22.txt:21:48:02: <oerjan> hm ... technically the empty program is legal but cannot be quoted...
|
|
|
93 2008-01-23.txt:05:33:26: <RodgerTheGreat> technically speaking, there's a grain of truth to that. "MInd's Eye", or audiovisual scratchpad, depending which model of cognition you subscribe to. :)
|
|
|
94 2008-01-23.txt:06:41:36: <adu> technically all edges are "undirected" but somehow know which one is "more positive", which mathematically implies a directed edge
|
|
|
95 2008-01-24.txt:04:45:31: <RodgerTheGreat> I'm not technically a goon, but I've been quite tempted to buy an account
|
|
|
96 2008-01-30.txt:22:53:36: <GregorR> Technically people have made it work with no runtime, but you lose many features.
|
|
|
97 2008-02-03.txt:08:16:06: <adu> because everything can be though of as a query or a command anyways, and if there is no interpretation of either in the current namespace, then there would technically be an error, but if the error of not finding any current bindings was instead used as the method of binding, then the '=' operator is useless
|
|
|
98 2008-02-04.txt:19:16:25: <ehird`> well, technically THAT doesn't but the k interp is tiny and really fast and IS used for those
|
|
|
99 2008-02-04.txt:20:27:21: <ais523> even though technically speaking they aren't
|
|
|
100 2008-02-04.txt:22:03:10: <ais523> technically speaking, all comments have to be replaced by a positive amount of whitespace
|
|
|
101 2008-02-10.txt:00:37:20: <ehird`> just dejavu sans mono. it's not monospaced, technically, because of the >>> and similar
|
|
|
102 2008-02-12.txt:22:17:26: <ehird> SimonRC: technically,
|
|
|
103 2008-02-16.txt:21:57:37: <pikhq> You could, technically, do Malbolge with it.
|
|
|
104 2008-02-17.txt:03:40:37: <lispy> Sgeo: which reminds me...since TC definition doesn't involves a system clock and user input. I've sometimes wondered if there are things we could make a modern computer do that a TC technically cannot.
|
|
|
105 2008-02-19.txt:21:16:01: <ais523> the classic a^=b^=a^=b is unfortunately not portable, and is technically undefined behaviour
|
|
|
106 2008-02-22.txt:20:05:45: <ais523> and it isn't even an esolang, technically speaking
|
|
|
107 2008-03-07.txt:20:09:25: <oklopol> i guess technically no, but do realize ehird recalled differently.
|
|
|
108 2008-03-09.txt:02:51:00: <pikhq> Technically, that's address 0 in kernel mode.
|
|
|
109 2008-03-10.txt:21:18:38: <ais523> in 2D, if you know for certain you're going non-cardinal, then technically speaking you only need to store the top and bottom
|
|
|
110 2008-03-12.txt:21:12:28: <AnMaster> ais523_non-admin, and also technically loading the larger program will be slower
|
|
|
111 2008-03-15.txt:19:59:52: <ehird> technically the spec allows [...] in the program just as a word
|
|
|
112 2008-03-16.txt:22:35:19: <pikhq> (technically, those are no longer functions, but rather *relations*. . . :p)
|
|
|
113 2008-03-31.txt:16:17:50: <ais523> which looks perfectly natural, but technically speaking .28 is the extension
|
|
|
114 2008-04-03.txt:16:45:29: <ais523_> this is as bad as that technically-correct-SGML website that someone, I think maybe pikhq, linked to a while ago
|
|
|
115 2008-04-04.txt:14:05:55: <ais523> but the result is the POSIX equivalent of a DS9K; yes, technically it complies with the spec, but nobody else does things like that
|
|
|
116 2008-04-04.txt:21:29:46: <SimonRC> vixey: dragon-shaped, but technically not dragons
|
|
|
117 2008-04-09.txt:16:15:48: <oklopol> and you technically can't, if lisp is defined to fail in some cases
|
|
|
118 2008-04-14.txt:11:04:33: <oklopol> i guess it's not technically a quine, because that's not printed to stdout
|
|
|
119 2008-04-16.txt:17:04:24: <AnMaster> anyway befunge technically got no syntax errors either, it is perfectly valid to use an non-implemented instruction to reflect
|
|
|
120 2008-04-23.txt:18:45:57: <ehird> ais523: however, technically you don't violate the github tos
|
|
|
121 2008-04-23.txt:18:47:39: <ais523> ehird: oh, I forgot that you didn't need a TLD for email, technically speaking
|
|
|
122 2008-05-01.txt:22:24:36: <ais523> AnMaster: technically speaking Windows is POSIX too, at least when they tested it they got a 'did not definitively fail' answer
|
|
|
123 2008-05-06.txt:22:09:31: <ehird> ais523: technically
|
|
|
124 2008-05-07.txt:20:42:54: <ehird> technically it'll work
|
|
|
125 2008-05-08.txt:22:19:10: <ehird> technically, if you give the definition of replace I stated,
|
|
|
126 2008-05-15.txt:00:20:33: <oerjan> wikipedia tells me that technically coffee beans are not beans either
|
|
|
127 2008-05-15.txt:22:19:35: <ehird> Technically I have given up on very few projects. But some of them have been at low priority for years.
|
|
|
128 2008-05-19.txt:05:09:56: <Slereah_> There's three suits, technically
|
|
|
129 2008-05-26.txt:03:12:27: <oklopol> (well technically it does, but not important here)
|
|
|
130 2008-05-27.txt:21:18:46: <oklopol> (well technically i did by saying that out loud)
|
|
|
131 2008-05-28.txt:23:30:35: <ehird> technically that's against freenode rules
|
|
|
132 2008-05-30.txt:21:19:35: <Slereah_> Well, so's a Turing machine, technically.
|
|
|
133 2008-05-30.txt:21:23:13: <Slereah_> But I suppose that, technically, there's a twin of the 2,3 machine, with directions reversed, such that right-cut would still be TC.
|
|
|
134 2008-06-01.txt:14:39:51: <ais523> and technically speaking there's no reason why you couldn't implement curses in Brainfuck, except that that would be insane
|
|
|
135 2008-06-01.txt:19:23:20: <Slereah> Well, technically, I could just do a replace = by the combinator
|
|
|
136 2008-06-05.txt:01:02:49: <Slereah> Technically, I think that most of the time, there will only be one argument for it to be valid.
|
|
|
137 2008-06-06.txt:20:42:41: <oklopol> (got it, i guess i was technically wrong)
|
|
|
138 2008-06-07.txt:18:23:21: <AnMaster> well it could technically register it
|
|
|
139 2008-06-07.txt:18:23:32: <tusho> AnMaster: Well, technically it could. But what would it do with it?
|
|
|
140 2008-06-08.txt:15:26:23: <Slereah> Well, it's technically copyrighted.
|
|
|
141 2008-06-10.txt:18:31:41: <Slereah7> Plus, technically, it's the same rigid formalism
|
|
|
142 2008-06-17.txt:21:57:41: <oklopol> well, don't forget Rule on Page, technically i still have the lead with less than 70 points.
|
|
|
143 2008-06-18.txt:02:20:27: <oklofok> but as i'm in a band (well technically two), i need to drink occasionally
|
|
|
144 2008-06-19.txt:23:54:02: <AnMaster> technically
|
|
|
145 2008-06-19.txt:23:54:12: <ais523> well, C-INTERCAL can run on other compilers, technically
|
|
|
146 2008-06-27.txt:18:32:10: <tusho> technically that has extra whitespace
|
|
|
147 2008-06-28.txt:01:00:54: <Slereah_> Technically, using Planck units to define units of space time, the entire universe is way under 10^150 units of spacetime
|
|
|
148 2008-06-28.txt:06:03:03: <psygnisfive> also, it is technically illegal in the US, yes.
|
|
|
149 2008-06-28.txt:07:58:09: <psygnisfive> which means that technically its not a quine
|
|
|
150 2008-06-28.txt:08:01:27: <psygnisfive> which i guess is technically what the source is
|
|
|
151 2008-07-02.txt:19:45:29: <tusho> GregorR: Technically I stole it from Ruby, which does it _unambigiously_
|
|
|
152 2008-07-03.txt:17:41:35: <AnMaster> ais523, well it can technically
|
|
|
153 2008-07-07.txt:20:32:41: <ais523> well, technically speaking there are no limitations on fingerprint names
|
|
|
154 2008-07-13.txt:21:14:47: <tusho> technically it's right.
|
|
|
155 2008-07-21.txt:03:31:51: <Slereah__> I mean, technically
|
|
|
156 2008-07-23.txt:17:56:50: <MikeRiley> technically no, other than it says the 0k will not execute the next instruction
|
|
|
157 2008-07-24.txt:19:13:21: <AnMaster> technically STDIO is system interaction... ;P
|
|
|
158 2008-07-25.txt:16:12:29: <MikeRiley> technically,,,since the spec says like c fgets, and fgets keeps the line endings....
|
|
|
159 2008-07-27.txt:16:57:15: <MikeRiley> technically,,,even FNGR could be made to work using this scheme....but will stick with the new FING for doing this kind of thing...
|
|
|
160 2008-07-27.txt:21:52:05: <tusho> well, technically it doesn't
|
|
|
161 2008-08-02.txt:22:37:11: <oerjan> i'm technically subscribed, but only the backup lists are set to deliver
|
|
|
162 2008-08-06.txt:20:17:48: <tusho> mplayer on windows, while technically possible, is a bit pointless
|
|
|
163 2008-08-06.txt:22:26:28: <tusho> technically powered by mediawiki but that's irrelevant
|
|
|
164 2008-08-07.txt:15:14:48: <tusho> and well technically you could do just about anything
|
|
|
165 2008-08-08.txt:13:42:03: <tusho> oklopol: technically its purpose is to change the topic
|
|
|
166 2008-08-08.txt:21:00:01: <tusho> technically it isn't a lie
|
|
|
167 2008-08-08.txt:22:45:57: <ais523> and yes, should go in >, technically speaking there's no need to bother about <
|
|
|
168 2008-08-10.txt:12:26:23: <tusho> technically they're not valid URIs
|
|
|
169 2008-08-11.txt:12:09:19: <AnMaster> technically
|
|
|
170 2008-08-11.txt:12:10:52: <AnMaster> because technically, all it is is a number
|
|
|
171 2008-08-11.txt:12:29:04: <tusho> technically it's not
|
|
|
172 2008-08-14.txt:19:33:21: <AnMaster> should technically be possible
|
|
|
173 2008-08-17.txt:19:22:38: <AnMaster> I guess "no read" technically too, but I can't see the use of that
|
|
|
174 2008-08-22.txt:15:50:06: <Slereah_> Well, technically
|
|
|
175 2008-08-24.txt:19:49:00: <MikeRiley> i am a bit confused why mycology has a test to see if SCKE is included in SOCK,,,since technically it should not be....
|
|
|
176 2008-08-31.txt:00:12:05: <tusho> Additionally: clicking an ad by mistake is technically click fraud
|
|
|
177 2008-09-16.txt:17:35:46: <ais523> but it's technically speaking usable for programming, if you're very patient
|
|
|
178 2008-09-16.txt:19:53:57: <AnMaster> technically impossible
|
|
|
179 2008-09-21.txt:22:45:58: <oerjan> technically, yes
|
|
|
180 2008-09-26.txt:20:46:43: <Slereah> I think that two elisioned sesses are combined in one, technically
|
|
|
181 2008-09-27.txt:10:25:58: <Keymaker> but i don't know what the memory is, technically. new values go to end and also when loop begins it takes value from end, but values are removed beginning from left/start
|
|
|
182 2008-09-27.txt:14:58:19: <oerjan> technically i think i'd've wanted `(',f ',cc) or a direct application
|
|
|
183 2008-10-01.txt:14:33:09: <tusho> Is technically illegal.
|
|
|
184 2008-10-01.txt:21:49:30: <oerjan> ais523_: the elder god things are not technically part of it. but don't let that reassure you.
|
|
|
185 2008-10-01.txt:23:03:09: <ais523_> AnMaster: technically it's a nomic but its rules rarely change, the nomicness is only used to improve them from time to time
|
|
|
186 2008-10-01.txt:23:17:54: <ais523_> that's technically gramatically correct
|
|
|
187 2008-10-03.txt:20:48:51: <oerjan> CO2Games: yeah then you need a tape device, a RAM is not technically enough since the pointer sizes would be bounded too
|
|
|
188 2008-10-07.txt:17:01:57: <oklocod> oerjan: sat is just 3-sat with larger clauses right? then it's technically not the same, because the gate thing has nested operations and suchamathings.
|
|
|
189 2008-10-08.txt:17:49:01: <oklocod> there should never be a command that makes technically existing, but practically nonexistant, functionality easier :P
|
|
|
190 2008-10-08.txt:17:49:30: <oerjan> oklocod: this is not that kind. this is technically non-existing, so that's fine
|
|
|
191 2008-10-08.txt:17:49:54: <oklocod> oerjan: well it's technically existing if you have some other representation of a string on the stack
|
|
|
192 2008-10-10.txt:22:57:51: <ehird> although technically you can do classes
|
|
|
193 2008-10-10.txt:23:21:21: <ehird> I own the server (a VPS technically), ais523 is sudoer.
|
|
|
194 2008-10-13.txt:11:54:36: <oklopol> thank you, although that was so obvious i should technically kill everyone of you
|
|
|
195 2008-10-16.txt:21:11:58: <fizzie> Another style thing: in the "ATHR vs. REFC" the wording, while technically speaking correct, maybe a bit needlessly complicated. The REFC reference numbers don't really matter, so it probably doesn't matter if they're given out first-come-first-served or something stranger, you could just say they're global and need to work without explicit synchronization of requests.
|
|
|
196 2008-10-17.txt:21:45:01: <fizzie> Some three of the ten "newer nodes" in the CIS cluster only have two of the four cores in use, so I guess there would technically speaking be some room there too.
|
|
|
197 2008-10-20.txt:22:18:26: <psygnisfive> technically i put it on your stem
|
|
|
198 2008-10-22.txt:18:17:15: <oklopol> optbot is a baby, technically, as are most bots
|
|
|
199 2008-10-24.txt:14:02:32: <ais523> AnMaster: that's interesting... I'd argue that doing something that's both utterly unexpected and technically correct is correct behaviour for an ESO pastebin
|
|
|
200 2008-10-24.txt:14:56:58: <ehird> well, technically you could enter a program that prints inputs
|
|
|
201 2008-10-27.txt:01:40:21: <psygnisfive> but brain != mind. atleast not technically
|
|
|
202 2008-11-11.txt:17:44:36: <GregorR> That way they wouldn't be links (technically)!
|
|
|
203 2008-11-12.txt:17:38:23: <oklopol> but i am technically running, i can show you a vid once i master this.
|
|
|
204 2008-11-13.txt:14:24:38: <ehird_> Also, technically messing up KDE was my fault, but i'm blaming it on KDE.
|
|
|
205 2008-11-14.txt:12:27:27: <oklopol> technically i was just "jumping around" before.
|
|
|
206 2008-11-14.txt:14:54:56: <oklopol> yeah he says "the reader will find this confusing", but that's bullcrap, i'm not talking about "finnish that sounds pretty", i'm just telling you i'm technically right.
|
|
|
207 2008-11-15.txt:21:34:15: <Slereah_> Also in the logs, technically
|
|
|
208 2008-11-21.txt:14:19:17: <Slereah_> It can be O anything, technically.
|
|
|
209 2008-11-27.txt:20:24:12: * oklopol is technically a bastard!
|
|
|
210 2008-11-27.txt:20:28:32: <AnMaster> technically we all got exactly one asshole too :P
|
|
|
211 2008-11-28.txt:09:19:44: <Slereah_> Technically, I should need it only for one application.
|
|
|
212 2008-11-29.txt:13:58:14: <Slereah_> Well, technically, it does.
|
|
|
213 2008-11-29.txt:19:07:19: <jayCampbell> wasn't that technically a ranged attack?
|
|
|
214 2008-12-04.txt:21:40:59: <ehird> Although technically I do not have to track them, I feel like I should.
|
|
|
215 2008-12-05.txt:21:58:07: <ais523> technically speaking?
|
|
|
216 2008-12-10.txt:15:05:49: <zuff> oklopol: because it technically is
|
|
|
217 2008-12-16.txt:18:47:26: <zuff> Technically ais523 is a separate person because he's a wikipedia admin and they get death threats and stuff.
|
|
|
218 2008-12-16.txt:22:12:25: <zuff> also, it's technically down.
|
|
|
219 2008-12-23.txt:23:12:49: <psygnisfive> which is i suppose technically possible
|
|
|
220 2008-12-24.txt:14:05:05: <oerjan> technically even here it doesn't start until 5 o'clock iirc
|
|
|
221 2008-12-25.txt:14:38:01: <AnMaster> ais523|direct, technically it could work at any point during the year
|
|
|
222 2008-12-30.txt:04:29:25: <Sgeo> Technically, in AW, not an arbitrary number, due to space limitations, but let's ignore that
|
|
|
223 2008-12-30.txt:04:29:48: <Sgeo> identical objects can technically be distinguished, if the viewer can't see some of them
|
|
|
224 2009-01-02.txt:19:23:31: <CakeProphet> though technically I'm familiar with C... but I never use it unless someone needs me to.
|
|
|
225 2009-01-04.txt:16:07:00: <ais523> if a point is so far away it's moving away faster than the speed of light, it's technically outside the universe
|
|
|
226 2009-01-04.txt:16:08:20: <ais523> Slereah: well, technically, but everything else expands at the same rate too, so it gets smaller compared to all the objects inside it
|
|
|
227 2009-01-04.txt:16:12:01: <oklopol> Slereah: well technically not, say the universe consisted of cells of some size that was constantly getting bigger
|
|
|
228 2009-01-04.txt:16:12:21: <ais523> ehird: as for Drizzle, they're taking out all the features that you don't technically have to use in a MySQL database AFAICT
|
|
|
229 2009-01-09.txt:19:03:01: <Hiato> Hrmm... ok, so fundamentally, technically, it's not cool. Deewiant, do you use it? PS: it does have a much catchier description: a lightweight and flexible Linux® distribution that tries to Keep It Simple.
|
|
|
230 2009-01-14.txt:19:57:32: <ais523> which in Perl, is technically compile-time
|
|
|
231 2009-01-15.txt:19:56:53: <ehird> ok, technically we have purl.org
|
|
|
232 2009-01-18.txt:16:52:01: <ais523> returning a struct is technically speaking only returning one value
|
|
|
233 2009-01-18.txt:17:41:16: <ais523> despite it being technically illegal
|
|
|
234 2009-01-18.txt:17:47:43: <AnMaster> I just had a crazy idea for how to implement an AI that would actually work, it is technically unfeasible though
|
|
|
235 2009-01-18.txt:17:49:18: <AnMaster> ais523, I said "technically unfeasible"
|
|
|
236 2009-01-18.txt:17:49:53: <AnMaster> ais523, indeed. I said "technically unfeasible" and "given enough time"
|
|
|
237 2009-01-21.txt:20:02:57: <oerjan> i mean _technically_ one of them is official, but no one has ever managed to call that rule without using an AI
|
|
|
238 2009-01-21.txt:21:21:00: <ais523> no, WP:BEANS technically says "Don't tell people not to do something, because they'll be certain to try"
|
|
|
239 2009-01-21.txt:22:26:21: <oerjan> i supposed technically someone _could_ have mirrored it
|
|
|
240 2009-01-26.txt:20:43:53: <oklopol> i'm pretty sure "before wp was what it is now" meant wikipedia didn't exist, with the additional "don't make smart-ass comments about it somehow technically existing in some form"
|
|
|
241 2009-01-27.txt:00:05:30: <ehird> it isn't technically a program as much as a program fragment I cooked up when thinking about concatenative langs for a game engine scripting language
|
|
|
242 2009-01-31.txt:18:07:05: <oklopol> of course, it seems i technically haven't implemented it anymore, because it doesn't work.
|
|
|
243 2009-02-01.txt:17:31:49: <oklopol> technically yes.
|
|
|
244 2009-02-04.txt:17:37:46: <ehird> what's needed is inline asm in haskell. then, technically, it'd be 100% haskell ;-D
|
|
|
245 2009-02-04.txt:18:36:43: <ehird> ^ despite being technically forbidden, this is the closest type I can get the FFI to output, and gcc accepts it...
|
|
|
246 2009-02-04.txt:19:02:42: <ehird> technically, I should be doing `hs_add_root(__stginit_Export);` after the hs_init, where __stginit_Export is defined...somewhere, but what the heck
|
|
|
247 2009-02-05.txt:19:09:07: <ais523> impomatic: technically speaking, it isn't functional, but all writing in it seems to be functional in practice
|
|
|
248 2009-02-05.txt:19:09:52: <impomatic> So technically speaking, would I need to ad much to make it functional?
|
|
|
249 2009-02-05.txt:21:05:13: <ais523> technically speaking, strings in a #include can be parsed however the compiler wants
|
|
|
250 2009-02-05.txt:21:05:39: <ais523> they don't even technically have to refer to filenames, although every compiler I've met does that
|
|
|
251 2009-02-08.txt:14:57:52: <ais523> ehird: you are aware that "wat" is technically speaking a spelling error?
|
|
|
252 2009-02-11.txt:17:20:46: <ais523> well, technically prolog is a lisp derivative
|
|
|
253 2009-02-11.txt:21:46:35: <ehirddit> All my settings and files are technically gone, but I'll fish out what I need from /Previous Systems/.
|
|
|
254 2009-02-13.txt:08:30:13: <oklofok> i mean, i am technically cs people, but i should probably be math people
|
|
|
255 2009-02-14.txt:16:09:08: <ehird> technically, it shouldn't have persisted past the upgrade anyway
|
|
|
256 2009-02-14.txt:16:50:35: <ehird> (technically, the logs are on bespin.org; tunes.org just happens to be hosted on bespin
|
|
|
257 2009-02-14.txt:16:54:19: <ais523> that isn't even an esolang, technically speaking
|
|
|
258 2009-02-15.txt:09:20:09: <oerjan> also, that's technically correct only if you count duplicates, in which case it still isn't, should be 2*len(nick)+1
|
|
|
259 2009-02-18.txt:17:32:30: <ehird> well, technically it stores an integer pointer too.
|
|
|
260 2009-02-22.txt:22:19:04: <oerjan> ais523: "i call myself", technically
|
|
|
261 2009-02-24.txt:21:59:57: <oerjan> well i guess technically the Tuesday has the same problem
|
|
|
262 2009-02-26.txt:00:03:02: <AnMaster> oklopol, talking about Mac OS 6-9 (and probably older ones, but never used them. and yes it is technically System 6, System 7, Mac OS 8, Mac OS 9...)
|
|
|
263 2009-02-28.txt:20:14:05: <ais523> ehird: I think technically speaking you aren't allowed to do that in C
|
|
|
264 2009-02-28.txt:23:42:28: <ehird> oerjan: technically, a.s. != autism
|
|
|
265 2009-03-01.txt:17:02:19: <oklopol> that was interesting, technically, yes, but i mean something that's interesting to play
|
|
|
266 2009-03-02.txt:14:43:52: <ehird> i think it might be technically correc
|
|
|
267 2009-03-03.txt:18:32:24: <FireFly> But it looks about as good, technically wise
|
|
|
268 2009-03-03.txt:22:05:32: <AnMaster> ehird, I don't have the C89 spec. I know it breaks C99 technically
|
|
|
269 2009-03-05.txt:18:02:41: <ais523> is that, technically speaking, a stack overflow?
|
|
|
270 2009-03-05.txt:18:16:24: <AnMaster> technically current erlang versions can run out of atoms. But the limit is a few millions iirc, and someone said it will most likely go away in the next major release
|
|
|
271 2009-03-07.txt:22:13:51: <ehird> bsmntbombdood: technically, 20kb would be enough.
|
|
|
272 2009-03-08.txt:16:35:57: <AnMaster> ais523, it technically does. That is the effect.
|
|
|
273 2009-03-08.txt:20:10:20: <ehird> technically
|
|
|
274 2009-03-08.txt:22:44:45: <ehird> Horrible, evil Scheme code that is technically R5RS compliant.
|
|
|
275 2009-03-10.txt:15:58:33: <ehird> (isn't it technically troff that does that?)
|
|
|
276 2009-03-11.txt:23:55:07: <oerjan> mapM_, technically
|
|
|
277 2009-03-13.txt:19:07:41: <ais523> and nearly all are abandonware, technically that's illegal but nobody but me seems to care
|
|
|
278 2009-03-13.txt:23:04:32: <mad> I think it's specific to snes technically but in general it refers to effects where you alter registers between lines
|
|
|
279 2009-03-16.txt:23:37:46: <psygnisfive> technically
|
|
|
280 2009-03-17.txt:19:19:39: <fizzie> Also in practice, many A/D converters are technically speaking 1-bit, it's just that they have a high enough frequency. And then some stuff to get multi-bit values.
|
|
|
281 2009-03-18.txt:00:35:20: <oerjan> or wait, that "new" is not technically part of the rules
|
|
|
282 2009-03-18.txt:14:56:28: <fizzie> Well, I mean, technically speaking I guess I should be learning it. There is an obligatory Swedish exam part of our study curriculum (it's in the law, even), and I thought I'd get it done easier by doing it in course form.
|
|
|
283 2009-03-20.txt:00:22:24: <oklofok> although i guess that's technically not a good opposite for fun
|
|
|
284 2009-03-22.txt:17:52:33: <ais523> TAEB takes a lot longer than 1 second to start up, and is technically a script I suppose
|
|
|
285 2009-03-22.txt:21:05:21: <Slereah_> Technically, the answer should be R
|
|
|
286 2009-03-23.txt:17:56:32: <AnMaster> I think they are technically incompatible though
|
|
|
287 2009-03-23.txt:22:12:13: <AnMaster> ehird, yes technically
|
|
|
288 2009-03-24.txt:19:10:54: <AnMaster> ais523_, I see. So it is technically even simpler to parse?
|
|
|
289 2009-03-24.txt:19:56:52: <ehird> ais523_: Yes, you're lucky because you have technically competent friends.
|
|
|
290 2009-03-24.txt:20:05:49: <ehird> Come on, you can't seriously believe people are that technically competent.
|
|
|
291 2009-03-26.txt:16:32:29: <ais523> ehird: I thought abandonware was a term for things that were technically illegal, but that nobody cared enough to sue about
|
|
|
292 2009-03-27.txt:23:41:01: <AnMaster> also I know technically how you do it, I can manage short and not to steep hills fine. and I know how you put your foots. never let the tips drift apart too much for example.
|
|
|
293 2009-03-29.txt:23:26:16: <oerjan> well technically the car parts would probably fall off because the view out is so lousy you cannot avoid bumping into things
|
|
|
294 2009-03-30.txt:23:25:16: <fizzie> But I have even more -doc packages: autobook (well, technically that's not -doc), autoconf-doc, automake1.9-doc, gcc-4.1-doc, gcc-4.3-doc, gcc-doc-base, gdb-doc, ocaml-doc.
|
|
|
295 2009-04-01.txt:22:47:23: <ais523> my C-INTERCAL is technically a fork, but because the original had been discontinued for years it became the de-facto official version
|
|
|
296 2009-04-01.txt:23:11:55: <ais523> technically speaking, I'm an engineer
|
|
|
297 2009-04-02.txt:16:48:11: <ehird> yes, it's technically correct
|
|
|
298 2009-04-02.txt:16:48:38: <ehird> llback, and much more. We also pride ourselves in having technically competent support staff based in our UK offices.
|
|
|
299 2009-04-02.txt:16:51:58: <Slereah> Well, technically, it's correct
|
|
|
300 2009-04-03.txt:21:45:43: <ehird> Pac-Man technically has no ending—as long as the player keeps at least one life, they should be able to continue playing indefinitely. However, because of a bug in the routine that draws the fruit, the right side of the 256th level becomes a garbled mess of text and symbols, rendering the level impossible to pass by legitimate means. Normally, no more than seven fruits are displayed at any one time, but when the internal level counter (stored in a sing
|
|
|
301 [too many lines; stopping]
|
