2006-12-22.txt:06:10:38: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2006-12-22.txt:06:24:13: -!- Jafet has parted #esoteric (?).
2007-02-03.txt:09:23:59: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2007-02-03.txt:10:10:03: -!- Jafet has parted #esoteric (?).
2008-06-28.txt:18:35:49: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2008-06-28.txt:18:36:03: -!- Jafet has parted #esoteric (?).
2010-03-03.txt:14:40:45: <scarf> <Jafet> I can implement nethack in hq9+n.
2010-04-05.txt:16:25:36: <fax> 15:24 < Jafet> PLEASE DO NAME ONE
2010-04-05.txt:16:26:32: <ais523> which channel? I recognise Jafet from #nethack
2010-04-05.txt:16:26:55: <oklopol> i recognize jafet from people pasting what he's said
2010-11-30.txt:15:36:10: <elliott> <Jafet> elliott: (snd *** snd.fst) . maximumBy (compare `on` fst `on` fst) . catMaybes . map (ap ((>>=) . flip sab t . lhs) ((Just .) . flip (,) . rhs) $ rs
2011-09-07.txt:06:25:05: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-07.txt:06:38:30: <Jafet> A Turing test is a procedure that takes a machine and returns a boolean. I've always found that a little shady.
2011-09-07.txt:06:53:19: <Jafet> Only to its clerics
2011-09-08.txt:02:52:45: <Jafet> They don't speak, they hiss
2011-09-08.txt:02:53:17: <CakeProphet> Jafet: oh ho
2011-09-08.txt:02:58:36: <Jafet> linux does it too; they're in good company
2011-09-08.txt:03:59:44: <Jafet> You should re-evaluate your goals
2011-09-08.txt:04:00:11: <quintopia> (it could be you jafet)
2011-09-08.txt:04:21:32: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-08.txt:04:51:09: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-08.txt:09:47:19: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
2011-09-08.txt:09:48:01: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-08.txt:10:35:33: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-08.txt:14:12:15: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-08.txt:14:26:02: <Jafet> valgrind, then
2011-09-08.txt:14:26:16: <ais523> Jafet: hmm, interesting, explain more
2011-09-08.txt:14:27:17: <Jafet> There's cachegrind and lackey
2011-09-08.txt:14:27:52: <Jafet> Since valgrind adds a huge amount of indirection to the code, the results should be repeatable
2011-09-08.txt:14:28:42: <Jafet> Yes, but with a simulated cache.
2011-09-08.txt:14:30:42: <Jafet> deamericanize
2011-09-09.txt:03:06:45: <Jafet> This can probably be easily expressed with continuations.
2011-09-09.txt:03:07:07: <Jafet> Although, what continuation can be sensibly thrown is another question.
2011-09-09.txt:03:07:25: -!- Jafet has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer).
2011-09-09.txt:03:08:07: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-09.txt:03:08:46: <Jafet> ...perhaps one that takes a replacement for whatever-value-caused-the-problem as its parameter.
2011-09-09.txt:03:09:03: <Jafet> Well, the stack is an implementation detail.
2011-09-09.txt:03:09:49: <oerjan> Jafet: actually i'm here mostly making the stack explicit in a vain hope of making the semantics understandable
2011-09-09.txt:03:10:38: <Jafet> By "unthrow", I presume you mean "go back to where the exception occurred and continue".
2011-09-09.txt:03:10:43: <oerjan> Jafet: yeah
2011-09-09.txt:03:11:05: <Jafet> But how would you continue? An error just occurred.
2011-09-09.txt:03:11:22: <Jafet> Okay, which language is this
2011-09-09.txt:03:11:49: <Jafet> But exceptions are usually used to signal errors, so you need some way to continue that doesn't cause the error again
2011-09-09.txt:03:12:17: <Jafet> I suggest returning a continuation that replaces the thing that caused the error, if applicable
2011-09-09.txt:03:12:37: <CakeProphet> Jafet: that's the idea, except it's not really a continuation.
2011-09-09.txt:03:13:28: <oerjan> Jafet: note that common lisp actually _does_ support something like unthrow, afair
2011-09-09.txt:03:14:18: <oerjan> Jafet: presumably however, each type of exception would contain enough information to tell whether it could be safely continued from
2011-09-09.txt:03:14:38: <Jafet> I'm confused by CakeProphet already. That's good, right?
2011-09-09.txt:03:14:59: <oerjan> Jafet: i haven't got around to reading him yet :P
2011-09-09.txt:03:15:36: <Jafet> Just make it impossible to name the type of a fatal error, so the programmer can't ever handle one.
2011-09-09.txt:03:17:29: <Jafet> To unthrow, you'd have to wrap everything in the Cont type or something
2011-09-09.txt:03:17:41: <Jafet> Perhaps static typing should be left out of your project
2011-09-09.txt:03:21:47: <oerjan> <Jafet> Just make it impossible to name the type of a fatal error, so the programmer can't ever handle one. <-- erm i didn't mean fatal in the sense you couldn't handle them further up, just fatal in the sense you cannot reasonably continue from them.  actually i'm not sure there is a real difference.
2011-09-09.txt:03:23:34: <Jafet> Every exception should be revertable! Design the language to enforce this.
2011-09-09.txt:03:23:53: <Jafet> Except, maybe, really really fatal errors.
2011-09-09.txt:08:51:18: <Jafet> Yes.
2011-09-09.txt:08:51:38: <Jafet> It raises the channel mean IQ, if only by a little.
2011-09-09.txt:08:52:34: <CakeProphet> Jafet: lol
2011-09-09.txt:08:53:32: <Jafet> Not really; python is full of lol.
2011-09-09.txt:08:56:50: <Jafet> Ah, cheater would be the one to know the details.
2011-09-09.txt:16:56:43: <elliott> 03:10:38: <Jafet> By "unthrow", I presume you mean "go back to where the exception occurred and continue".
2011-09-09.txt:17:38:41: <elliott> 08:51:18: <Jafet> Yes.
2011-09-09.txt:17:38:41: <elliott> 08:51:38: <Jafet> It raises the channel mean IQ, if only by a little.
2011-09-09.txt:17:38:48: <elliott> Jafet: Nah, it just raises the channel mean pedantry level.
2011-09-10.txt:00:14:22: <Jafet> Especially when using it to transmit XML.
2011-09-10.txt:08:30:27: <Jafet> Uh, they never created any black holes. The whole project was plagued by bureaucracy and funding problems, and never started up. The data up till now has been fabricated.
2011-09-10.txt:08:30:36: <Jafet> Why else do you think we're still here, stupid?
2011-09-10.txt:08:32:02: <elliott_> Jafet: Bureaucracy? Seriously?
2011-09-10.txt:08:52:03: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-10.txt:12:50:24: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-10.txt:13:00:49: <Jafet> Definitely a joke
2011-09-10.txt:13:00:58: <Jafet> Who the hell makes startups in london
2011-09-11.txt:22:40:21: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-11.txt:23:19:02: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-12.txt:00:47:47: <Jafet> You can't read that?
2011-09-12.txt:00:47:51: <Jafet> What's wrong with you?
2011-09-12.txt:00:47:55: <ais523> Jafet: it's an inside-out function call, I think
2011-09-12.txt:00:48:36: <elliott> <ais523> Jafet: it's an inside-out function call, I think
2011-09-12.txt:00:48:46: <Jafet> Actually, the last part is quite funny
2011-09-12.txt:00:48:54: <Jafet> I don't suppose protocol.def is C, is it.
2011-09-12.txt:00:49:03: <elliott> Sure it is, Jafet
2011-09-12.txt:00:52:43: <Jafet> elliott: how does a C file have "field_num++" at the end
2011-09-12.txt:00:53:41: <elliott> Jafet: the field_num++ is in that FIELD() declaration
2011-09-12.txt:01:06:06: -!- Jafet1 has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-12.txt:01:07:11: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
2011-09-12.txt:01:08:30: -!- Jafet1 is now known as Jafet.
2011-09-12.txt:03:28:38: <Jafet> No, this is like expecting someone who just started "calculus" to know what a real number is
2011-09-12.txt:03:28:53: <Jafet> Most people graduate from calculus courses without knowing what a real number is
2011-09-12.txt:03:31:01: <coppro> (with Jafet, this time)
2011-09-12.txt:04:03:38: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
2011-09-12.txt:04:08:49: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-12.txt:05:52:09: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-12.txt:09:54:29: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-12.txt:09:56:39: <Jafet> If ordered by size.
2011-09-12.txt:10:02:37: <Jafet> "I'm not a schemer. I try to show the schemers how pathetic their attempts to control things really are."
2011-09-12.txt:12:40:06: <Jafet> C-M-^H
2011-09-12.txt:13:42:21: <Jafet> Classes are abstract things which appear in your program, and are not meant to be executed.
2011-09-12.txt:13:43:22: <Jafet> Perhaps it's better to say "attended"
2011-09-12.txt:23:45:23: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-13.txt:00:19:17: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:00:51:58: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-13.txt:00:54:42: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:01:55:31: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-13.txt:04:12:55: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:05:01:29: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-13.txt:05:39:42: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:09:54:01: -!- Jafet1 has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:09:56:31: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds).
2011-09-13.txt:10:33:43: -!- Jafet1 is now known as Jafet.
2011-09-13.txt:16:30:04: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-13.txt:16:31:12: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-13.txt:16:40:57: <Jafet> RL zen conduct
2011-09-13.txt:16:46:17: <Jafet> Keep respawning until it works
2011-09-13.txt:16:47:46: <Jafet> What's wrong with my solution
2011-09-13.txt:16:48:01: <elliott> Jafet: it's terrible and might not even work at all :P
2011-09-13.txt:16:48:14: <Jafet> Sure, it might not work in 32-bit address spaces, but those are like deprecated.
2011-09-13.txt:17:02:10: <Jafet> elliott has never opened nfo files
2011-09-13.txt:17:02:22: <elliott> Jafet: nfo files don't go through cc!
2011-09-13.txt:17:03:11: <Jafet> Neither do comments
2011-09-13.txt:17:03:37: <elliott> Jafet: they should do
2011-09-13.txt:17:04:24: <Jafet> No, comments are for profanity
2011-09-13.txt:17:05:02: <Jafet> I guess you could do #define the \ #define fucking
2011-09-13.txt:17:06:23: <Jafet> PLEASE
2011-09-13.txt:17:10:24: <Jafet> Normal people do other things during that time, like go to the beach to perform lambda calculus.
2011-09-13.txt:17:10:30: <elliott> Jafet: Yes.
2011-09-13.txt:17:31:40: <Jafet> Suffix tree
2011-09-13.txt:17:32:10: <Jafet> Well, that depends on whether you're making a data structure for the text or the regexp
2011-09-13.txt:23:55:13: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-14.txt:00:38:24: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:01:11:58: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-14.txt:01:12:30: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:01:29:02: <Jafet> Only 39 bytes
2011-09-14.txt:01:29:31: <elliott> Jafet: Forty, isn't it?
2011-09-14.txt:01:30:12: <Jafet> You asked for overhead
2011-09-14.txt:01:30:18: <elliott> Jafet: Point :P
2011-09-14.txt:01:31:02: <Jafet> Most code points use one byte,
2011-09-14.txt:01:31:08: <Jafet> So UTF-320
2011-09-14.txt:01:38:14: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
2011-09-14.txt:01:46:59: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:01:57:06: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-14.txt:02:06:22: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:02:07:38: <Jafet> Dataflow languages aren't esoteric
2011-09-14.txt:02:07:47: <Jafet> Neither are constraint logic ones
2011-09-14.txt:02:09:38: <Jafet> You admire his intellect?
2011-09-14.txt:02:14:22: <Jafet> I think you could make an esolang out of higher dimensional spreadsheets
2011-09-14.txt:02:14:32: <Jafet> And higher order, of course
2011-09-14.txt:02:19:50: <Jafet> I bet if someone here implemented an esolang based on spreadsheets, their endeavour to make it turing complete will make it superior to other real spreadsheets
2011-09-14.txt:02:32:30: <Jafet> Hey, it works for python.
2011-09-14.txt:02:32:41: <Jafet> And any other language that is C in disguise
2011-09-14.txt:02:33:33: <Jafet> C with reference counting.
2011-09-14.txt:03:19:08: <Jafet> I made a script to reroll until I could get it on the first click
2011-09-14.txt:03:21:17: <Jafet> Microsoft has made a few different versions... the recent ones play in the background and prevent you from losing if the position is ambiguous
2011-09-14.txt:03:59:36: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-14.txt:04:05:07: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:04:16:24: <Jafet> I wonder what's the minimum number of identifiers you need for lambda calculus to be turing complete
2011-09-14.txt:04:16:29: <Jafet> Enough to define S and K, I guess
2011-09-14.txt:04:16:46: <Jafet> That makes three or so
2011-09-14.txt:04:17:28: <Jafet> I presume the software doesn't let you tell it which position to use
2011-09-14.txt:04:18:51: <Jafet> Can you make a turing complete set of combinators with two variables? I suspect it's impossible with one
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:08: <elliott> Jafet: it's provably impossible with one
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:47: <Jafet> pikhq: \x.x x
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:49: <elliott> Jafet: oh uh
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:51: <pikhq> Jafet: Fuck you.
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:53: <pikhq> Jafet: :P
2011-09-14.txt:04:19:53: <elliott> Jafet: there is a one-combinator complete base
2011-09-14.txt:04:20:15: <Jafet> elliott: but the combinator can't be defined with just one variable name
2011-09-14.txt:04:20:20: <elliott> Jafet: oh
2011-09-14.txt:04:20:23: <Jafet> So you can't bootstrap it into one-variable lambda calculus
2011-09-14.txt:04:21:04: <elliott> Jafet: yeah i suspect you always need three variables
2011-09-14.txt:04:22:03: <Jafet> Breaking news: zzo invents cobol
2011-09-14.txt:04:22:15: <elliott> Jafet: teach itidus20 lambda calculus
2011-09-14.txt:04:23:46: <Jafet> oklopol: jigsaw puzzles are turing complete
2011-09-14.txt:04:24:28: <Jafet> Yes, just assign colours to pieces
2011-09-14.txt:04:28:05: <Jafet> oklopol: incorrect
2011-09-14.txt:04:28:12: <Jafet> See Penrose tilings
2011-09-14.txt:04:29:59: <Jafet> Hmm, whoops
2011-09-14.txt:04:30:07: <Jafet> Maybe it was the pinwheel tiling
2011-09-14.txt:04:30:37: <Jafet> No, I did not realize that
2011-09-14.txt:05:04:12: -!- Jafet has quit (*.net *.split).
2011-09-14.txt:05:05:20: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:05:15:29: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-14.txt:06:33:55: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-14.txt:23:47:27: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-15.txt:00:21:57: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-15.txt:02:00:40: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-15.txt:02:06:22: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-15.txt:02:54:36: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-15.txt:08:32:54: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-15.txt:12:22:39: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds).
2011-09-15.txt:17:49:02: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-15.txt:23:29:39: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-16.txt:00:01:12: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-16.txt:00:37:08: <Jafet> Sex.
2011-09-16.txt:01:36:25: <Jafet> And I thought the psycho-babble thing was a joke
2011-09-16.txt:01:37:00: <Jafet> Shit just god Freudian
2011-09-16.txt:01:37:10: <Jafet> gott, even
2011-09-16.txt:01:58:14: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-16.txt:02:13:28: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-16.txt:05:17:18: <Jafet> > (LT `mappend` GT, EQ `mappend` GT)
2011-09-16.txt:05:17:34: <monqy> the one Jafet used
2011-09-16.txt:05:18:07: <Jafet> > liftM2 mappend [LT..GT] [LT..GT]
2011-09-16.txt:05:18:18: <Jafet> > liftM2 mappend [LT .. GT] [LT .. GT]
2011-09-16.txt:05:58:44: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-16.txt:06:10:53: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-16.txt:06:50:22: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds).
2011-09-16.txt:06:52:14: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-16.txt:07:03:43: <Jafet> > let cnt n = length $ filter (all (\(x,y) -> x/=y)) $ map (ap tail zip) $ subsequences [1..n] in map cnt [1..9]
2011-09-16.txt:07:05:46: <CakeProphet> Jafet: precedence error with $ I believe.
2011-09-16.txt:07:05:49: <Jafet> > let cnt n = length $ filter (all (\(x,y) -> x/=y)) $ map (ap zip tail) $ subsequences [1..n] in map cnt [1..9]
2011-09-16.txt:07:06:09: <Jafet> Okay, that's probably not correct.
2011-09-16.txt:07:06:48: <Jafet> > let cnt n k = length $ filter (all (\(x,y) -> x/=y)) $ map (ap zip tail) $ filter ((==k).length) $ subsequences [1..n] in [ [ cnt n k | k <- [1..n] ] | n <- [1..8] ]
2011-09-16.txt:07:07:12: <Jafet> Proof by lambdabot
2011-09-16.txt:07:09:16: -!- Jafet has quit (Quit: Leaving.).
2011-09-16.txt:07:43:51: -!- Jafet has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-16.txt:11:48:21: <Jafet> I think you're describing befunge, not chess.
2011-09-16.txt:11:48:30: <Jafet> (Multiplayer befunge!)
2011-09-16.txt:11:48:51: <CakeProphet> Jafet: kind of I guess.
2011-09-16.txt:11:56:28: <Jafet> You are referring to Stanton pieces? The bishop has radial asymmetry.
2011-09-16.txt:11:56:52: <Jafet> The other pieces, well... fix them with a sharpie
2011-09-16.txt:11:57:19: <Jafet> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staunton_chess_set
2011-09-16.txt:11:57:28: <Jafet> Chess is supposed to be independent of the piece shapes
2011-09-17.txt:00:39:17: <Jafet> http://gog.com
2011-09-17.txt:00:40:58: <elliott> Jafet: I like the part where they're selling a game that came out this year
2011-09-17.txt:00:46:02: <Jafet> elliott: perhaps the game was already old!
2011-09-17.txt:00:46:16: <Jafet> Oh, it wasn't DNF.
2011-09-17.txt:00:46:31: <elliott> Jafet: Well, DNF would certainly remove the "Good" part.
2011-09-17.txt:01:55:43: -!- Jafet1 has joined #esoteric.
2011-09-17.txt:01:59:33: -!- Jafet has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds).
2011-09-17.txt:02:17:27: -!- Jafet1 is now known as Jafet.
2011-09-17.txt:03:23:53: <Jafet> "The best minds of my generation are figuring out how to make people click ads." ~ Jeff Hammerbacher
2011-09-17.txt:04:39:44: <Jafet> For an average definition of source
2011-09-17.txt:04:41:14: <Jafet> I heard from a film commentary that they had to render some part of it with 64-bit colour instead of 32-bit colour, because it affected the results
2011-09-17.txt:04:41:26: <Jafet> It involved a diffraction shader or something
2011-09-17.txt:06:11:11: <Jafet> Which esoteric programming languages have been deployed?
2011-09-17.txt:06:14:29: <evincar> Jafet: What do you mean by "deployed"?
2011-09-17.txt:06:15:11: <Jafet> HackEgo: What do you mean by "deployment"?
2011-09-17.txt:06:15:22: <Jafet> The silent type, eh.
2011-09-17.txt:06:16:12: <Jafet> We should be the intergalactic hub
2011-09-17.txt:06:25:23: <Jafet> Why would generated code be invalid?
2011-09-17.txt:06:25:36: <elliott> Jafet: It might break its knee.
2011-09-17.txt:06:26:06: <Jafet> Is this why some programmers worry about padding?
2011-09-17.txt:06:26:15: <elliott> Jafet: Yes.
2011-09-17.txt:06:26:19: <elliott> Jafet: Health and safety is vital when programming.
2011-09-17.txt:06:27:02: <Jafet> Why would a code generator produce something semantically invalid?
2011-09-17.txt:06:27:11: <Jafet> Find that code generator and break its knee.
2011-09-17.txt:06:27:56: <Jafet> Did they include a doctype?
2011-09-17.txt:06:28:30: <elliott> Jafet: I, too, advocate violence against invalids.
2011-09-17.txt:06:28:34: <elliott> Jafet: You monster.
2011-09-17.txt:06:28:34: <Jafet> What's HTML?
2011-09-17.txt:06:28:54: <Jafet> Or html
2011-09-17.txt:06:29:17: <evincar> Jafet: HTML5.
2011-09-17.txt:06:29:33: <Jafet> Okay, then validate it as HTML5. If that's even possible.
2011-09-17.txt:06:29:54: <Jafet> For bonus points, validate all actionscript
2011-09-17.txt:06:31:36: <Jafet> How Poeful.
2011-09-17.txt:06:32:57: <elliott> Jafet: Boeful.
2011-09-17.txt:07:05:14: <Jafet> Rational obsession?
2011-09-17.txt:07:06:58: <Jafet> Queen is a really shitty band name.
2011-09-17.txt:07:07:50: <elliott> Jafet: Not as bad as King.
2011-09-17.txt:13:02:26: <Jafet> The thing that isn't a project and has nothing to do with Euler
2011-09-17.txt:13:03:58: <Jafet> elliott: data Lazy a = Lazy a; data StrictList a = SNil | SCons !a (StrictList a); type LazyList a = StrictList (Lazy a)
2011-09-17.txt:13:04:43: <elliott> Jafet: Cute. But doesn't let you parameterise spline strictness.
2011-09-17.txt:13:05:29: <Jafet> data ElliottIsAFag s a = SNil | SCons !a !(spn (ElliotIsAFag spn a))
2011-09-17.txt:13:05:44: <Jafet> ...I think that would work.
2011-09-17.txt:13:06:00: <Jafet> s/s /spn /
2011-09-17.txt:13:06:27: <Jafet> Damn, I was trying to prove the converse.
2011-09-17.txt:13:07:14: <Jafet> You can usually fix that with more polymorphism.
2011-09-17.txt:13:07:26: <Jafet> POLYMOARPHISM
2011-09-17.txt:13:09:44: <Jafet> The Prelude does not have polymoarphism.
2011-09-17.txt:13:10:32: <Jafet> Also, you can't unbox that !a.
2011-09-17.txt:13:10:57: <Jafet> More like Num a => Num (Lazy a)
2011-09-17.txt:13:11:05: <Jafet> Repeat 9001 times
2011-09-17.txt:13:11:22: <elliott> Jafet: who cares about the prelude
2011-09-17.txt:13:11:28: <Jafet> And don't have pack or unpack, just roll both into cast
2011-09-17.txt:13:11:40: <elliott> Jafet: Anyway, one problem there is that yo uca'n't override strictness of the element type
2011-09-17.txt:13:13:08: <Jafet> Programming with splines sure is
2011-09-17.txt:13:14:15: <Jafet> ,,,smooth? Visually appealing?
2011-09-17.txt:13:15:46: <Jafet> How would it be more efficient?
2011-09-17.txt:13:16:20: <Jafet> map on a non-strict list.
2011-09-17.txt:13:17:23: <Jafet> That would suck, actually, since you'd need a stack or a reversal.
2011-09-17.txt:13:18:27: <Jafet> Either way, it's a linear amount of extra space.
2011-09-17.txt:13:19:51: <elliott> Jafet: What would suck?
2011-09-17.txt:13:20:12: <Jafet> map on strict lists.
2011-09-17.txt:13:20:45: <elliott> Jafet: Well, I'm not saying strict languages are a party.
2011-09-17.txt:13:21:10: <Jafet> It's kind of egregious when a strict solution uses more space than the lazy one.
2011-09-17.txt:13:21:31: <Jafet> Well, you save a bit of space from unboxing, but it's not enough.
2011-09-17.txt:13:21:50: <Jafet> (#,#)
2011-09-17.txt:13:22:32: <Jafet> Do you need strict tuples that often, or do you just want unboxed tuples
2011-09-17.txt:13:23:23: <Jafet> Well, you can fix the tuple type system while you're at it.
2011-09-17.txt:13:24:22: <Jafet> So you can write tail (a,b,c...) and get (b,c...)
2011-09-17.txt:13:24:40: <Jafet> Then init (x,y,z,w) = (x,y,z)
2011-09-17.txt:13:26:12: <Jafet> Eh pops up at the right time and doesn't afraid of anything.
2011-09-17.txt:13:26:31: <Jafet> @google openoffice.org clippy
2011-09-17.txt:13:28:37: <Jafet> http://www.oooforum.org/forum/viewtopic.phtml?t=22401
2011-09-17.txt:13:28:46: <Jafet> 10% of people actually want it.
2011-09-17.txt:13:29:54: <Jafet> That's probably more people than the people who want, say, auto-turn-everything-that-could-possibly-be-interpreted-as-a-date-into-a-date-even-American-so-called-dates in spreadsheets.
2011-09-18.txt:00:44:28: <Jafet> > let !4 = 2 in ()
2011-09-18.txt:00:47:45: <Jafet> That defines (+).
2011-09-18.txt:00:47:51: <Jafet> > let (x + 2) = 4 in x
2011-09-18.txt:00:48:03: <Jafet> That attempts to use a horrible deprecated feature.
2011-09-18.txt:00:50:16: <Jafet> It has always been possible to turn that off.
[too many lines; stopping]