| 00:00:23 | BitPuffin | dom96: what kind of CPU? |
| 00:00:34 | dom96 | AMD Phenom Quad |
| 00:01:20 | BitPuffin | sounds like you should be fine I'd assume |
| 00:01:26 | BitPuffin | ask in #wayland though about the state etc |
| 00:02:36 | dom96 | AFAIK the AMD drivers need to add support for Wayland first, so i'm sure that will take a couple of years. |
| 00:03:16 | BitPuffin | dom96: hmm, should probably work with open source drivers soon enough |
| 00:03:37 | dom96 | open source drivers don't support my graphics card :P |
| 00:03:45 | comex | it's all great, except for how Canonical decided to write their own version for no reason |
| 00:05:37 | BitPuffin | dom96: oh that's a shame |
| 00:05:48 | BitPuffin | comex: well without that wayland probably wouldn't be happening right now |
| 00:06:12 | EXetoC | no? |
| 00:07:01 | dom96 | BitPuffin: Yeah, i'm somewhat tempted to try to get support for my GPU in the open source drivers working myself. But I don't want to fry my GPU. |
| 00:07:37 | BitPuffin | dom96: doesn't the hardware have safe switches for that? |
| 00:07:55 | EXetoC | it's easy to trigger overclocking or something by accident? |
| 00:08:59 | dom96 | BitPuffin: No idea. I'd be scared that I would screw something up anyway heh. |
| 00:09:29 | dom96 | EXetoC: That's definitely a possibility. |
| 00:09:46 | BitPuffin | dom96: try asking AMD about it. They actually provide details about their hardware, that's why Haiku has some AMD drivers and no NVidia drivers |
| 00:09:46 | dom96 | Since the proprietary drivers can control AMD overdrive. |
| 00:11:41 | dom96 | I bet they would tell me "It is not recommended to use third party software on our products, we cannot guarantee that no damage can be caused blah blah" |
| 00:12:47 | dom96 | But I may do it anyway, if anything talking to the devs of the open source driver would be interesting. |
| 00:13:41 | Associat0r | ID didn't start FPS at all |
| 00:14:36 | BitPuffin | Associat0r: well they pretty much did |
| 00:15:19 | Associat0r | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aipGP5oAuWQ "The History of FPS Games Vol 1 1974-1988 " |
| 00:16:38 | Associat0r | game industry is forgetting it's history just like with computing in general |
| 00:16:58 | * | Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za |
| 00:23:57 | BitPuffin | Associat0r: well yeah I know, but they aren't really the same thing |
| 00:27:21 | Associat0r | first person and shooting |
| 00:30:43 | Associat0r | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first-person_shooters |
| 00:43:20 | BitPuffin | yeam |
| 00:43:22 | BitPuffin | yeah |
| 00:43:25 | BitPuffin | obviously |
| 00:43:41 | BitPuffin | but that's like the driest way to look at it ever |
| 00:45:02 | dom96 | Good night |
| 00:46:22 | BitPuffin | night! |
| 00:54:29 | * | XAMPP quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 00:57:16 | EXetoC | :þ |
| 01:05:16 | * | Amrykid quit (Changing host) |
| 01:05:16 | * | Amrykid joined #nimrod |
| 01:13:51 | * | q66 quit (Quit: Leaving) |
| 01:13:54 | EXetoC | BitPuffin: wassup |
| 01:14:22 | BitPuffin | EXetoC: job searching |
| 01:14:43 | EXetoC | -.- |
| 01:15:12 | BitPuffin | EXetoC: whaat |
| 01:15:36 | EXetoC | nothing |
| 01:17:43 | * | DAddYE_ joined #nimrod |
| 01:19:38 | * | EXetoC quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.4.1) |
| 01:21:30 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 01:22:40 | * | DAddYE_ quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 01:26:36 | * | Sergio965 quit (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…) |
| 01:51:44 | Associat0r | Carmack keynote recording http://www.twitch.tv/bethesda/b/439369577 |
| 02:01:41 | * | BitPuffin quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 02:18:21 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 02:25:06 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 02:40:55 | * | Associat0r quit (Quit: Associat0r) |
| 02:42:23 | * | Emmyy quit (K-Lined) |
| 02:57:09 | * | Endy joined #nimrod |
| 03:09:39 | * | Endy quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 03:27:01 | * | Aww_ joined #nimrod |
| 03:27:25 | * | Aww_ is now known as Guest33357 |
| 03:31:08 | * | Guest33357 is now known as Emmyy |
| 04:00:17 | * | OrionPK quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 04:28:39 | * | xilo quit (Read error: Operation timed out) |
| 04:30:19 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 06:04:15 | * | Associat0r joined #nimrod |
| 06:42:25 | * | Endeg joined #nimrod |
| 07:11:36 | * | Araq_ joined #nimrod |
| 07:53:33 | * | Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za |
| 08:25:07 | * | DAddYE quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 08:25:39 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 08:29:48 | * | Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za |
| 08:30:24 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 08:38:03 | * | Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za |
| 09:26:12 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 09:32:52 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 09:39:17 | * | EXetoC joined #nimrod |
| 09:43:25 | * | q66 joined #nimrod |
| 09:53:11 | EXetoC | "Using a C-like *T notation would make it shorter but causes even more problems with Nimrod's syntax." maybe just keep the P prefix then. seems like a good compromise |
| 09:56:08 | Araq_ | well Rust uses_this for functions and people complain about it too |
| 09:56:33 | Araq_ | so I'm back to "lets try to let the tools deal with it" |
| 09:57:12 | Araq_ | it's only Vim, Emacs and Aporia anyway that need to be "patched" |
| 09:58:03 | Araq_ | I think it's a safe bet to ignore the other editors for a while |
| 09:58:12 | EXetoC | I don't know why you'd want to use snake case, but ok |
| 09:59:19 | * | BitPuffin joined #nimrod |
| 09:59:31 | EXetoC | or maybe that was just an example |
| 10:00:31 | BitPuffin | ohoy! |
| 10:00:36 | Araq_ | people complain about these things endlessly ... |
| 10:00:44 | Araq_ | that was my point |
| 10:01:10 | EXetoC | yeah |
| 10:01:13 | BitPuffin | me saying ohoy? Sorry then ;_; |
| 10:01:52 | Araq_ | EXetoC: I think you can read the single words better with snake_case |
| 10:02:08 | Araq_ | but that comes at the expense of "lexing" |
| 10:02:27 | Araq_ | it makes it much harder to see where the identifier ends for me |
| 10:02:28 | BitPuffin | how does that make lexing harder? |
| 10:02:41 | BitPuffin | ah |
| 10:02:54 | BitPuffin | nimrod doesn't allow snake case? |
| 10:03:05 | EXetoC | it does |
| 10:03:09 | Araq_ | BitPuffin: you should know by now nimrod doesn't care ;-) |
| 10:03:25 | BitPuffin | nimro never cares |
| 10:03:48 | BitPuffin | so erf and e_Rf is the same symbol? |
| 10:04:42 | Araq_ | yep |
| 10:05:08 | BitPuffin | splendid |
| 10:06:17 | BitPuffin | so here is something I was wondering about |
| 10:06:26 | BitPuffin | if a proc has a ref or ptr variable |
| 10:06:36 | EXetoC | in this case it's about people complaining endlessly, so I don't see how tools will help. are people supposed to care less if the conversion is just one command away? |
| 10:06:49 | BitPuffin | will any passed variable implicitly become a ref or ptr? |
| 10:06:53 | BitPuffin | or is that just with var |
| 10:07:11 | BitPuffin | and if you don't mark it with var, is it still passed by reference or is it faster to pass as a var? |
| 10:07:25 | EXetoC | it's implicit with var? |
| 10:07:33 | BitPuffin | yeah |
| 10:07:51 | BitPuffin | well you can't pass a let or a const to a var I think |
| 10:08:32 | EXetoC | what else then? you often need to introduce new variables for this reason |
| 10:09:10 | * | nihathrael quit (Quit: Unknown Horizons - Open Source real-time strategy with the comfy 1602 feeling!) |
| 10:09:34 | EXetoC | var x = y; f(x) |
| 10:09:41 | EXetoC | rather than just f(y) |
| 10:09:56 | BitPuffin | you mean because y is const or let? |
| 10:09:57 | BitPuffin | well |
| 10:10:07 | BitPuffin | I'm sure you can just do f(y.someCopyProc) |
| 10:10:10 | * | nihathrael joined #nimrod |
| 10:10:18 | Araq_ | "often"? it happens very rarely for me |
| 10:10:33 | BitPuffin | Araq_: did I get it right though? |
| 10:10:38 | Araq_ | no |
| 10:10:48 | BitPuffin | tell me what I got wrong |
| 10:10:49 | Araq_ | y.someCopyProc is no l-value either |
| 10:10:57 | Araq_ | in general |
| 10:11:07 | BitPuffin | so there is no dup proc? |
| 10:11:11 | EXetoC | sometimes you just don't care |
| 10:11:33 | Araq_ | BitPuffin: you got it all backwards I'm afraid |
| 10:11:45 | Araq_ | the problem is not 'dup' |
| 10:12:00 | EXetoC | I don't need it as often now, but that's because I can't bother with 'var' on params as much anymore |
| 10:12:03 | BitPuffin | Oh wait |
| 10:12:11 | BitPuffin | a var parameter is supposed to modify the variable |
| 10:12:15 | Araq_ | yes |
| 10:12:16 | BitPuffin | well then dup would be useless |
| 10:12:21 | BitPuffin | because the variable would just disappear |
| 10:12:28 | Araq_ | exactly |
| 10:12:40 | BitPuffin | Well if you only care about the side effects though |
| 10:12:42 | Araq_ | EXetoC: good ;-) that's the point |
| 10:12:58 | BitPuffin | if any |
| 10:13:45 | BitPuffin | Araq_: but are arguments always passed by reference, just that without var, ref, ptr it's an immutable reference? |
| 10:14:05 | Araq_ | BitPuffin: that's one way of looking at it |
| 10:14:21 | BitPuffin | I'm just wondering because I thought in that case it's better to pass them as one of those and mark it with {.noSideEffect.} |
| 10:14:34 | Araq_ | in reality the compiler decides for you whether to pass by copy or by reference |
| 10:14:57 | Araq_ | the compiler tries to use the most efficient way |
| 10:15:07 | BitPuffin | Araq_: okay so all forms are just as fast, and ref & ptr doesn't happen implicitly, it has to be a ref or ptr variable right? |
| 10:15:12 | EXetoC | I always forget some detail. that's fine then |
| 10:15:29 | BitPuffin | Does {.noSideEffect.} help with the decision? |
| 10:15:33 | Araq_ | BitPuffin: right |
| 10:15:48 | Araq_ | noSideEffect is irrelevant for the analysis |
| 10:16:33 | EXetoC | the only remaining issue then is that sometimes you can't do x.y.z += x.y.w, because of the way 'var' works. or is that a bug? say if x is 'var' whatever and the other symbols are fields |
| 10:16:52 | BitPuffin | ah, so that's just to make sure that your proc never introduces a side effect |
| 10:17:35 | Araq_ | BitPuffin: noSideEffect is for the programmer, the compiler doesn't need it, it performs the analysis always anyway |
| 10:17:52 | EXetoC | or just "x.y.z += 1" for simplicity (rather than "x.y.z = x.y.z + 1") |
| 10:18:00 | BitPuffin | Araq_: makes sense |
| 10:18:18 | Araq_ | EXetoC: I'm nto sure what you mean |
| 10:18:28 | Araq_ | x.y.z is either an l-value or it's not |
| 10:19:08 | Araq_ | if 'x' is a parameter and no intermediate pointers are involved nor it's a var parameter then it's not l-value |
| 10:19:46 | EXetoC | ok bug then. will report some other time. will be away for two days |
| 10:19:51 | EXetoC | happy decision-making :> |
| 10:20:10 | Araq_ | I don't think there is a bug lurking here |
| 10:20:21 | Araq_ | but sure, make an issue |
| 10:22:36 | EXetoC | it is a var |
| 10:25:33 | Araq_ | what is a 'var'? 'x'? |
| 10:26:01 | Araq_ | ok bug report please |
| 10:26:04 | Araq_ | bye |
| 10:26:06 | * | Araq_ quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [Firefox 22.0/20130618035212]) |
| 10:26:11 | * | EXetoC quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.4.1) |
| 10:30:46 | * | EXetoC joined #nimrod |
| 10:32:33 | EXetoC | yes x would be a var in this case, but maybe x.y[z] or y[z] or something like that was the issue specifically, where y was an array. I'm pretty sure that it should be regarded as an lvalue. can't see why not |
| 10:32:40 | EXetoC | alright cya on sunday |
| 10:32:40 | * | EXetoC quit (Client Quit) |
| 10:33:50 | * | Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za |
| 10:44:39 | * | Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za |
| 11:05:01 | * | Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za |
| 11:25:02 | dom96 | hello |
| 11:26:30 | BitPuffin | hey dom96! Now that vectors are pretty much complete I'm marking linagl as 0.1.0 so I'm adding it to babel :) |
| 11:26:36 | BitPuffin | dom96: 0.2.0 will have matrices |
| 11:26:37 | dom96 | yay |
| 11:27:14 | BitPuffin | dom96: err, what link should I add as the url |
| 11:27:23 | BitPuffin | dom96: https://bitbucket.org/TheLonelyByte/linagl/ |
| 11:30:44 | BitPuffin | ssh://[email protected]/TheLonelyByte/linagl ? |
| 11:33:39 | BitPuffin | aaand bitbucket went down |
| 11:35:30 | BitPuffin | and it's up |
| 11:40:08 | * | Araq_ joined #nimrod |
| 11:46:09 | * | Araq_ quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 11:46:37 | * | Araq_ joined #nimrod |
| 11:48:35 | dom96 | BitPuffin: I think just the http url will work. |
| 11:48:44 | dom96 | BitPuffin: Whatever way you would clone a hg repo |
| 11:48:58 | dom96 | (as a user with read-only permissions) |
| 11:51:33 | * | BitPuffin quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 12:11:35 | * | Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za |
| 12:30:47 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 12:37:28 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 12:45:14 | * | [1]charles is now known as charles81 |
| 13:45:10 | * | xilo joined #nimrod |
| 13:49:15 | * | BitPuffin joined #nimrod |
| 13:51:08 | BitPuffin | dom96: now the pull request was submitted, apparently github doesn't do that automatically anymore |
| 13:52:01 | dom96 | CC0? |
| 13:52:40 | BitPuffin | dom96: Creative Commons 0 |
| 13:54:02 | dom96 | BitPuffin: I think it would be better to use https://bitbucket.org/TheLonelyByte/linagl as the URL. Because then the user doesn't have to unlock their SSH key. |
| 13:54:29 | BitPuffin | dom96: will that work? |
| 13:54:39 | dom96 | yes |
| 13:54:46 | dom96 | hg clone https://bitbucket.org/TheLonelyByte/linagl |
| 13:54:47 | dom96 | works for me |
| 13:54:54 | BitPuffin | yep i just tried |
| 13:56:36 | * | Endy joined #nimrod |
| 13:56:37 | BitPuffin | dom96: feel like changing it for me? |
| 13:56:54 | dom96 | alright |
| 13:57:21 | BitPuffin | or I can do it |
| 13:57:44 | dom96 | do it then :P |
| 13:57:50 | BitPuffin | chil l:D |
| 13:58:01 | * | Araq_ quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [Firefox 22.0/20130618035212]) |
| 13:58:32 | BitPuffin | done |
| 14:00:06 | BitPuffin | dom96: some more info about cc0 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ |
| 14:00:16 | dom96 | heh, I just found that :P |
| 14:01:00 | NimBot | nimrod-code/packages master 6574e0a Isak Andersson [+0 ±1 -0]: Add linagl to packages.json |
| 14:01:00 | NimBot | nimrod-code/packages master 394d260 Isak Andersson [+0 ±1 -0]: Update linagl link |
| 14:01:00 | NimBot | nimrod-code/packages master f1f9de6 Dominik Picheta [+0 ±1 -0]: Merge pull request #22 from BitPuffin/patch-1... 2 more lines |
| 14:01:06 | BitPuffin | wee! |
| 14:02:01 | dom96 | So why do you prefer to use hg and not git? |
| 14:02:22 | BitPuffin | I think it's a bit more sane |
| 14:02:56 | BitPuffin | You do things the way you would expect to do it |
| 14:03:05 | BitPuffin | with Git it's usually kind of weird |
| 14:03:29 | dom96 | I think i'm too used to Git nowadays to switch to hg heh |
| 14:03:38 | BitPuffin | dom96: linagl installed successfully. |
| 14:03:42 | BitPuffin | it works :) |
| 14:03:52 | dom96 | yay |
| 14:03:57 | BitPuffin | dom96: Well it was kind of the same for me. But I decided to do it anyway |
| 14:04:33 | BitPuffin | dom96: the only thing that was kind of different was branches |
| 14:04:59 | BitPuffin | dom96: branches stick to commits in hg. If you want disposable git like branches you can use bookmarks instead |
| 14:05:04 | dom96 | btw remember to bump your version in the .babel file |
| 14:05:16 | BitPuffin | dom96: why should I bump? |
| 14:05:17 | dom96 | Usually best to get into the habit of doing it straight after tagging I think |
| 14:06:03 | dom96 | Because that is what babel reads to determine your packages version. |
| 14:06:14 | BitPuffin | dom96: but the version is correct |
| 14:07:11 | dom96 | So the commit that you tagged as version 0.1.0 is version 0.1.0 and your hg 'tip' is version 0.1.0 too? |
| 14:07:33 | BitPuffin | dom96: no tip shouldn't be 0.1.0 |
| 14:07:59 | BitPuffin | and it ain't |
| 14:07:59 | dom96 | But it is :P |
| 14:08:19 | BitPuffin | it is not! |
| 14:08:19 | dom96 | https://bitbucket.org/TheLonelyByte/linagl/src/25fa332cee272a662115f94e60ed87cd81c20041/linagl.babel?at=tip#cl-3 |
| 14:08:50 | BitPuffin | dom96: oh well, the tag v0.1.0 is 0.1.0 I can't bump the number before it's an actual release |
| 14:09:04 | dom96 | why not? |
| 14:09:32 | BitPuffin | dom96: because things that aren't releases are tip |
| 14:09:56 | BitPuffin | dom96: and babel did the right thing, it downloaded the tag v0.1.0 because I don't see a matrix file in the package |
| 14:09:56 | dom96 | alright. Just remember to bump it when tagging :P |
| 14:10:01 | BitPuffin | dom96: ofc :) |
| 14:11:05 | dom96 | yeah, I think I will have to make babel ignore the version param in the .babel file when the user specifies that they want to install tip |
| 14:11:23 | dom96 | That's not implemented yet though, so it's all good I think. |
| 14:12:50 | * | [1]Endy joined #nimrod |
| 14:13:57 | dom96 | Being able to specify a branch or commit in your dependencies list will be pretty useful. |
| 14:15:50 | * | Endy quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 14:15:50 | * | [1]Endy is now known as Endy |
| 14:17:28 | BitPuffin | dom96: yes for sure! |
| 14:17:57 | BitPuffin | dom96: can babel also act a s a build system for a project? |
| 14:18:05 | BitPuffin | that would be sweet |
| 14:18:08 | BitPuffin | like dub |
| 14:18:09 | BitPuffin | for D |
| 14:18:10 | BitPuffin | gotta go |
| 14:21:34 | dom96 | I guess. |
| 14:21:42 | dom96 | Nimrod already takes care of most stuff. |
| 14:22:42 | * | BitPuffin quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 14:35:37 | * | rubino123 joined #nimrod |
| 14:53:03 | * | Associat0r quit (Quit: Associat0r) |
| 14:56:24 | * | [1]Endy joined #nimrod |
| 15:00:52 | * | Endy quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 15:00:52 | * | [1]Endy is now known as Endy |
| 15:35:04 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 15:42:28 | * | DAddYE quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 15:54:34 | * | Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za |
| 16:22:46 | * | DAddYE joined #nimrod |
| 17:21:07 | dom96 | hey DAddYE |
| 17:30:39 | DAddYE | hey dom96! |
| 17:31:51 | dom96 | DAddYE: How's nimrod coding going? |
| 17:33:07 | DAddYE | quite well, I'm coding a channel primitive (poor's man) based on pipes |
| 17:33:14 | DAddYE | lthread coroutines |
| 17:33:21 | DAddYE | (I know nimrod has channels) |
| 17:34:01 | DAddYE | but are base on pthread |
| 17:34:42 | dom96 | cool, so will you be sticking with Nimrod, do you like it? |
| 17:36:04 | DAddYE | yep other than issue you know I like it a lot! |
| 17:36:23 | DAddYE | I'm trying to spend more time in studying source code |
| 17:36:43 | DAddYE | and rewrite for the joy of no one some stuff already written |
| 17:36:48 | dom96 | hrm you mean the T/P prefixes issue? |
| 17:37:02 | DAddYE | yea, but isn't a big deal I've a nimrod fork |
| 17:37:08 | DAddYE | case sensitive |
| 17:37:09 | DAddYE | :D |
| 17:37:43 | DAddYE | and hand made pretty :D |
| 17:38:14 | dom96 | You edited the compiler so that it's case sensitive? lol |
| 17:38:49 | DAddYE | yep only the first letter, Araq pointed me how do that, I'll switch soon to a full CS |
| 17:49:56 | * | Mat2 joined #nimrod |
| 17:49:59 | Mat2 | hi |
| 17:52:25 | Araq | hi Mat2 |
| 17:52:37 | Araq | hi DAddYE, does my "nimrod pretty" fix work? |
| 17:52:57 | DAddYE | I haven't tried yet |
| 17:53:01 | Araq | ok |
| 17:53:18 | Mat2 | hi Araq and all |
| 18:07:45 | Mat2 | if I define an array of sequences, must I initiate each sequence element or is these done automatical ? |
| 18:12:14 | Araq | you must initialize each element unless you use system.safeAdd |
| 18:12:26 | Araq | though this will likely change |
| 18:12:26 | Mat2 | thanks |
| 18:12:39 | Araq | and 'add' will becomes the "safe" version |
| 18:13:37 | * | Sergio965 joined #nimrod |
| 18:15:10 | * | Sergio965 quit (Client Quit) |
| 18:15:28 | Mat2 | hmm, I think some programmers will expect that GB collected types are implicitly initiated so this would be a nice behaviour |
| 18:41:07 | * | rubino123 quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 18:51:00 | apotheon | Araq: in case you're still seeking perspectives on coding styles - http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1iyp6v/is_there_a_really_an_empirical_difference_between/cbfo4k8 |
| 18:51:55 | Araq | apotheon: I know the study. it's worthless |
| 18:52:06 | apotheon | I'm not linking to the study. I'm linking to a comment. |
| 18:52:23 | apotheon | (my comment, in fact) |
| 18:53:13 | Araq | yeah well I disagree |
| 18:53:26 | apotheon | Okay. |
| 18:53:42 | Araq | C is around for long enough to see what happens |
| 18:53:42 | apotheon | I didn't say you had to agree. I offered my perspective so you could perhaps understand it. |
| 18:54:01 | Araq | in C you have a consistent style *per project* |
| 18:54:07 | apotheon | Oh, criminy. Is this going to be another case of "I hate technology Foo, therefore stuff that Foo does is bad"? |
| 18:54:24 | apotheon | Forget I said anything. |
| 18:54:49 | * | Associat0r joined #nimrod |
| 18:54:49 | * | Associat0r quit (Changing host) |
| 18:54:49 | * | Associat0r joined #nimrod |
| 18:55:06 | Araq | but you have TYPESLIKETHIS (Winapi) types_like_this_t (posix), TypesLikeThis (GTK) |
| 18:55:37 | apotheon | I just need to repeat to myself (every time I think about talking to Araq . . .) "He will never just try to reach an understanding if he has an opinion that differs from yours -- he will instead expend a lot of energy trying to prove you are stupid." |
| 18:56:21 | Araq | well according to your nice theory these things shouldn't have happened |
| 18:56:32 | apotheon | What theory is that? |
| 18:56:46 | apotheon | I don't see any theory that shows this is impossible. |
| 18:56:50 | apotheon | Mine or otherwise. |
| 18:57:05 | Araq | " Thus, in my view, one should follow the conventions of the project and the language's community not just because it's polite, but also because it is probably really and truly better for the readability of the source code for that language to do it that way." |
| 18:57:11 | apotheon | Go ahead, though. I'm sure the straw man can take the abuse. It'll just stuff itself with more straw for your weapon practice pleasure. |
| 18:57:49 | apotheon | Yes, divest it of context. |
| 18:58:07 | apotheon | In fact, you should always specifically ignore the part where I *directly* addressed that problem. |
| 18:58:15 | apotheon | You know -- the next fucking sentence. |
| 18:58:42 | apotheon | Never mind, I'm sure I didn't actually say anything in the next sentence. If I did, it might undermine your theory that I'm an imbecile for daring to have a different opinion than you. |
| 18:58:46 | apotheon | We can't have that. |
| 18:59:21 | apotheon | Couldn't possibly survive in a world where anything contradicts the One Truth that issues from the Mouth of Araq . . . |
| 18:59:35 | apotheon | . . . like the VeryNextSentence. |
| 18:59:50 | Araq | *shrug* so you're right because you contract yourself? |
| 18:59:54 | apotheon | The strawman is easier to see when your biases are so deeply ingrained. |
| 19:00:17 | apotheon | 1. I didn't contradict -- I pointed out the difference between a tendency and a Natural Law. |
| 19:00:29 | Mat2 | apotheon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning |
| 19:00:31 | apotheon | 2. Are you right because you typo a lot? (This is much the same argument as yours.) |
| 19:00:36 | apotheon | "contract" indeed |
| 19:01:05 | apotheon | Mat2: I'm going to ignore petty sniping from the peanut gallery. |
| 19:01:17 | apotheon | (especially when it's inapplicable) |
| 19:01:23 | * | wan_ joined #nimrod |
| 19:01:30 | apotheon | Neither of us used circular reasoning. |
| 19:02:05 | Araq | apotheon: you say "I think it works well except when it doesn't" well ... yes |
| 19:02:31 | apotheon | Araq: I say "It tends to work well. Tendencies are not absolutes." Your inability to understand that kind of statement is your failing -- not mine. |
| 19:02:49 | dom96 | hello wan_, welcome to #nimrod. |
| 19:03:46 | apotheon | wan_: Whether you're actually welcome probably depends on your opinions on certain things. |
| 19:03:54 | * | apotheon isn't bitter at all. Oh, no, not at all. |
| 19:04:26 | Araq | apotheon: maybe the more important question is "what if it doesn't work well"? but I'll give up |
| 19:04:46 | Araq | and you're welcome here no matter if you disagree with me or not |
| 19:04:53 | apotheon | Araq: Maybe you should have brought up "the more important question" earlier, rather than immediately jumping to "you're a fucking imbecile just because". |
| 19:05:23 | Araq | hi wan_, welcome :-) |
| 19:05:46 | apotheon | Araq: I don't feel very welcome when your argumentation style is to label people who disagree with you, at least implicitly, as idiots all the time, even when all they're trying to do is provide some perspectives and reasoning that would help you understand why some people disagree with you. |
| 19:06:15 | Mat2 | hi wan_ |
| 19:06:37 | apotheon | meh |
| 19:06:47 | apotheon | I have better things to do than deal with this shit. |
| 19:07:05 | apotheon | dom96: Make sure you let me know if any other Nimrod software of yours goes the copyfree route, please. |
| 19:07:05 | dom96 | apotheon: How and at what point did Araq imply that you are an idiot? |
| 19:07:08 | * | apotheon left #nimrod (#nimrod) |
| 19:07:27 | * | dom96 sighs |
| 19:12:23 | * | Aww_ joined #nimrod |
| 19:12:44 | * | Aww_ is now known as Guest88875 |
| 19:14:11 | dom96 | oh, another new person. Hello. |
| 19:14:12 | * | Emmyy quit (Killed (kornbluth.freenode.net (Nickname regained by services))) |
| 19:14:12 | * | Guest88875 is now known as Emmyy |
| 19:14:41 | Mat2 | hello |
| 19:14:48 | dom96 | or not heh |
| 19:20:14 | * | wan_ quit (*.net *.split) |
| 19:20:15 | * | nihathrael quit (*.net *.split) |
| 19:20:16 | * | charles81 quit (*.net *.split) |
| 19:34:21 | * | Emmyy is now known as EvilAww |
| 19:40:43 | * | nihathrael joined #nimrod |
| 19:40:43 | * | wan_ joined #nimrod |
| 19:48:36 | * | Sergio965 joined #nimrod |
| 20:12:01 | Mat2 | ok, I have an array, something like array [0..x, seq[uint8]] and a loop index i, how do I initialize each sequence element ? |
| 20:13:06 | * | Endy quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 20:13:11 | Araq | for i in 0..high(a): a[i] = @[] |
| 20:14:05 | Mat2 | thanks |
| 20:24:59 | Mat2 | works, but I get trouble defining an array of sequences as object member: Error: 'ob.aHeap[i]' cannot be assigned to |
| 20:25:51 | Araq | is 'ob' a parameter? |
| 20:27:07 | Mat2 | no, the object reference. Ah I see... |
| 20:27:28 | Mat2 | I have mixed up a wrong syntax |
| 20:29:39 | Mat2 | huh, now it worked |
| 20:33:45 | Araq | exetoc reported a perhasp similar problem this morning |
| 20:34:09 | Araq | pastebin your code please |
| 20:36:09 | Mat2 | uno momento |
| 20:42:06 | Mat2 | http://pastebin.com/TNec3ZdF |
| 20:43:28 | Mat2 | Error: 'ob.aHeap[i]' cannot be assigned to |
| 20:44:05 | Araq | I asked you if 'ob' is a parameter |
| 20:44:17 | Araq | you denied :P |
| 20:44:21 | Araq | and yet it is |
| 20:44:29 | Araq | well parameters are readonly |
| 20:44:41 | Araq | so use a 'var' parameter instead |
| 20:44:58 | Araq | roc seqHeapInit (ob: var TNavmSeqHeap) |
| 20:45:01 | Araq | *proc |
| 20:45:33 | Mat2 | yes, that was my solution, you asked for the code which causes the error however :P |
| 20:45:50 | Araq | -.- |
| 20:46:18 | Araq | seems to be my day today |
| 20:46:49 | Araq | maybe I really have some deep problems understanding other people |
| 20:47:38 | Mat2 | no problem, my answer was just to unspecific |
| 20:49:33 | Araq | btw perhaps it's better to make 'oHeap' the first object field so it gets a small offset that can become an immediate on x86 |
| 20:49:50 | Mat2 | thanks |
| 20:51:58 | * | Mat2 vim sucks because of needed mode-switches (personal meaning) |
| 20:52:59 | Araq | use aporia instead, doesn't work on a mac yet though |
| 20:53:20 | Mat2 | I give it a try |
| 20:56:47 | Mat2 | it uses GTK so there should exist a highlighting file which I can use for gedit, right ? |
| 20:57:28 | Araq | true but you won't ever use gedit again :P |
| 21:04:40 | dom96 | :D |
| 21:05:29 | Mat2 | *g*. Well, its nice to have options (larger GTK application can behave ehm ... problematic on Raspberri Pi for example) |
| 21:06:36 | Mat2 | but I can convert .lang files for using other text editors and work in text mode |
| 21:06:58 | Mat2 | or via a terminal emulator |
| 21:08:55 | dom96 | That reminds me, I should test Aporia on the RPI. |
| 21:09:37 | Mat2 | good idea (take the 512mB version) |
| 21:30:55 | Mat2 | dom96: I will build Aporia tomorrow for RPI (which can take some time) and post my experiences |
| 21:31:14 | dom96 | cool, thanks. |
| 21:38:45 | * | Sergio965 quit (Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…) |
| 21:40:23 | Mat2 | hmm, exist there a plan for switching to GTK 3 (the Gnome one) ? |
| 21:42:47 | dom96 | Maybe someday. But currently I am not impressed with GTK 3. |
| 21:44:53 | * | OrionPK joined #nimrod |
| 21:45:25 | Mat2 | that's a common reaction to GTK as I know. Most programmers seem to prefer Qt |
| 21:47:00 | dom96 | I don't mind GTK in general. But GTK3 apps still look crap on my desktop. |
| 21:47:10 | dom96 | The theme is very broken. |
| 21:47:14 | dom96 | I don't get why. |
| 21:48:25 | Mat2 | that's because of the Gnome influence |
| 21:48:42 | dom96 | Also I am worried about GTK's future on Windows. |
| 21:53:25 | Mat2 | hmm, probably future versions of GTK will be much more restricted to Gnome so I see no future beside Linux (on BSD porting is already a hard try and these OS is *Nix like) |
| 22:07:46 | Araq | I'm not that worried, windows compatibility is good |
| 22:07:58 | Araq | the DLLs we need will continue to run |
| 22:21:24 | Mat2 | I hope so |
| 22:21:57 | dom96 | I am worried. |
| 22:22:18 | dom96 | There is a bug on Windows with scrolling in the GtkSourceView. |
| 22:22:28 | dom96 | And it's pretty annoying. |
| 22:23:03 | dom96 | Also we won't get all the new features that will be introduced into the GtkSourceView. |
| 22:23:06 | dom96 | Like code folding. |
| 22:23:18 | Araq | I can't stand code folding |
| 22:23:29 | Araq | it always folds the wrong things |
| 22:23:41 | Araq | but I get your point |
| 22:24:10 | Araq | I guess ultimately we need to write our own editor component |
| 22:24:51 | Araq | it's actually lots of fun and you can finally control everything |
| 22:25:11 | Araq | and all bugs are yours so you can fix them :P |
| 22:25:34 | dom96 | Lots of fun... hah. |
| 22:26:11 | dom96 | I'm starting to think that using webkit + HTML as a GUI toolkit may not be such a bad idea. |
| 22:28:34 | Araq | omg |
| 22:28:53 | Araq | no ... it IS a bad idea |
| 22:29:06 | dom96 | why? |
| 22:29:50 | Araq | I'd use OpenGl or SDL for Aporia 2 ;-) |
| 22:30:26 | Araq | dom96: because I dislike webapps |
| 22:30:39 | dom96 | But it won't be a webapp |
| 22:30:52 | dom96 | It will be a desktop app running webkitgtk |
| 22:30:57 | Araq | yeah I suppose |
| 22:31:10 | Araq | still a bad idea |
| 22:31:12 | dom96 | You're using chatzilla which is pretty much a web app... |
| 22:31:22 | Araq | he he, good point |
| 22:31:37 | Araq | but I use it so that it crashes when my browser crashes |
| 22:34:00 | dom96 | And you have stuff like this which I could reuse: http://codemirror.net/ |
| 22:34:13 | dom96 | Speaking of that, look at their 'commercial support' deal. |
| 22:34:21 | dom96 | We should do something like that for Nimrod :P |
| 22:35:21 | Araq | they don't support nimrod ... |
| 22:35:42 | Associat0r | we should have a hypercard style web |
| 22:36:03 | dom96 | yeah, I know. We need to ridicule them for not supporting Nimrod :P |
| 22:36:08 | Associat0r | then this dichotomy would be a non-issue |
| 22:37:04 | * | rubino123 joined #nimrod |
| 22:37:41 | rubino123 | one more idea for nimrod; a bitcoin node client |
| 22:38:05 | Mat2 | how about using Qt? |
| 22:38:53 | Araq | wrapping Qt is lots of work |
| 22:39:02 | Araq | same for wxWidgets |
| 22:39:10 | Mat2 | that's true |
| 22:39:21 | dom96 | rubino123: I think we have enough ideas, we need more people to implement them. |
| 22:39:58 | rubino123 | Ok; let me finish on my other free project and I will get websockets done |
| 22:40:18 | dom96 | Awesome. |
| 22:41:23 | Mat2 | it can be worth the effort because of some abstractions for web and stand-alone applications support for example plus Qt runs on a variety of platforms |
| 22:42:47 | dom96 | AFAIK using Qt would mean compiling my Nimrod app using a C++ compiler which would make me feel uncomfortable. |
| 22:43:04 | Mat2 | I see your point |
| 22:43:29 | Mat2 | ok, wrong library |
| 22:44:02 | Mat2 | how about FLTK ? |
| 22:44:21 | Araq | exhu is writing a new UI library in pure Nimrod |
| 22:44:29 | Araq | we can simply wait for that |
| 22:45:00 | Mat2 | doesn't know before |
| 22:45:09 | Mat2 | makes sense :) |
| 22:46:02 | dom96 | I think we may have to wait a while :\ |
| 22:47:46 | rubino123 | Is there a nimrod to js tool? |
| 22:48:02 | dom96 | 'nimrod js <file.nim>' |
| 22:49:10 | Mat2 | get some sleep, ciao |
| 22:49:24 | * | Mat2 quit (Quit: Verlassend) |
| 22:55:04 | rubino123 | dom96, feature complete(ness)? |
| 22:56:06 | dom96 | rubino123: needs work I think. I don't use it at all, and other people don't either AFAIK so I'm guessing there may be problems. |
| 22:57:58 | Araq | it should actually be quite usable, I rewrote it recently |
| 22:58:23 | Araq | but it's true I'm not aware of any project that really uses it |
| 22:59:30 | dom96 | The tester still doesn't test it does it? |
| 23:43:45 | Araq | I dunno lol |