| 00:01:29 | dom96_ | ldlework: hah, that's awesome. |
| 00:02:04 | ldlework | dom96_: Go is frustrating because it turns completely otherwise capable developers into cultish massocists |
| 00:02:20 | ldlework | I want to enjoy language discussions with my coworkers but Go makes that impossible |
| 00:02:23 | ldlework | For example |
| 00:02:39 | ldlework | One of the developers here who I respect, when confronted with the inability to use interfaces with built in maps |
| 00:02:42 | ldlework | exclaimed |
| 00:02:56 | ldlework | "I like that it has that limitation. It removes entire classes of problems!" |
| 00:03:09 | ldlework | I couldn't look that person in the eye for a couple days. |
| 00:03:39 | Varriount | Isn't that like saying that cutting peoples toes off prevents them from being stubbed, or getting a hangnail, etc? |
| 00:03:57 | ldlework | Varriount: except I don't know what toe-stubbing he thinks that limitation prevents |
| 00:04:15 | Araq | it's like saying having no legs has its advantages cause they can be broken |
| 00:04:16 | ldlework | I literally cannot think of *any advantage no matter how trivial* of preventing maps from being usable with interfaces |
| 00:04:26 | ldlework | Can you? |
| 00:04:55 | Araq | no, it's surprising. maps are builtin in Go |
| 00:05:08 | Araq | why don't they work with interfaces? |
| 00:05:25 | ldlework | Araq: they are specifically designed not to |
| 00:05:37 | Araq | how hard can it beto hash a pointer? |
| 00:05:37 | Araq | *be to |
| 00:05:47 | Araq | why? |
| 00:10:11 | Varriount | Araq: Speaking of maps and interfaces, is having implicit iterators with more than two output elements planned? |
| 00:13:14 | ldlework | Varriount: I have *no* idea. |
| 00:13:21 | ldlework | err |
| 00:13:23 | ldlework | Araq: * |
| 00:14:08 | Araq | Varriount: I can't remember, do we already support implicit triples() iterators? |
| 00:14:13 | Araq | I guess not |
| 00:14:28 | Araq | what's the use case? |
| 00:18:50 | Varriount | Araq: I was looking at the parseargs module. There was an iterator returning tuple[kind, key, value] |
| 00:19:33 | Varriount | Araq: Why is the limit bounded? Why can't it be unlimited? |
| 00:19:55 | Araq | and which iterator would invoke that implicitly? |
| 00:22:18 | Varriount | proc items*[T](iterable: T): tuple |
| 00:22:38 | * | Matthias247 quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 00:25:40 | Araq | but for 2 'pairs' is invoked ... |
| 00:26:08 | Varriount | Araq: Why not (eventually) do away with that? |
| 00:27:05 | Varriount | Why not just have one generic procedure, and unpack the tuple it returns? |
| 00:27:37 | Araq | no. |
| 00:27:45 | Araq | we've been there before |
| 00:27:55 | Araq | didn't work in generics |
| 00:28:00 | Araq | so we changed it. |
| 00:29:31 | Varriount | Araq: So now people are limited to being able to return only one- or two-element tuples to get implicit iteration? |
| 00:30:36 | Araq | oh come on |
| 00:30:48 | Varriount | It's like java and having to use an absurd amount of overloads because the language doesn't support proper default arguments. |
| 00:30:50 | Araq | how hard is it to write down the iterator's name anyway |
| 00:31:21 | Araq | I can't see how Java has anything to do with it |
| 00:32:22 | Varriount | Araq: I was using a comparative situation. |
| 00:33:57 | Araq | btw the implicit items/pairs fails in generics iirc |
| 00:34:16 | Araq | can we fix bugs before introducing ever more problems? |
| 00:34:30 | * | Joe_knock joined #nimrod |
| 00:34:38 | * | Joe_knock quit (Changing host) |
| 00:34:38 | * | Joe_knock joined #nimrod |
| 00:34:39 | Varriount | Araq: Fine. Spoilsport. :3 |
| 00:41:14 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod bigbreak 0dbec5a Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±2 -0]: Adds support for the ``.. code::`` rst directive.... 4 more lines |
| 00:41:14 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod bigbreak d935633 Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±2 -0]: Modifies docgen to support new warning message. |
| 00:41:14 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod bigbreak 078594c Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±1 -0]: Improves macro tutorial with hyperlinks and numbered lines. |
| 00:41:14 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod bigbreak 9c6d54d Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±1 -0]: Hyperlinks quit related docstrings in system module. |
| 00:41:14 | NimBot | 5 more commits. |
| 00:41:34 | Varriount | Araq: Since I'm generating the installers... |
| 00:41:50 | Varriount | How about we include babel as a component? |
| 00:42:14 | Varriount | Or does babel not work? |
| 00:42:39 | Araq | dunno, I never update it, so it works for me |
| 00:42:51 | Araq | same with aporia really |
| 00:43:17 | Araq | Varriount: I won't apply your koch PR |
| 00:43:22 | Araq | what's the point? |
| 00:43:34 | Araq | boot should support --out? wtf? why? |
| 00:43:44 | Araq | that's not what bootstrapping is meant for |
| 00:43:56 | Varriount | Araq: Well, because temp doesn't support -d:release. |
| 00:44:08 | Araq | sure it does |
| 00:44:23 | Araq | "koch temp c -d:release test.nim" |
| 00:44:40 | * | q66 quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 00:44:45 | Araq | er wait |
| 00:45:05 | Araq | that doesn't apply it to "temp" |
| 00:45:13 | Varriount | Yeah. I know. |
| 00:45:41 | Varriount | Araq: I need the behavior for the builder, otherwise I have to do messy things with copying. |
| 00:45:45 | onionhammer | bigbreak isnt building |
| 00:45:47 | onionhammer | compiler/msgs.nim(416, 41) Error: type mismatch: got (Array constructor[0..28, string]) but expected 'array[0..27, string]' |
| 00:46:05 | Varriount | onionhammer: Pls fx it |
| 00:46:54 | onionhammer | cant right now |
| 00:47:02 | Varriount | Araq: Besides, boot fails if you pass in a --out argument. |
| 00:48:11 | Araq | onionhammer: I'm fixing it |
| 00:48:31 | onionhammer | right-o |
| 00:49:26 | Araq | Varriount: boot does not reasonably support --out, nor should it |
| 00:49:55 | Araq | please fix the "temp -d:release" issue differently, perhaps just introduce "temp_release" |
| 00:51:51 | dom96_ | Varriount: It's called Nimble now, not Babel. |
| 00:52:22 | Varriount | Araq: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B077nrrf63xtbUtsdC1adXFyb0E/view?usp=sharing |
| 00:52:37 | Varriount | That contains the installers with fixed doc shortcut. |
| 00:52:47 | Varriount | Note that babel/nimble isn't included. |
| 00:52:49 | Araq | what about the aporia issue? |
| 00:53:06 | Araq | not including nimble is fine with me. we'll do that for 0.10 |
| 00:53:24 | Varriount | Araq: I haven't had a chance to investigate it. I don't know the aporia code in any case. |
| 00:53:36 | Araq | well the thing is, it works for me |
| 00:53:49 | Araq | but then I already have some other Nimrod in my path etc. |
| 00:53:50 | dom96_ | Araq: What Aporia issue> |
| 00:53:52 | dom96_ | *? |
| 00:54:02 | Varriount | Actually, aporia works for me. |
| 00:54:05 | Araq | dom96_: aporia can't find Nimrod.exe |
| 00:54:18 | Varriount | Pressing f4 doesn't crash aporia. |
| 00:54:23 | Varriount | (for me) |
| 00:54:32 | Araq | for me neither |
| 00:54:51 | Araq | that means it's XP specific? |
| 00:54:58 | Varriount | *shrug* |
| 00:55:19 | Varriount | He's using an OS that was released... how many years ago? |
| 00:55:59 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod bigbreak b13c51c Araq [+0 ±1 -0]: compiler bootstraps again |
| 00:56:17 | Varriount | Brb, folding clothes |
| 00:56:43 | Araq | folding clothes? are you in the army now? |
| 00:57:02 | Varriount | No, it's part of my chores. |
| 00:57:56 | Varriount | Don't you fold your own clothes? |
| 00:58:33 | Araq | I have a wife. |
| 00:59:16 | Varriount | And my parents just happen to have children. |
| 01:01:07 | woodgiraffe | I enjoy reading this channel |
| 01:01:37 | Varriount | I enjoy being in the company of a wooden giraffe. |
| 01:01:42 | * | xenagi joined #nimrod |
| 01:02:16 | woodgiraffe | You better, we're a threatened species |
| 01:02:41 | Araq | Varriount: well the docs link now works |
| 01:03:06 | Araq | which is nice for the people using XP without internet |
| 01:03:15 | Araq | and thinking about it |
| 01:03:23 | Araq | that's exactly how you should use XP |
| 01:03:35 | Varriount | Considering that it |
| 01:03:58 | Varriount | doesn't have support anymore, and that there are glaring vulnerabilities, you're right. |
| 01:05:42 | Araq | well it can't be worse than executing 40K lines of generated configure scripts which could do all sort of things |
| 01:06:28 | Varriount | Not to mention, take 30 minutes to configure, and 3 hours to debug. |
| 01:06:28 | Araq | this is just another security desaster on linux waiting to happen, if you ask me |
| 01:07:35 | Araq | and it performs really nice checks like "checking if your memset works correctly" |
| 01:07:46 | woodgiraffe | Araq: as long as you get it from a trusted source, one trusts microsoft as well if running a Windows I assume |
| 01:09:09 | Araq | woodgiraffe: well sure but running 40K lines of generated batch/powershell scripts is not common |
| 01:09:50 | woodgiraffe | On nix it is |
| 01:09:57 | Araq | yep. |
| 01:17:31 | Joe_knock | Can I install Nim in it's own folder and run all programs from that folder without breaking the system-wide install? Ubuntu 12.04 |
| 01:18:32 | Araq | you should be able to |
| 01:19:05 | Araq | but I've heard that a system-wide install can confuse the local Nim installation |
| 01:19:29 | Araq | Varriount: thanks. updated the installers |
| 01:19:41 | Joe_knock | I want to box bigbreak in it's own folder. |
| 01:20:36 | * | darkf joined #nimrod |
| 01:21:16 | Varriount | Which is what I find ironic about OpenBSD |
| 01:21:44 | Varriount | Araq: On OpenBSD, the server from which the package manager downloads stuff is controlled by an environment variable. |
| 01:21:54 | Joe_knock | Unless I break the symlink for system-wide install... |
| 01:22:23 | Varriount | Joe_knock: Port virtualenv to Nimrod. :3 |
| 01:23:01 | Joe_knock | Varriount: Is it complex? |
| 01:23:09 | Varriount | No idea. |
| 01:24:05 | Varriount | Araq: No comment regarding the openbsd method of installation? |
| 01:24:18 | Joe_knock | Let me ask the python peoples. |
| 01:24:59 | Varriount | Joe_knock: "The planet of the python peoples" - Sounds like some Sci-Fi B-Movie |
| 01:28:24 | Araq | Varriount: no comment necessary. |
| 01:28:30 | * | darkf quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 01:29:16 | * | vendethiel quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 01:30:58 | Joe_knock | Varriount: Somebody there said that virtualenv is python-specific |
| 01:31:12 | Joe_knock | Would I be cheating if I wrote the nim virtualenv in python? |
| 01:31:19 | Varriount | Not really. |
| 01:31:41 | Varriount | Joe_knock: The *implementation* is python-specific. The general idea can be applied to Nimrod. |
| 01:32:18 | Joe_knock | I understand the encapsulation, but I don't like how virtualenv does it. |
| 01:33:23 | Araq | good night |
| 01:34:07 | Joe_knock | night |
| 01:34:12 | * | darkf joined #nimrod |
| 01:36:40 | * | vendethiel joined #nimrod |
| 01:39:57 | * | brson quit (Quit: leaving) |
| 01:49:06 | * | Jehan_ quit (Quit: Leaving) |
| 01:58:23 | * | vendethiel quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 02:07:19 | * | mko quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 02:22:38 | * | superfunc quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) |
| 02:22:44 | * | Varriount_ joined #nimrod |
| 02:23:52 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 02:23:57 | * | Varriount quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds) |
| 02:26:51 | * | vendethiel joined #nimrod |
| 02:29:44 | * | darkf_ joined #nimrod |
| 02:32:39 | * | darkf quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 02:32:45 | * | darkf_ is now known as darkf |
| 02:38:52 | * | flaviu quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 02:38:53 | * | superfunc joined #nimrod |
| 02:44:28 | * | flaviu joined #nimrod |
| 02:53:17 | fowl | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmav517MQJc |
| 02:53:36 | * | AMorpork is now known as ZzZMorpork |
| 02:58:11 | * | enquora quit (Quit: enquora) |
| 02:59:30 | * | flaviu quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 02:59:32 | ldlework | ...wow... |
| 03:01:37 | * | flaviu joined #nimrod |
| 03:02:31 | * | flaviu quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 03:39:00 | * | zombified joined #nimrod |
| 03:43:08 | * | zombified quit (Client Quit) |
| 03:45:06 | * | Joe_knock left #nimrod ("Leaving") |
| 04:14:02 | * | johnsoft quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 04:15:10 | * | johnsoft joined #nimrod |
| 04:18:16 | fowl | wrong channel >_> |
| 04:52:38 | * | superfunc quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) |
| 05:06:54 | * | xenagi quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 05:57:38 | * | BlaXpirit joined #nimrod |
| 06:00:46 | * | superfunc joined #nimrod |
| 06:03:37 | * | ARCADIVS joined #nimrod |
| 06:15:48 | * | superfunc quit (Quit: Page closed) |
| 06:59:01 | * | kemet joined #nimrod |
| 07:03:24 | * | kemet quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds) |
| 07:04:20 | * | darkf quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 07:04:59 | * | darkf joined #nimrod |
| 07:40:53 | * | BlaXpirit quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 08:21:40 | * | tdc joined #nimrod |
| 08:26:39 | * | tdc left #nimrod ("Leaving") |
| 08:28:43 | * | Trustable joined #nimrod |
| 08:29:28 | * | mbenadda____ joined #nimrod |
| 09:32:32 | * | khmm joined #nimrod |
| 09:37:01 | * | gokr_ quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 09:38:29 | * | kemet joined #nimrod |
| 09:40:05 | * | kemet quit (Client Quit) |
| 09:56:22 | * | ZzZMorpork is now known as AMorpork |
| 10:00:02 | * | bjz_ joined #nimrod |
| 10:00:03 | * | bjz quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 10:05:37 | * | Lynx_ quit (Quit: leaving) |
| 10:11:47 | * | Jehan_ joined #nimrod |
| 10:37:23 | * | dom96_ quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 10:47:20 | * | Jehan_ quit (Quit: Leaving) |
| 10:54:51 | * | kemet joined #nimrod |
| 10:55:40 | * | acidx joined #nimrod |
| 10:59:35 | * | dom96_ joined #nimrod |
| 11:02:54 | * | khmm quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 11:13:01 | * | khmm joined #nimrod |
| 11:15:49 | * | BlaXpirit joined #nimrod |
| 11:27:20 | * | johnsoft is now known as jiando |
| 11:27:26 | * | jiando is now known as johnsoft |
| 11:55:14 | * | khmm quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 11:55:39 | * | irrequietus joined #nimrod |
| 11:57:28 | * | mbenadda____ quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 12:00:58 | * | kemet quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 12:01:14 | * | kemet joined #nimrod |
| 13:18:04 | * | xcombelle joined #nimrod |
| 13:18:20 | * | khmm joined #nimrod |
| 13:23:34 | * | johnsoft quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 13:23:55 | * | johnsoft joined #nimrod |
| 13:27:33 | * | kemet quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 13:33:11 | * | ARCADIVS quit (Quit: ARCADIVS) |
| 13:40:37 | * | Francisco quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 13:48:37 | * | khmm quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds) |
| 14:04:10 | * | khmm joined #nimrod |
| 14:40:28 | * | darkf quit (Quit: Leaving) |
| 14:45:10 | * | kemet joined #nimrod |
| 14:51:27 | woodgiraffe | I have a proc that takes no parameters and returns an int, now it needs to remember always the last output it returned and I don't want to pollute "module namespace". - I'd turn to OOP/Singletons, any pointers on different takes? |
| 14:51:45 | * | superfunc joined #nimrod |
| 15:08:24 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 15:15:44 | fowl | woodgiraffe, {.global.} variable inside the function |
| 15:17:54 | * | xcombelle quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 15:18:34 | * | khmm quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 15:20:48 | * | sdw_ joined #nimrod |
| 15:23:59 | * | BlaXpirit-UA joined #nimrod |
| 15:24:25 | * | BlaXpirit quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 15:24:26 | * | sdw quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 15:25:05 | * | kemet quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 15:25:07 | * | kemet1 joined #nimrod |
| 15:59:16 | * | EXetoC joined #nimrod |
| 16:00:52 | * | untitaker quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 16:06:09 | * | untitaker joined #nimrod |
| 16:19:14 | * | [CBR]Unspoken quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 16:23:24 | * | gokr quit (Quit: Leaving.) |
| 16:31:57 | * | [CBR]Unspoken joined #nimrod |
| 16:47:41 | * | gokr joined #nimrod |
| 16:49:23 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 16:51:28 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 16:52:11 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 16:54:17 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 16:54:53 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 16:56:57 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 16:57:36 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 16:58:27 | * | brson joined #nimrod |
| 16:58:41 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 16:59:16 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 17:00:21 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 17:00:57 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 17:02:02 | * | Hakaslak quit (Max SendQ exceeded) |
| 17:02:03 | * | tillzy joined #nimrod |
| 17:02:37 | * | Hakaslak joined #nimrod |
| 17:15:25 | ldlework | Someone should have told Joe_Knock to use Docker |
| 17:15:31 | ldlework | Docker is virtualenv for everything :) |
| 17:16:40 | woodgiraffe | fowl: thanks |
| 17:24:33 | * | Mat3 joined #nimrod |
| 17:24:35 | Mat3 | hello |
| 17:26:50 | dom96_ | welcome Hakaslak |
| 17:26:54 | dom96_ | hi Mat3 |
| 17:30:58 | woodgiraffe | I have two 2d-sequences of int, I'd like to create a new sequence with its elements being the sum of those two given sequences pairwise. - Map doesn't accept multiple parameters? |
| 17:31:43 | woodgiraffe | Any pointers how to do this sweet and short? |
| 17:38:18 | * | Matthias247 joined #nimrod |
| 17:41:19 | * | kemet1 quit (Quit: Instantbird 1.5 -- http://www.instantbird.com) |
| 17:51:12 | dom96_ | woodgiraffe: Use a for loop. |
| 18:03:18 | gokr | woodgiraffe: Or look in sequtils.nim for inspiration and hack your variant :) |
| 18:03:37 | gokr | But a for loop is definitely the principle of least surprise. |
| 18:04:18 | gokr | Personally I played yesterday with making some new seq procs with inspiration from the insanely rich protocols in Smalltalk. |
| 18:12:21 | * | gokr quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 18:12:38 | * | superfunc quit (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) |
| 18:29:35 | * | BitPuffin joined #nimrod |
| 18:47:37 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 18:50:58 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 18:57:53 | Mat3 | hi dom96 |
| 18:58:45 | Mat3 | gokr: That is for sure useful work :) |
| 19:02:15 | * | q66 joined #nimrod |
| 19:15:57 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 19:32:13 | * | Joe_knock joined #nimrod |
| 19:35:44 | * | superfunc joined #nimrod |
| 19:36:17 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 19:36:34 | superfunc | sup Var|Mobile |
| 19:42:37 | wan | dom96_: the tfb has merged my pull request. Nimrod is now 0.10.0 from 31 october, and jester is at latest new-async |
| 19:44:32 | wan | (I had to disable scgi though and proxy http from nginx) |
| 19:46:52 | * | Joe_knock is now known as Joe_knock_afk |
| 19:48:33 | * | BitPuffin quit (Quit: See you on the dark side of the moon!) |
| 19:49:50 | * | khmm joined #nimrod |
| 19:56:15 | * | khmm quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 19:59:53 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 20:13:06 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 20:19:21 | woodgiraffe | I'm trying to multiple an int with a float expecting the result to be an int agagin, if I cast twice (int to float then the result to int again), I get a over- or underflow exception. - Am I approaching this the wrong way? |
| 20:24:14 | superfunc | var res: int = x * f.int |
| 20:24:29 | superfunc | where x is of type int and f is of type float |
| 20:26:46 | woodgiraffe | superfunc: f in my case is always in range [0,1], I assume int(0.5) = 0? |
| 20:38:48 | woodgiraffe | Just occured to me to just floor it |
| 20:39:09 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 20:39:51 | woodgiraffe | I guess this can be done much more elegantly: cast[int8](floor(cast[float](x) * fac)) |
| 20:40:12 | Araq | casting is wrong |
| 20:40:22 | Araq | read some tutorial |
| 20:40:53 | * | tillzy quit (Quit: tillzy) |
| 20:41:24 | woodgiraffe | Ah I just noticed that the tutorials contain things the manual doesn't have |
| 20:41:38 | Araq | report that as a bug please |
| 20:41:57 | Araq | we strive for the manual as the primary source of wisdom |
| 20:42:45 | woodgiraffe | I assume with not using casting you mean I should instead use toFloat etc.? |
| 20:44:11 | Araq | do you know the binary representation of floating point numbers? |
| 20:44:20 | Araq | cause that's what 'cast' will give you |
| 20:44:24 | woodgiraffe | Araq: oh... |
| 20:44:56 | superfunc | woodgiraffe: yes, saying f.int would floor it |
| 20:45:25 | superfunc | you can test this easily by running: var x = 0.5 echo x.int |
| 20:46:27 | superfunc | Araq: the cast operator is akin to reinterpret_cast<T> in C++, right? |
| 20:47:22 | Mat3 | cast[int8] <- ??? |
| 20:48:46 | * | nullmove joined #nimrod |
| 20:50:27 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 20:51:57 | Araq | superfunc: yes |
| 20:51:58 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 20:54:59 | * | nande joined #nimrod |
| 20:55:41 | * | dloss joined #nimrod |
| 20:58:37 | * | dloss quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 21:01:06 | NimBot | nimrod-code/csources devel dede2c0 Araq [+0 ±2495 -0]: rebuilt C sources |
| 21:01:06 | NimBot | nimrod-code/csources devel 96adf91 Araq [+0 ±3 -0]: changed back exename |
| 21:01:06 | NimBot | nimrod-code/csources devel ae68977 Araq [+69 ±0 -0]: added missing files |
| 21:01:06 | NimBot | nimrod-code/csources devel 11b85b9 Araq [+0 ±21 -0]: attempt to make the C sources work again |
| 21:01:06 | NimBot | 3 more commits. |
| 21:01:40 | Araq | Varriount_: we didn't have "csources devel", right? |
| 21:02:03 | ldlework | Has anyone Dockerized nim yet? |
| 21:02:10 | * | ldlework checks the registry |
| 21:02:30 | ldlework | aha they have |
| 21:06:04 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 21:08:17 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 21:09:24 | nullmove | createShared gives me Error: invalid pragma: benign |
| 21:10:11 | nullmove | weird because other procs marked with benign works |
| 21:10:50 | Araq | damn |
| 21:10:54 | Araq | thanks for reporting |
| 21:11:15 | Araq | it's a known bug in the compiler, I guess I should fix it rather than work around it |
| 21:21:45 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 21:21:45 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 21:22:03 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 21:33:38 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod devel 0dbec5a Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±2 -0]: Adds support for the ``.. code::`` rst directive.... 4 more lines |
| 21:33:38 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod devel d935633 Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±2 -0]: Modifies docgen to support new warning message. |
| 21:33:38 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod devel 078594c Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±1 -0]: Improves macro tutorial with hyperlinks and numbered lines. |
| 21:33:38 | NimBot | Araq/Nimrod devel 9c6d54d Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz [+0 ±1 -0]: Hyperlinks quit related docstrings in system module. |
| 21:33:38 | NimBot | 267 more commits. |
| 21:34:04 | Araq | now we are one. |
| 21:37:03 | * | flaviu joined #nimrod |
| 21:39:23 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 21:40:42 | * | flaviu quit (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 21:42:29 | * | woodgiraffe quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 21:46:16 | * | woodgiraffe joined #nimrod |
| 21:49:54 | Trustable | wow, 269 commits, seems like much progress :) |
| 21:50:07 | Joe_knock_afk | Does anybody know how to set your away username on XChat? |
| 21:50:55 | * | gokr joined #nimrod |
| 21:53:09 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 21:55:56 | * | Joe_knock_afk is now known as Joe_knock |
| 21:59:17 | * | nullmove quit (Quit: Page closed) |
| 22:00:36 | * | mko joined #nimrod |
| 22:08:33 | Araq | hrm createShared works for me ... |
| 22:09:07 | * | tillzy joined #nimrod |
| 22:09:18 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 22:10:26 | Araq | but freeShared fails |
| 22:24:58 | * | Var|Mobile joined #nimrod |
| 22:29:02 | * | Mat3 quit (Quit: Verlassend) |
| 22:29:33 | * | flaviu joined #nimrod |
| 22:33:35 | * | Francisco joined #nimrod |
| 22:34:47 | * | tillzy quit (Quit: tillzy) |
| 22:38:06 | Araq | so the next release will be 0.10.2 |
| 22:38:19 | Araq | since bigbreak reported 0.10.0 for a long time |
| 22:38:32 | Araq | which is wrong, it should have been 0.10.1 |
| 22:38:44 | dom96_ | it should report 0.9.9 |
| 22:39:10 | dom96_ | releasing 0.10.2 without 0.10.0 will be confusing |
| 22:40:06 | Araq | semantic versioning means we need 0.10.x |
| 22:40:42 | Araq | according to Varriount_ bigbreak breaks at least one third of all babel packages |
| 22:41:00 | flaviu | Semantic versioning actually says 1.0.x |
| 22:41:38 | * | Francisco quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 22:41:46 | flaviu | But I realize you're treating the middle number as the breaking version number, and the big number as big changes |
| 22:42:03 | flaviu | a la Haskell |
| 22:43:32 | dom96_ | this has nothing to do with semantic versioning |
| 22:43:41 | dom96_ | you're skipping a 0.10.x version |
| 22:43:49 | dom96_ | which you haven't done for 0.9.x |
| 22:43:53 | dom96_ | 0.9.0 was released. |
| 22:44:02 | * | Francisco joined #nimrod |
| 22:44:39 | ldlework | Why would previous threepoint releases matter about future threepoint releases? |
| 22:45:32 | dom96_ | people will wonder what happened to 0.10.0 |
| 22:45:38 | flaviu | dom96_: You changed your nick color! :P |
| 22:45:52 | dom96_ | especially because we told many people that when 0.10.0 is released that the name will change. |
| 22:46:17 | dom96_ | Araq: bigbreak in devel now? |
| 22:46:28 | ldlework | dom96_: sure but people are not going to crash planes into the ground over it |
| 22:46:38 | Araq | well the release plan is now 0.9.6 -> 0.10.2 -> 1.0.0 |
| 22:46:53 | Araq | which is confusing either way |
| 22:47:01 | Araq | even if we stick to 0.10.0 |
| 22:47:15 | Araq | dom96_: yes, devel=bigbreak now |
| 22:47:38 | dom96_ | cool |
| 22:48:30 | flaviu | Araq: Sounds great! |
| 22:48:41 | flaviu | Don't forget to do `git push origin :bigbreak` |
| 22:48:55 | Araq | hrm? what does that do? |
| 22:49:14 | flaviu | Deletes the bigbreak branch from the origin remote |
| 22:49:28 | * | Var|Mobile quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) |
| 22:49:51 | dom96_ | indeed, good idea. |
| 22:50:01 | ldlework | Hmm |
| 22:50:10 | ldlework | Where are typeclasses described in the language docs |
| 22:50:55 | Araq | somewhere in the manual |
| 22:51:08 | ldlework | lol I can't find it |
| 22:51:16 | ldlework | trying to sell someone on the "constraint based" declarations |
| 22:51:21 | ldlework | I dunno what you guys call them |
| 22:52:04 | Araq | http://nimrod-lang.org/manual.html#user-defined-type-classes |
| 22:52:15 | Araq | http://nimrod-lang.org/manual.html#type-classes |
| 22:52:18 | ldlework | gah thanks |
| 22:52:51 | ldlework | Araq: how would you name Nim's style of "example usage" declarations for type classes? |
| 22:52:57 | ldlework | is there a buzzword I can use? |
| 22:52:59 | flaviu | implements_78 new_spawn newasync newparser newtempl revert-1618-patch-3 sigpipe vm2 vm2_2 |
| 22:53:02 | ldlework | do any other languages use that style? |
| 22:53:11 | flaviu | can all definitely also be deleted |
| 22:53:54 | flaviu | ldlework: I'm not sure, but IIRC D uses it too. Perhaps the have a word for it. |
| 22:55:05 | ldlework | flaviu: I think "constraint based" isn't bad |
| 22:56:29 | flaviu | Yep. http://dlang.org/concepts.html |
| 23:01:27 | ldlework | flaviu: hmm that doesn't seem like the same thing? |
| 23:01:32 | ldlework | that seems like generics constraints |
| 23:01:40 | ldlework | Nim's typeclass constraints seem different? |
| 23:01:42 | gokr | is it just me who ... wonders about the do syntax vs the new lambda syntax etc? It seems a tad .. confusing now. |
| 23:01:43 | flaviu | Yes, but very similar |
| 23:04:19 | dom96_ | gokr: I dislike the do syntax and think it should be removed. |
| 23:04:32 | dom96_ | or at least it should be constrained |
| 23:04:59 | gokr | Personally I never really liked it either. Felt... oddly disconnected. And all to just avoid a last ")" ? |
| 23:05:06 | gokr | Or "end" in ruby or whatever. |
| 23:05:11 | dom96_ | Currently you get `do` nodes in the AST even if you have not written a 'do' keyword. |
| 23:05:43 | Araq | omg, again? |
| 23:06:01 | Araq | there is no alternative "lambda" syntax |
| 23:06:17 | Araq | it's in a *module* implemented as a macro |
| 23:06:23 | Araq | because we can |
| 23:06:29 | * | Francisco quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds) |
| 23:06:31 | gokr | Yeah, fine, the net effect is the same. |
| 23:06:35 | gokr | Its meant to be used, right? |
| 23:06:38 | Araq | the future module is a language showoff module |
| 23:06:55 | Araq | I personally don't use it |
| 23:06:57 | gokr | Ok, so its ... not yet decided what happens with it? |
| 23:07:10 | * | Francisco joined #nimrod |
| 23:07:33 | Araq | no, it's "araq doesn't care, but it's not part of the core" |
| 23:07:50 | gokr | Well... stdlib is just as important as core. |
| 23:07:53 | gokr | IMHO. |
| 23:08:21 | Araq | lots of people argue that, but it's wrong IMHO |
| 23:08:21 | ldlework | +1 |
| 23:08:28 | ldlework | to gokr |
| 23:08:31 | ldlework | :P |
| 23:08:58 | gokr | Smalltalk without the libraries is... nothing. |
| 23:09:20 | gokr | Literally I mean. |
| 23:09:26 | Araq | so? in C the stdlib is often avoided |
| 23:10:06 | gokr | And it seems to me that a lot of the idioms etc in Nim are in the stdlib. So it shapes how Nim code looks and how people write it. |
| 23:11:04 | gokr | C has quite a lot of the language "in the language". |
| 23:11:33 | gokr | Nim seems to have much more in the libraries. operators. iterators. collection types. |
| 23:15:50 | gokr | And... one thing refreshing with Nim compared to say... Lua or Javascript (just to pick two out of the blue) - is that there actually is a stdlib. |
| 23:16:22 | gokr | Javascript now suffers from a huge amount of more or less good libraries - and combing it all is a mess. |
| 23:16:24 | EXetoC | and static typing :> |
| 23:16:25 | gokr | combining. |
| 23:17:07 | Araq | well the argument was "it's confusing", to which I replied "so don't use the future module" |
| 23:17:11 | gokr | I just mentioned those because they both suffer from a decent canonical stdlib. |
| 23:17:52 | Araq | what's the alternative? to remove the future module? then somebody will realize it's only an ordinary module |
| 23:18:05 | Araq | and creates a nimble package out of it |
| 23:18:20 | gokr | No, I was just curious. The do thing - is that... in system or the language or? |
| 23:18:36 | Araq | that's in the language |
| 23:18:58 | Araq | it's even a keyword |
| 23:19:57 | gokr | right |
| 23:20:33 | * | irrequietus quit () |
| 23:23:58 | gokr | dom96: Hmmm, so... the "->" used in do - is a declaration. And ... same is used in lambda declarations. And then when you create one, you use "=>", that's the idea? |
| 23:24:59 | dom96_ | gokr: In the lambda macro `->` is used for type annotations. |
| 23:25:28 | gokr | yes, I am looking at the code etc. Ok, "type annotation" is perhaps a better term. |
| 23:26:05 | gokr | I was kinda confused first about -> vs => but ok, that clears that up - and is in fact ... symmetrical with the do syntax, kinda. |
| 23:26:16 | dom96_ | The docs show it off fairly well I think http://build.nimrod-lang.org/docs/future.html |
| 23:26:24 | gokr | Oh, perhaps I missed that. |
| 23:26:42 | gokr | Ah, right - I saw the code :) |
| 23:27:47 | gokr | Now... the only thing that I will undoubtedly type wrong 100 times is the do syntax vs the proc syntax. So... " -> int:" vs ":int =" |
| 23:28:27 | gokr | I can understand how it came to be though, since I guess the idea with do is to end with ":" and... ":int :" looks odd. |
| 23:29:06 | dom96_ | Araq: Can we please remove the do notation and adopt the lambda macro instead? |
| 23:29:46 | Araq | no |
| 23:29:54 | gokr | Is there semantic differences between them btw? |
| 23:30:33 | Araq | 'do' is used by many people and it's required to be able to pass multiple blocks to a macro |
| 23:31:06 | Araq | whereas the => macro is pointless sugar |
| 23:31:26 | gokr | But ... kinda neat sugar. |
| 23:32:28 | gokr | Oh well, time for bed. cya |
| 23:36:08 | Varriount_ | Araq: Hm? What do you mean by 'csources devel'? |
| 23:36:19 | Araq | csources repo with devel branch |
| 23:36:30 | Araq | now we have it |
| 23:36:40 | * | BlaXpirit-UA quit (Quit: Quit Konversation) |
| 23:37:00 | Varriount_ | We've had one for a while now. |
| 23:37:51 | Varriount_ | Araq: Where should I host the new build hub? |
| 23:38:28 | fowl | Araq, csources devel branch works? or bigbreak |
| 23:38:54 | Araq | Varriount_: well I didn't |
| 23:39:06 | Araq | anyway I merged bigbreak into devel |
| 23:40:22 | Varriount_ | :O |
| 23:40:27 | * | Varriount_ is now known as Varriount |
| 23:45:04 | Varriount | Araq: What service is currently being used to host the build bot? |
| 23:45:16 | Varriount | Er, the build bot hub |
| 23:45:30 | Araq | linode |
| 23:45:52 | Varriount | Is it free, or paid? |
| 23:46:02 | flaviu | paid |
| 23:46:07 | Araq | but you should host it on DigitalOcean |
| 23:46:12 | flaviu | It's a generic VPS service |
| 23:46:31 | Varriount | Araq: Or on one of the other free vps services. |
| 23:46:47 | flaviu | Varriount: Those don't really exist :/ |
| 23:47:04 | Varriount | flaviu: https://crissic.net/open-source_free-hosting |
| 23:47:26 | flaviu | Oh, I see. That looks great! |
| 23:49:31 | * | Matthias247 quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 23:50:13 | Varriount | flaviu: https://www.virtkick.io/blog/free-vps-for-open-source-meet-virtkick-federation.html |
| 23:51:14 | Varriount | So, DigitalOcean vs VirtKick vs Crissic |
| 23:52:02 | flaviu | What's the point of VirtKick? You have to host your own servers to get access to a vps |
| 23:52:17 | Varriount | Hrm, true. |
| 23:52:27 | Varriount | So DigitalOcean vs Crissic |
| 23:53:55 | * | BitPuffin joined #nimrod |
| 23:54:38 | * | BitPuffin quit (Client Quit) |
| 23:54:53 | flaviu | Apply to both, see if you get accepted |
| 23:55:13 | Varriount | And if we get accepted to both? |
| 23:55:44 | dom96 | We already have a DO VPS |
| 23:55:44 | flaviu | Extra buildbot? |
| 23:55:54 | Varriount | flaviu: New buildbot |
| 23:56:54 | dom96 | Varriount: But because you are a student you could probably get $100 for DO through GIthub student pack. |
| 23:57:25 | dom96 | May be a good idea not to put the build bot on the same server as the main site. |
| 23:57:53 | * | BitPuffin joined #nimrod |