<<21-06-2012>>

---

00:43:39	*	Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za
04:05:42	*	XAMPP joined #nimrod
05:09:34	zahary	I used distinct to control one specific property of the type classes - whether they will bind once to a type within a proc call
05:09:35	zahary	e.g.
05:09:35	zahary	proc foo(a, b: expr) # a and b can be different types
05:09:35	zahary	T1 = distinct expr
05:09:35	zahary	proc foo(a,b: T1) # a and b must be the same type
05:20:08	zahary	I haven't quite made my mind yet what should be the default. with concrete types like the current examples "bind once" makes more sense, but I think with feature-based constraints (checks wether the type support certain operations), "dont bind" is more likely what the user want
05:21:13	zahary	about the destructors: if we specify that the move function should leave the object in a state where a destructor is equivalent to noop, we can statically determine that "x" was moved into the result and requires no further action
05:27:06	*	XAMPP[0] joined #nimrod
05:28:02	*	XAMPP quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
05:31:45	*	XAMPP[0] quit (Client Quit)
05:39:39	zahary	… but I must point out that this doesn't buy us much in terms of codegen complexity - you still have to compile a try/catch block to call the destructor if the scope is left before the move(x, result) line
07:44:24	*	Araq_ joined #nimrod
07:46:00	*	Araq_ quit (Client Quit)
11:14:00	*	Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za
13:02:25	*	Araq_ joined #nimrod
13:02:41	Araq_	so zahary
13:02:47	Araq_	any idea what causes the bug?
13:03:04	Araq_	it's not like we have lots of objects with flags in them ...
13:03:10	Araq_	o.O
13:03:59	zahary	you have left some comments just below the error
13:03:59	zahary	# XXX: this BUG is hard to fix -> we need to introduce helper structs,
13:03:59	zahary	# but determining when this needs to be done is hard. We should split
13:03:59	zahary	# C type generation into an analysis and a code generation phase somehow.
13:04:34	zahary	I was working on something else and didn't bother to chase this further as there is easy work around
13:05:18	Araq_	but that refers to:
13:05:30	Araq_	type T = array[0..4, T]
13:05:45	zahary	yes, I figured this must be the intent
13:06:06	Araq_	well 'T' is obviously invalid, but there are similar examples
13:06:16	Araq_	where nimrod's type system allows things that C's does not
13:07:16	Araq_	I don't get why your example doesn't work
13:07:28	Araq_	it idiomatic nimrod code ...
13:07:31	Araq_	*it is
13:07:32	zahary	Thinking about it, the error is quite logical - probably it's trying to validate the function type
13:07:53	Araq_	but there is no dependency between the function type and the object
13:07:55	zahary	so it goes over all params - registers TFlags, then reaches the return type and bang
13:08:13	Araq_	it's absurd
13:08:32	Araq_	a function type does not introduce a strong dependency
13:08:54	Araq_	should be easy to fix though
13:09:43	Araq_	I mean there is a dep from proc -> object, but not from object -> proc
13:09:48	Araq_	so there is no cycle
13:10:20	Araq_	and the internal error should only trigger when it encounters a cycle it can't resolve
13:15:38	*	Araq__ joined #nimrod
13:17:44	*	Araq_ quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
13:21:59	*	Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za
13:32:04	*	Araq__ quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 13.0.1/20120614114901])
17:39:57	*	Trix[a]r_za is now known as Trixar_za
17:42:04	Trixar_za	[NimBot] Araq/Nimrod dedbeef Araq [+0 �3 -0]: moar fixes <-- wonder when we'll get one like that, as in the hash number
17:42:43	Araq	Trixar_za: what?
17:42:56	Araq	the fix had no github number ...
17:43:23	Araq	I always use #no if there is any
17:43:37	Trixar_za	It uses hexadecimal hashes to mark the commits
17:43:53	dom96	Trixar_za: The chances of that happening are quite slim I think.
17:44:07	Trixar_za	Probably.
17:44:12	Trixar_za	Would be awesome to see though
17:44:52	Araq	can't follow
17:45:21	Trixar_za	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexspeak
17:46:09	dom96	Araq: He's wondering when this will happen: [NimBot] Araq/Nimrod **dedbeef** Araq [+0 �3 -0]
17:46:22	dom96	Note the 'dedbeef'
17:46:35	Araq	what's the advantage?
17:46:56	Trixar_za	It's just an intellectual novelty
17:47:03	Trixar_za	No real advantage
17:56:53	dom96	Trixar_za: How's the asyncio-ing going? :P
18:00:53	Trixar_za	Haven't tried yet :P
18:00:59	Trixar_za	*hides*
18:01:45	*	dom96 shakes head in disappointment
18:07:06	Trixar_za	Speaking of which, I'm busy considering if I should become a debugger. I seem to have a unnatural talent for it. Mostly because programming is logical and follow set patterns ('style') and anything that deviates from this pattern is most likely a mistake or just bad form. I can also fix problems using the same patterns. Why I can read code in all languages even though I never learned it.
18:07:45	Araq	yes debug nimrod :-)
18:09:24	Trixar_za	Only good thing that ever came from my crappy first few years in school studying in a language I barely understood :P - I have a good memory, I'm a good mimic and I see patterns near instantly :P
18:09:47	Trixar_za	Also means I suck at writing code on my own though :/
18:11:37	Trixar_za	And yeah, that's how I figured the echo/print thing out on my own. Not by any real skill at Nimrod >.>
18:44:34	*	Trixar_za is now known as Trix[a]r_za
18:46:55	*	Bosc0p joined #nimrod
18:47:11	*	Boscop quit (Disconnected by services)
18:47:13	*	Bosc0p is now known as Boscop
18:47:15	*	Boscop quit (Changing host)
18:47:15	*	Boscop joined #nimrod
19:02:37	*	Bosc0p joined #nimrod
19:02:53	*	Boscop quit (Disconnected by services)
19:02:55	*	Bosc0p is now known as Boscop
19:02:57	*	Boscop quit (Changing host)
19:02:57	*	Boscop joined #nimrod
20:17:14	*	dom96 is declaring today to be a big Nimrod task implementation day on Rosetta code :P
20:57:29	Araq	what about improving the forum instead, dom96? :P
20:57:42	Araq	people wanna 'reset password' feature
20:57:50	dom96	But but but :(
20:57:56	dom96	This is fun :P
20:58:33	Araq	alright ... add it to the testsuite :P
20:58:45	Araq	I'm trying hard to make it smaller though
20:59:10	Araq	and add new stuff to already existing tests :-)
21:00:05	dom96	Will do.
21:02:52	dom96	My goal mostly is to find good tests for the new closures :P
21:04:55	Araq	well you already found a bug :-/
21:05:49	dom96	Better to test them thoroughly :P
21:05:59	Araq	indeed
21:39:24	Araq	good night guys
21:54:58	*	filwit joined #nimrod
21:55:55	dom96	hey filwit!
21:56:03	filwit	hi
21:56:27	filwit	is there a way to read the pragmas of a proc?
21:56:59	dom96	You mean check what pragmas are set on a proc?
21:59:10	filwit	yes
22:01:24	dom96	I'm not sure. Why do you want to do that?
22:01:49	filwit	basically I'm trying to make a "new Type" syntax with a macro, which will call a any finalizer marked with {.new.}. Or something along those lines
22:02:32	filwit	the only issue I have with non-pure OOP design is when I'm creating object, I like to know exactly what type I'm guess from the factory function at a glance
22:03:45	filwit	my mind basically says "I need a new File... so I type 'new' and tell it 'File' and that's all I have to remember... not createFile(), or newFile(), etc"
22:05:26	dom96	filwit: right, this might help: https://gist.github.com/2de51a3146470998502c
22:05:44	dom96	See the way the pragma is stored in the AST?
22:06:17	filwit	okay great, I was thinking I'd need to write a macro to do it
22:06:45	filwit	I forgot about the dumpTree: thing
22:06:49	filwit	very useful
22:06:52	dom96	indeed
22:07:46	dom96	Wait. So if you have `new Type`, then you want this to be transformed into:
22:08:08	filwit	well, 'new' is already taken, so probably 'create Type'
22:08:23	dom96	newType() - where `newType()` is defined like: proc newType(): Type {.new.} ?
22:08:35	filwit	yes
22:09:14	filwit	so you mark each "constructor" with {.new.} pragma to allow it to work with the 'new' keyword (create)
22:09:15	dom96	I'm not sure that is possible with a macro, how will you search for the function marked with {.new.}?
22:09:34	filwit	well that's what I'm trying to figure out
22:10:15	filwit	can I get a list of functions that match a parameter filter? In a macro that is
22:10:33	filwit	meaning... proc foo(Type, ...), proc bar(Type, ...)
22:10:37	filwit	then
22:10:43	filwit	macro create:
22:11:16	filwit	for func in getAllProcWithTypeAsFirstParam():
22:11:19	filwit	...
22:11:24	dom96	As far as I know there is no way to get a list of functions that have been defined in a macro.
22:11:42	filwit	well..... damn
22:11:52	filwit	guess this doesn't work then
22:12:02	filwit	I can do it through naming conventions
22:12:39	dom96	I wonder how hard it would be to implement a function which gives you this kind of information.
22:12:46	filwit	template create(T:expr, params:expr) = `create T`(params)
22:13:04	filwit	and then you define: proc createMyType(...) = ...
22:13:17	filwit	and you can say: var foo = create MyType(...)
22:14:02	filwit	but I'd prefer not to rely on naming conventions.... at that point there's not difference really between just calling the factory function
22:14:20	dom96	hrm, wait.
22:15:14	dom96	Nah, what I'm thinking of is runtime type information.
22:15:32	filwit	what would fix everything, is if 'new' simply had an 'expression' version... meaning you could use 'new' like this: var foo = new Foo()
22:15:42	filwit	and like:
22:15:47	filwit	var foo: Foo
22:15:49	filwit	new foo
22:16:34	filwit	but my test show that you can't have two procs that return different things
22:16:59	dom96	Yeah, overloading based on return type is not implemented yet.
22:17:07	filwit	so it's planned?
22:17:13	dom96	Yeah, as far as I know.
22:17:21	dom96	And that type of syntax will be used then
22:17:26	filwit	well then great, I will not worry about this now
22:18:00	filwit	because once we can do that, then I'm sure I can convince Araq to make a version of 'new' that works like the above
22:18:24	filwit	I looked at the definition of 'new' and it's just a {.magic.} pragma
22:18:37	filwit	which I have no Idea where to find out what that does
22:18:48	dom96	It's implemented in the compiler.
22:18:59	filwit	yes but where?
22:19:01	dom96	new only works on references I believe, and pointers.
22:19:25	dom96	So I bet it only allocates storage for the data and sets the reference/pointer to point to that data.
22:20:40	dom96	let me try to nimgrep for it
22:22:11	filwit	anyways, I just had that idea last night, and spent a moment trying to get it to work. I really don't have to much time to spend on this stuff... all my free-time I spend getting the last of the graphics done for my project
22:22:42	filwit	which sux ATM, since we missed the competition dead-line :-(
22:23:57	filwit	It wasn't really a possibility though, we entered to late and have problems with the graphics half-way through (ending up having to change our initial design entirely) to make them work without GPU shaders (which Windows Phone 7 doesn't support)
22:24:38	filwit	but now that we missed the dead-line, we're changing them back to our initial design (mostly), LOL
22:24:54	dom96	nice lol
22:25:20	filwit	so it's been a bit of a head-ache, but things should be ready for release in the new few days now
22:25:43	filwit	and I'm excited to be able to get back to work on Aporia
22:25:54	filwit	Nimrod really does have some great things about the language
22:26:39	dom96	Well my exams are finally ended, however I am leaving for holidays soon, and then straight after I come back I will start working :(
22:26:51	dom96	I should have time on the weekends hopefully though.
22:27:07	dom96	filwit: ccgexprs.nim line 907
22:27:52	*	dom96 really needs to start hacking on the Nimrod compiler again
22:28:10	filwit	it's fine, we can just both work on stuff when we can. I just don't like making a bunch of feature requests and then not helping get them done
22:28:16	filwit	:-V
22:28:29	filwit	thanks for the source info
22:29:29	dom96	I'm glad you're helping. You should help Araq with the compiler also :D
22:29:45	filwit	I've starting taking a look at the compiler source a bit
22:30:21	filwit	it's a bit complex for me to just start adding features, but I'll keep learning it until I can
22:31:43	dom96	I understand, It's still complex for me too :P
22:33:25	filwit	I think in the more immediate future I could 'help' more with the publicity of Nimrod, which is to say I could make a simple game with it
22:34:00	dom96	That would be awesome.
22:34:04	filwit	I would like to make a simple shooter or something, and start porting over our Reign engine (at least pieces of it)
22:34:35	filwit	one things people are always saying about D is... "it sounds cool, but can you show me anything that's been made with it?"
22:35:08	filwit	people arn't really willing to learn a whole language with out some sort of evidence that it can do things
22:35:23	filwit	even if the language in question is completely awesome
22:35:31	dom96	of course.
22:36:03	filwit	it's usually about what's more practical to use... that's why C#/Java are so popular cause all the external libraries and support basically mean you can focus solely on your own project and just make it work
22:36:47	filwit	some I was impressed with Nimrod is that many libraries (X11, OpenGL, etc) are already wrapped and distributed with the compiler, so I can just use them
22:36:48	dom96	Well I actually find the fact that I can help out with the core of the language quite fun :)
22:37:07	filwit	ya, and I would like to eventually be able to do that as well
22:38:01	filwit	realistically though, that's not a world I know much about (at least not to that degree), and so it'll be awhile before I start contributing much
22:39:38	dom96	It actually gives you very good experience. For example I never knew as much about sockets as I do now before I started using Nimrod and improving Nimrod's sockets module :P
22:40:17	filwit	yep, I know what you mean. I learned a ton about language design by learning about D
22:40:20	dom96	It really helped me realise how annoying some of POSIX and the Win API is.
22:40:49	filwit	I don't think I would even be able to appreciate the beauty of Nimrod if I hadn't first learned about D
22:41:00	filwit	lol
22:41:09	filwit	are you a Window, Linux, or Mac fan?
22:41:59	filwit	I'm a Linux guy (as of a year ago), but that's more about supporting community (open source) software than the actually differences between the OSs
22:42:00	dom96	Linux, well... sometimes I still have a hard time deciding between Windows and Linux. But Linux is definitely better for programming.
22:43:30	filwit	ya, they're both good systems
22:43:46	dom96	I'm not sure about Macs, I haven't really given Mac OS a fair try.
22:44:00	filwit	it sux dude
22:44:00	dom96	But Macs are too expensive, so no thanks :P
22:44:12	filwit	I have a Mac with the newest OS
22:44:33	filwit	it's not fun, not for programmers at least
22:44:50	dom96	Why do so many programmers use them then? 0_o
22:44:52	filwit	for instance... it's practically impossible to open two instances of a single app...
22:45:32	dom96	oh yeah because of that dock thingy lol
22:45:34	filwit	IDK... cause they're crazy? Why do so many programmers write in C? You can't explain that. (meme reference ;P)
22:45:54	filwit	ya you have to start a new instance through the terminal
22:46:24	filwit	because the system is built for grandmas and stuff
22:46:29	filwit	which isn't a bad thing
22:46:37	filwit	but the way GnomeShell works is much better
22:47:01	filwit	(click on program: go to instance)(right-click, "new window": new instance)
22:47:06	filwit	best for both
22:47:24	dom96	btw what distro do you use?
22:47:37	filwit	Arch, but I'm on Ubuntu ATM
22:47:48	dom96	Ahh. I use Arch too.
22:47:59	dom96	Do you use Gnome Shell then?
22:48:04	dom96	(On Arch)
22:48:09	filwit	yes
22:48:30	filwit	I've tried Xfce and KDE recently, but Shell is best
22:48:41	filwit	btw, you should get this new extension if you're on Shell
22:48:46	dom96	hrm, I should give it a try. Currently using Xfce.
22:49:29	filwit	oh, the one thing I like much better about Shell over Xfce is the activity management (it's dynamic) and the overview mode
22:49:44	dom96	No idea what those things are heh
22:50:05	filwit	Activity=workspace (desktop, screen, etc)
22:50:30	filwit	in Xfce you have to create a set amount (how it a Ctrl-Insert to create a new one)
22:50:44	dom96	I see.
22:51:24	filwit	in Shell, the "overview" makes managing windows much easier... for me at least because I think spatially
22:52:25	filwit	It's easier to me to keep windows almost entirely visible on each workspace, and have multiple workspaces, than it is to constantly click through a list on a task bar
22:52:34	filwit	but that may just be me
22:52:52	filwit	and there's a new extention for Shell which adds a good dock
22:53:55	filwit	btw, I know Araq's German. What's your native language?
22:54:01	dom96	hrm, I definitely have to check it out.
22:54:37	filwit	do you speak English natively?
22:54:43	dom96	Polish. But i've been living in the UK for so long now that English is pretty much native to me nowadays.
22:54:57	filwit	cool
22:55:35	filwit	It would be interesting to live in a place where many people know multiple languages I think
22:55:50	filwit	though English is quickly becoming "standard"
22:55:57	filwit	(because of the web)
22:56:33	dom96	Yeah. I want to learn a third language, knowing two languages isn't cool anymore :P
22:56:41	filwit	lol
22:56:49	filwit	come to the states, it's cool in the states
22:57:11	filwit	or not cool, depending on if your second is Spanish ;P
22:57:38	dom96	I might someday move to the states.
22:57:50	dom96	But I hear that it's not that easy.
22:58:16	filwit	really? why? it's not awesome over hear or anything. And our economy is going down the drain
22:58:38	filwit	here** I mean, we have a lot of cool things over here
22:58:43	dom96	Dunno. The states always felt "cool" to me.
22:59:00	filwit	but there's also a lot of stupid people (looks at Wesboro baptist church)
22:59:08	dom96	I should probably visit England first though.
22:59:26	dom96	Ireland is just rain, rain, wind, farms and cows.
22:59:39	filwit	ya, lol I feel ya there
22:59:47	filwit	that's why I love Florida so much :)
22:59:52	filwit	lots of sun and beaches
23:00:11	filwit	but I've lived up north, where it's basically that... rain, snow, and farm land
23:00:12	dom96	Well at least it's never /too/ warm here :P
23:00:30	filwit	ya, I kinda like the crazy heat though ;P
23:00:52	filwit	it's nice being able to jump into an 80 degree pool at 3am ;D
23:01:20	dom96	Yeah, I kinda miss it too now... but then again when it's too warm my brain functions worse than a monkey's.
23:01:35	filwit	you've been to Florida? or...
23:01:43	dom96	Poland :)
23:01:52	dom96	It's very warm there in the summer.
23:01:54	filwit	Poland gets really hot like that?
23:02:03	filwit	didn't know that
23:02:24	dom96	lol, does everyone think that Poland is some kind of ice country?
23:02:59	filwit	idk... never thought about it much. I just thought it was mostly full of country side and farms
23:03:13	dom96	Yeah, it is.
23:03:15	filwit	which isn't exactly what you think when you think "warm weather"
23:03:46	filwit	I used to live in Iowa, and it gets very warm in the summer, and about -20 sometimes in the winter
23:03:48	dom96	I guess your idea of "warm weather" is: beaches, sunshine, beaches...
23:03:57	filwit	yes
23:04:00	dom96	Basically Florida I guess? or Miami :P
23:04:21	dom96	Yeah, it's the same in Poland. Very warm in summer, very cold in winter.
23:04:29	dom96	In Ireland it's just mild, always.
23:04:44	filwit	ya, sounds like Oregon (where i was mostly raised)
23:04:46	dom96	Barely any snow in winter, and some sun in summer.
23:04:57	filwit	yep... that's about it
23:05:01	filwit	I feel for you
23:05:13	filwit	that's why I moved away from there when I was able
23:05:26	filwit	cause we had around 280 days of overcast
23:05:35	dom96	Well like I said, I don't really mind the weather here.
23:06:13	filwit	more power to you then. I met some people in Oregon that where die-hard rain fans
23:06:25	filwit	it it's what you like, then that's great
23:07:52	dom96	I'm definitely not a die-hard rain fan. I do enjoy some sunshine, as long as it's not so much that I feel like I am passing out even with a fan on, blowing cool air at me.
23:08:21	dom96	It's definitely sunshine > rain for me :)
23:08:34	filwit	ya, everyone where keeps their AC's on high, so usually it's a big contrast stepping outside then in
23:08:55	filwit	btw... what's the economy like over there?
23:09:08	filwit	I hear Greece is in a bit of a melt-down ATM
23:09:20	dom96	Yeah, Greece is in serious trouble.
23:09:32	filwit	hear it's getting pretty bad too, but not like Greece
23:09:40	dom96	I think Ireland is alright.
23:09:57	dom96	But I can't say i'm up to date on the state of the economy here.
23:10:04	filwit	ya
23:10:23	dom96	I hear the Greece owes Europe a shit load of money.
23:10:26	dom96	*that
23:10:37	filwit	lol
23:10:51	filwit	USA owes China way more I'm sure
23:11:03	dom96	And that they're having a bad time rebuilding the government as they can't decide who to pick to lead their country.
23:11:04	filwit	cause we keep spending on stupid wars
23:11:42	filwit	god, I seriously think there's a better way to run governments and economies
23:12:04	filwit	than to "elect" people into positions of authority where they can fuck things up
23:12:43	filwit	have you ever heard of the Venus Project?
23:12:51	filwit	I think there's real value in their ideas
23:12:55	dom96	no, what is it?
23:14:09	filwit	well it's a group that's purposing an economic structure built without money
23:14:25	filwit	the first thing you're probably going to say is "you mean communism?"
23:14:55	filwit	and no, there's a major difference in both the concept, and the state of technology that might allow for it to be possible now
23:15:46	filwit	basically the idea is: since robots are stealing all of our jobs, soon we will have the ability to automatic virtually everything in our lives.... so what happens to all the uneducated work force then?
23:17:13	filwit	cause that's the real issue actually, if you look at graphs (I can look them up) you see that most of things that used to be made by human hands are now made by machines
23:18:08	dom96	hrm, right. I'm not sure I completely understand.
23:18:09	filwit	there's this guy, that's invented a machine, that can print a house in 24hours with 40% less material
23:18:11	filwit	I shit you not
23:18:48	filwit	it's still in prototype form, but soon, even the construction of houses may be completely done by machine
23:19:02	dom96	How will this economic structure work without money?
23:19:39	filwit	ya that's the first question I asked when I first heard about it
23:20:34	filwit	there's a video that does a much better of describing it than I can, but basically it would go like this
23:20:43	filwit	true "wealth" is resources
23:21:43	filwit	if labor can be automated, then the only things left for us to do is make technical designs of machines that can convert those resources into houses, cloths, food, etc
23:22:43	filwit	basically, today, we have private corporations that compete for "ownership" of resources, and distribution "rights"
23:23:28	filwit	they usually have their interests above their consumers, but there's a balance there, because of competing corporations which are gunning for the same consumers
23:23:46	filwit	but still, it's easy to see how that system can be corrupted
23:24:36	dom96	So basically instead of money, you exchange goods for other goods. So say, I want sugar, ok give me potatoes.
23:24:45	filwit	what would work better, is if there was simple a repository of technical designs, and a distributing "service" which allocated resources to the projects of "provably best worth"
23:24:51	dom96	But then, how much sugar for one potato?
23:25:01	filwit	no it's not a barter system
23:25:14	filwit	cause that's basically the same as money, like you're saying
23:25:51	dom96	I'm sorry. I don't think I see it.
23:25:55	filwit	basically it's the idea that we can provide for our needs by creating machines to do it for us
23:26:12	filwit	that's fine, and I don't expect you to just agree with me here or anything
23:26:14	dom96	Right. But machines will need maintenance.
23:26:42	filwit	sure, and today it's not fully possible IMO
23:26:44	dom96	What will the people that spend time maintaining these machines receive as a reward?
23:27:05	filwit	why do you work on Nimrod?
23:27:17	filwit	what "reward" do you receive?
23:27:25	filwit	or how about practicing art, or music?
23:28:02	filwit	If you could spend all of your time doing virtually anything you wanted, you would probably work on Nimrod even more, not less
23:28:26	dom96	I receive the reward of believing that the work I contribute towards Nimrod will help me in the future.
23:28:41	filwit	true, and that's they key
23:28:46	dom96	And of course it's fun :P
23:29:06	filwit	that reward doesn't go away if you remove money from the equation
23:29:22	filwit	because you learn things, and you move up a social latter by contributing to Nimrod
23:29:31	filwit	you can say "look what i've done in my life"
23:29:36	filwit	and others will look up to you
23:30:08	filwit	we don't really work for monetary reward, we work for the sense of accomplishment and social standing
23:30:33	filwit	would you date a person that just sat around the house all day and went to parties and that was their entire life?
23:30:40	filwit	I'm sure many would
23:30:43	dom96	That's true.
23:31:03	filwit	but that wouldn't offset the amount of people willing and wanting to contribute to society's projects
23:31:28	filwit	we may not be able to automate everything today, but soon we will
23:32:06	dom96	What might happen is that some people contribute more than others. And they start finding that to be unfair.
23:33:05	dom96	Now I know that with money this isn't exactly always fair either, not all jobs pay the same. But usually the correlation is that the more work you put into your education, and then your job the more money you will get.
23:33:44	filwit	see and that's where the big problem comes in. What about the people who can't afford education?
23:33:48	filwit	it's really expensive
23:35:06	filwit	the problem is, many would be educated and contribute, but they're raised in slums and ghettos
23:35:30	filwit	their entire life, they're taught, through experience, that they'll never amount to anything in their lives
23:35:44	filwit	and that's because everyone around them is poor
23:35:58	filwit	it's a self defeating loop
23:36:46	dom96	So essentially the venus project will make everyone the same?
23:37:01	filwit	no, no one is truely equal
23:37:26	filwit	midgets can't play basket ball, no matter how hard they try
23:38:19	filwit	the goal is to give everyone the most fair opportunity because we can
23:38:22	dom96	Well it's too late for me to understand the way that the venus project will fix all these issues I think :P
23:38:31	filwit	haha, no worries
23:38:36	filwit	sorry about all my ranting
23:38:58	filwit	we kinda got off on a topic I'm passionate about
23:39:15	dom96	No problem, yeah, was just going to say that you are very passionate about this.
23:39:27	dom96	I can't say i'm the same unfortunately :P
23:39:38	filwit	no worries ;-)
23:39:49	filwit	I'm probably not doing the best at describing it either
23:40:49	filwit	I actually had a very similar reaction as you when I first heard about it. Not that I'm projecting my experience onto your and expecting you to later agree with this
23:42:11	filwit	I'm just saying, I wasn't some crazy hippy that thinks we can all live in utopia
23:43:02	dom96	hehe
23:43:23	dom96	I just don't really worry about these types of issues.
23:43:35	filwit	actually, I was telling my X girlfriend about this (she and I where dating before I learned about the movement) and she was like "damn you've changed" cause I used to be pretty conservative with my stance on economic things
23:45:11	filwit	anyways... I'll stop talking about it now....
23:45:27	filwit	I'm sure you're fully sick of reading all this, lol
23:46:25	dom96	nah, sorry. I'm just watching Casino Royale at the same time, that's why i'm slightly less talkative :P
23:46:55	filwit	nice, 007's the shit
23:47:34	dom96	yep :D
23:47:57	Araq	I should really sleep now
23:48:07	filwit	heh Araq
23:48:14	filwit	thought you where sleeping....
23:48:25	Araq	but filwit ever noticed how "new Object" sucks because you can't abstract over the create operation anymore?
23:48:44	Araq	factories become a PITA with a special 'new' syntax ...
23:48:50	Araq	so I left them out
23:48:59	Araq	and you desperately want them back
23:49:05	Araq	I wonder why :-)
23:49:17	filwit	I'm not sure I follow
23:49:28	filwit	but I'm fully willing to be convinced
23:49:54	filwit	what can't you abstract over "new Object"?
23:50:10	Araq	alright, so we have a library and ObjectA
23:50:22	Araq	and we don't really plan ahead ;-)
23:50:37	Araq	so in Java people create our object with 'new ObjectA'
23:51:10	Araq	but now we need some slightly different ObjectB in our library
23:51:35	Araq	but clients shouldn't know about it
23:51:45	Araq	you do:
23:51:56	Araq	class ObjectB extends ObjectA { ... }
23:52:02	Araq	but then you're stuck
23:52:25	Araq	if you have newObjectA in the first place
23:52:31	Araq	it's only a convention
23:52:34	Araq	so you can do:
23:52:44	Araq	proc newObjectA(): ObjectA =
23:52:57	Araq	if someCrazyDispatchingCriteria:
23:53:07	Araq	var a: ObjectB
23:53:12	Araq	new a
23:53:16	Araq	result = a
23:53:20	Araq	else:
23:53:32	Araq	var a: ObjectA
23:53:35	Araq	new a
23:53:37	Araq	result = a
23:53:41	Araq	see?
23:53:54	Araq	special syntax for constructors hurts
23:54:31	Araq	I in fact gained flexibility by using the very same proc call syntax that's used for everything
23:54:54	filwit	this is confusing functionality, why would I ever want an ObjectB from a "newObjectA" factory?
23:55:21	filwit	my entire argument was that I want to know (for sure, and at a glance) what type the var is
23:55:34	dom96	So overloading by return type is still planned right? And we will get a basic `new` function or similar for which this problem is not applicable?
23:55:38	filwit	so I'm not looking up definitions
23:55:47	Araq	well
23:55:53	Araq	you want an IDE :P
23:56:11	Araq	that has nothing to do with special construction syntax
23:56:17	filwit	even with and IDE, you still have to roll your cursor over the syntax to see what the type is
23:56:29	Araq	ooooh big deal ...
23:56:33	Araq	or you write:
23:56:44	Araq	var x: X = initX()
23:57:03	filwit	sure, it might be trivial, but is that best situation?
23:58:07	filwit	another reason I don't like factories, is that I'm not sure exactly what function to call
23:58:14	Araq	*shrug*
23:58:21	dom96	If we have overloading by return type, then writing the type explicitly will be required anyway.
23:58:21	filwit	there could be "initX", "newX", "createX", etc...
23:58:27	dom96	var x: X = new()
23:58:41	Araq	it's like saying "I don't like abstractions because they hide stuff"
23:58:45	Araq	well yes
23:58:58	dom96	Araq: Are we getting them or not?
23:58:59	Araq	in fact I often don't like them either
23:59:15	filwit	even with IDE and code suggest, with "new Type" I only have to remember "new" and then I get a list of all possible parameters I can pass to the constructors
23:59:57	filwit	honestly, what dom96 is asking right now is what I think would work besst
23:59:59	filwit	best**