| 00:00.31 | Maquis | haha |
| 00:01.41 | vontrapp | what's the number to call OIT and tell them they suck and have them fix something broken? |
| 00:01.48 | Maquis | 84000 |
| 00:01.50 | Maquis | or 24000 |
| 00:01.52 | Maquis | i think both work |
| 00:02.00 | vontrapp | and to call from off campus? |
| 00:02.00 | Maquis | i'd suggest waiting until after they close, though |
| 00:02.07 | Maquis | 422-4000 |
| 00:02.12 | Maquis | what's broken? |
| 00:02.26 | Maquis | (or 378-4000 is the other number that should still work) |
| 00:02.31 | vontrapp | i just haven't been able to authenticate at byu all semester |
| 00:02.35 | Maquis | oh |
| 00:02.41 | Maquis | yeah... i'd suggest calling after hours |
| 00:02.43 | vontrapp | haven't really been over there at all, so it hasn't been a big deal |
| 00:02.52 | vontrapp | why after hours? |
| 00:03.12 | Maquis | because if you call during normal hours, you get the phone-answering people... |
| 00:03.29 | vontrapp | and after hours i get real people? |
| 00:03.32 | vontrapp | odd... |
| 00:03.34 | Maquis | if you call after-hours, the phone rights through to the NOC, and you get people who actually know what they're talking about |
| 00:03.43 | Maquis | s/rights/rings/ |
| 00:03.46 | vontrapp | ok, when is after hours? |
| 00:04.02 | Maquis | i dunno |
| 00:04.07 | Maquis | i usually call after like 8 or so |
| 00:20.56 | Lone_Wanderer | sneaky sneaky |
| 00:22.46 | levi | Woo, I have a sbcl/araneida server on the internet now. Still got a few quirks and is just running a modified version of the example from the docs, but it's there. |
| 00:22.55 | Lone_Wanderer | Did anyone else here listen to that talk by futurist John Smart that was linked to on Slashdot a bit ago? About accelerating change? |
| 00:37.33 | *** part/#utah bucky (~bucky@bucky.active.supporter.pdpc) |
| 01:04.24 | levi | Man, more people need to teach Scheme in school like Phil Windley does. |
| 01:04.30 | levi | http://classes.eclab.byu.edu/330/wiki/index.cgi?SchemeAndAmazon |
| 01:04.36 | Lone_Wanderer | who's Phil Windley? |
| 01:07.26 | sjansen | he's this dude |
| 01:07.29 | sjansen | who teaches |
| 01:07.32 | sjansen | scheme |
| 01:07.43 | levi | http://phil.windley.org/ |
| 01:08.04 | levi | He was the Utah CIO for a while. |
| 01:09.12 | Lone_Wanderer | and he teaches at BYU? |
| 01:09.15 | levi | Yeah. |
| 01:09.20 | levi | He's got an interesting blog, too. |
| 01:09.26 | Lone_Wanderer | cool |
| 01:09.32 | Lone_Wanderer | have to check it out when I have time |
| 01:09.46 | levi | His blog is http://www.windley.com/ |
| 01:09.52 | Lone_Wanderer | hey, if my laptop is attached to a docking station |
| 01:10.22 | Lone_Wanderer | and I put it into... I think it's called hibernate mode |
| 01:10.35 | Lone_Wanderer | no, just standby |
| 01:10.52 | Lone_Wanderer | is it safe to pop it out of the docking station? |
| 01:11.27 | sjansen | will the laptop bite you if you try? probably not |
| 01:11.41 | sjansen | will the laptop get upset? don't know |
| 01:16.37 | Lone_Wanderer | guess I'm about to find out. |
| 01:17.06 | levi | Time for me to head home. |
| 01:17.37 | Lone_Wanderer | au revoir, my lispy friend |
| 01:27.14 | *** join/#utah bigdog (~bigdog_ut@166.70.192.70) |
| 01:42.53 | *** join/#utah Lone_Wanderer (~chatzilla@c-67-161-243-72.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 01:53.24 | *** join/#utah mheath (~Michael@c-67-161-213-34.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 01:57.47 | *** join/#utah JoshH (~JoshH@firebat.aros.net) |
| 01:58.21 | mheath | Well, that was disappointing |
| 01:58.31 | mheath | Robotics competition at ITT Tech |
| 01:58.56 | mheath | We did horrible. At least there was free pizza and soda though :D |
| 01:59.01 | scott | no luck in #ubuntu, #e, or #debian. anyone here know how to change the login manager? |
| 01:59.17 | mheath | Have no idea in debian |
| 01:59.23 | Newsome | scott: as in xdm/gdm/kdm ? |
| 01:59.24 | mheath | That would be handled via your xinit stuff |
| 01:59.40 | scott | Newsome, yeah, get rid of gdm and set another program to be the login manager |
| 01:59.42 | mheath | call the appropriate login manager from xinit's config |
| 02:00.03 | mheath | Though debian probably has some easy to use variable in some weird configuration file |
| 02:00.08 | scott | I've never understood the whole /etc/init.d stuff |
| 02:00.11 | Newsome | scott: Not sure how it'll look on your system, but check in /etc/X11 |
| 02:00.25 | mheath | scott, me neither, but I use slackware so I've never bothered learning init.d :D |
| 02:00.33 | *** join/#utah levi-laptop (~levi@levi.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 02:00.37 | scott | perfect |
| 02:00.45 | scott | <PROTECTED> |
| 02:00.47 | scott | nice |
| 02:00.52 | Newsome | scott: great |
| 02:01.17 | mheath | Everyone on my team was blaming my code (some stuff I hacked together in like 2 hours) for the robot |
| 02:01.39 | mheath | Until, as an experiment, we later modified the robot to be simliar to others in design......It ran about 10x better with no modifications to the code |
| 02:04.37 | scott | alright, so apparently that's not everything |
| 02:05.49 | JoshH | scott: if you do dpkg-configure xserver-xfree86, you can pick the login manager you want. or, apt-get install rcconf. you can use it to select what you want to start at boot, and just select the login manager you want. |
| 02:06.26 | JoshH | dpkg-reconfigure actually |
| 02:10.27 | Maquis | ~lart projects and papers and assignments and everything else that i have to do |
| 02:20.25 | *** join/#utah spr (~spr@c-67-161-219-228.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 03:01.20 | brailsmt | ohh, i bet the papers will look and smell nice now when you hand them in |
| 03:04.55 | Maquis | ~lart brailsmt |
| 03:20.16 | brailsmt | that is a lame lart... |
| 03:20.29 | brailsmt | ~lart me |
| 03:20.35 | brailsmt | dangit... |
| 03:20.43 | brailsmt | ~lart you |
| 03:20.54 | brailsmt | ~lart -ibot- |
| 03:21.18 | brailsmt | ~lart 1b07 |
| 03:21.50 | brailsmt | ~lart ib0t |
| 03:21.50 | brailsmt | luser... |
| 03:45.35 | spr | My keyboard died |
| 03:45.39 | Maquis | what??? |
| 03:45.43 | Maquis | your keyboard died?? |
| 03:45.47 | Newsome | you're doing quite well for having a dead keyboard |
| 03:45.59 | spr | I took one of the extras we have and plugged it in :) |
| 03:46.30 | spr | It was my favorite keyboard, cordless, normal shaped, and it's lasted since 2000 |
| 03:47.13 | Maquis | Newsome: i haven't heard anything :) |
| 03:47.53 | Maquis | An Irish priest is driving down to New York and gets stopped |
| 03:47.53 | Maquis | for speeding. The state trooper smells alcohol on the |
| 03:47.53 | Maquis | priest's breath and then sees an empty wine bottle on the |
| 03:47.53 | Maquis | floor of the car. |
| 03:47.55 | Maquis | He says, "Sir, have you been drinking?" |
| 03:47.58 | Maquis | "Just water," says the priest. |
| 03:48.00 | Maquis | The trooper says, "then why do I smell wine?" |
| 03:48.03 | Maquis | The priest looks at the bottle and says, "Good Lord! He's |
| 03:48.05 | Maquis | done it again!" |
| 03:48.39 | Newsome | haha |
| 03:49.26 | Maquis | :) |
| 03:50.04 | Maquis | After a hardy Indiana rainstorm filled all the potholes in the streets and alleys, a young mother watched her two little boys playing in the puddle through her kitchen window. The older of the two, a five-year-old lad, grabbed his sibling by the back of his head and shoved his face into the water hole. As the boy recovered and stood laughing and dripping, the mother runs to the yard in a panic. |
| 03:50.10 | Maquis | "Why on earth did you do that to your little brother?!" she says as she shook the older boy in anger. |
| 03:50.13 | Maquis | "We were just playing 'church' mommy," he said. "I was baptizing him in the name of the Father, the Son and in the hole-he-goes." |
| 03:52.19 | *** join/#utah bigdog_ut (~bigdog_ut@166.70.192.70) |
| 04:09.42 | *** join/#utah byronc (~byron@209.197.11.63) |
| 04:23.41 | spr | fyi: the uug poll is down. Stop your scripts |
| 04:23.47 | *** topic/#utah by spr -> The source for OSS focused discussion in Utah. See sllug.org, plug.org, uug.byu.edu, uvlug.org, fslc.usu.edu, etc. | utwaa.org for Utah windows Admins Anonymous... |
| 04:24.37 | spr | mainly because you're /.ing the site |
| 04:49.22 | *** join/#utah jnielsendotnet (jn@c-24-2-72-123.client.comcast.net) |
| 04:49.37 | *** join/#utah mheath (~Michael@c-67-161-213-34.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 04:51.34 | mheath | Is anyone here particulary familar with DocBook? First time I've ever worked with DocBook and I'm wondering how one would have it properly display in a web browser. |
| 04:58.12 | mheath | Actually, nevermind. Figured it out :) |
| 05:08.13 | *** join/#utah bigdog_ut (~bigdog_ut@166.70.192.70) |
| 05:08.39 | mheath | Could someone here spare about 500K of webhosting space so that I can distribute some documentation I'm writing? |
| 05:09.18 | mheath | Just ask for FTP or SCP access, since I plan on making a lot of modifications over the next few weeks |
| 05:16.12 | jnielsendotnet | mheath: maybe..... |
| 05:16.52 | mheath | jnielsendotnet, it's only temporary, too. Just until I get my new webserver ready to go, or until I find another permanent home for it |
| 05:20.42 | Maquis | quick question |
| 05:20.53 | levi-laptop | Maquis: quick answer |
| 05:20.57 | Maquis | in mysql, how would one get a listing of the tables within a database |
| 05:21.06 | levi-laptop | show tables; |
| 05:21.07 | Maquis | i've connected to the server, and done use <database> |
| 05:21.10 | Maquis | oh |
| 05:21.12 | Maquis | that's simple |
| 05:21.18 | levi-laptop | Told ya I'd have a quick answer. ;) |
| 05:21.45 | levi-laptop | My knowledge of mysql doesn't go too much deeper than that, unfortunately. |
| 05:21.59 | Maquis | hmmm.. |
| 05:22.14 | Maquis | what's the mysql equivalent of "select count * from table" |
| 05:22.57 | jnielsendotnet | select count(*) from table; |
| 05:23.14 | jnielsendotnet | that's just SQL though.. pretty sure it's the same in other DB's |
| 05:23.51 | Maquis | oh |
| 05:24.44 | levi-laptop | I'm definitely a geek. Went to the bookstore today, and the books most appealing to me were a book on Godel's incompleteness theorem and a new Roger Penrose book that's an overview of modern Physics. |
| 05:25.18 | mheath | At least your an intelligent geek..... |
| 05:25.48 | mheath | I was stuck in a small room with several people who were listening to Starwars midi music and playing minesweeper |
| 05:26.28 | mheath | We were supposed to give a static display / presentation as part of the robotics competition today.... |
| 05:26.44 | mheath | They tell us "Ok, at 12:00". So we sit around waiting...and waiting....and waiting.... |
| 05:27.01 | levi-laptop | Heh. Woo, Star Wars midis. |
| 05:27.14 | mheath | Finally, at 12:00, a guy comes in... "Your the only team that hasn't been judged... you were supposed to do it hours ago." |
| 05:29.16 | mheath | That competition was kinda fun though |
| 05:29.20 | mheath | Free food :D |
| 05:29.22 | Lone_Wanderer | what did you do? |
| 05:29.25 | Lone_Wanderer | oohhhhh |
| 05:29.30 | Lone_Wanderer | can't complain about that |
| 05:29.43 | mheath | It was a line following robotics competition |
| 05:29.52 | mheath | Using Lego Mindstorms RCX robots |
| 05:30.11 | Lone_Wanderer | what's your major, mheath ? |
| 05:30.16 | mheath | ........ |
| 05:30.27 | Lone_Wanderer | oh :p |
| 05:30.54 | mheath | But, I *plan* on majoring in Distributed and Parallel Computer Processing Systems |
| 05:31.26 | Lone_Wanderer | hey, nine out of ten futurists think that's the Next Big Thing. |
| 05:31.48 | levi-laptop | Generally, people major in things like 'Computer Science' or 'Mathematics'. ;) |
| 05:32.10 | mheath | Have you seen Globe, Amoeba, or Orca? |
| 05:32.12 | levi-laptop | But that's a cool area of research for graduate work, no doubt. |
| 05:32.50 | mheath | levi, if you get a "Masters Degree in Parallel and Distributed Computer Systems" wouldn't you be majoring in Parallel and Distributed Computer Systems? |
| 05:33.53 | levi-laptop | mheath: Yes, but I've never heard of such a thing. Where do you plan on getting it? |
| 05:34.07 | levi-laptop | What about Albatross and Paramecium? |
| 05:35.14 | mheath | levi, are you trying to crack a joke, or do you actually know what I was talking about? (I ask because there is indeed a related project called Paramecium...I think they went a little overboard with the naming scheme) |
| 05:35.48 | levi-laptop | mheath: They all appear to be Andrew Tannenbaum research projects. |
| 05:35.52 | mheath | And I plan on getting that degree at Vrije Universiteit |
| 05:36.05 | levi-laptop | Where's that? |
| 05:36.14 | mheath | levi, uh, none of them are...He's involved with most of them |
| 05:36.22 | Lone_Wanderer | please don't say France |
| 05:36.25 | mheath | Not the main person in any of them, though |
| 05:36.33 | mheath | Lone_Wanderer, levi-laptop: Amsterdam |
| 05:36.39 | Lone_Wanderer | you really, really don't want to get a graduate degree in France |
| 05:36.53 | mheath | Haha, I can believe that :) |
| 05:37.30 | Lone_Wanderer | they make you take, like 15 years |
| 05:37.31 | levi-laptop | Why are you going to Amsterdam for a BS? |
| 05:37.46 | levi-laptop | Oh, that's a MS. |
| 05:38.11 | levi-laptop | Do you plan on doing all your university work there, or just graduate studies? |
| 05:38.11 | mheath | Yeah. I'm probably going to just major at WSU or somewhere in CS for my BS |
| 05:38.29 | levi-laptop | Yes, well, that's what I meant earlier. |
| 05:38.44 | mheath | Well, to go there as a foreighner you *have* to go as a graduate |
| 05:39.01 | mheath | *foreigner |
| 05:39.50 | Lone_Wanderer | So why Amsterdam? |
| 05:39.59 | levi-laptop | I just found all those projects under a link named 'projects led by Andrew Tanenbaum' |
| 05:40.19 | levi-laptop | Lone_Wanderer: Because that's where those projects are being done. |
| 05:40.33 | mheath | ....... |
| 05:41.13 | mheath | levi-laptop, no. I just mentioned a few relevent research projects related to distributed computer systems because Lone_Wanderer had said "hey, nine out of ten futurists think that's the Next Big Thing" |
| 05:41.21 | levi-laptop | mheath: Of course, now is a little early to be planning your grad school. The landscape is likely to be rather different by the time you finish your BS. |
| 05:41.38 | levi-laptop | mheath: They all happen to be done by the same group at the same school, though. |
| 05:41.47 | Maquis | ha! |
| 05:41.49 | Maquis | the truth comes out |
| 05:41.57 | Maquis | spr asked others to turn off their election scripts... |
| 05:42.02 | levi-laptop | mheath: The school you mentioned, in fact. |
| 05:42.04 | Maquis | but his is still running |
| 05:42.14 | mheath | Lone_Wanderer, thats one of a few places that offers that degree, it's a beautiful place... |
| 05:42.21 | Maquis | (as is that of his cohort from the cs dept) |
| 05:42.26 | mheath | The faculty sounds amazing |
| 05:42.27 | Lone_Wanderer | Harvard offers it |
| 05:42.32 | mheath | Except for Tannenbaum |
| 05:42.43 | mheath | Brilliant guy, but I've heard he's not that great of a teacher. |
| 05:42.44 | levi-laptop | You're not a fan of Tannenbaum? |
| 05:42.55 | mheath | Didn't say I wasn't a fan of Tannenbaum. |
| 05:43.28 | levi-laptop | Well, if you say you think they're all amazing except him, it does suggest that to your listeners. |
| 05:44.13 | mheath | Lone_Wanderer, haha, wish I could get into Harvard |
| 05:44.34 | mheath | And I'm not sure I trust Harvard's Computer Science department |
| 05:44.46 | Lone_Wanderer | Do smashingly well in your undergrad program and you could. |
| 05:45.11 | Lone_Wanderer | I know a girl who's studying math at Harvard. |
| 05:45.17 | mheath | If I do, I'd rather change my major and shoot for MIT. |
| 05:45.26 | Lone_Wanderer | She graduated from Julliard when she was 15 or something. |
| 05:45.33 | mheath | MIT's CS department bears more prestige than Harvard's. |
| 05:46.02 | Lone_Wanderer | asphalt is black |
| 05:46.02 | levi-laptop | mheath: From what I hear, the trick is to know someone in your school who knows the faculty at MIT. |
| 05:46.03 | Lone_Wanderer | :p |
| 05:46.23 | mheath | levi-laptop, from what I hear, the trick is to be black. |
| 05:47.00 | mheath | But if you know someone who's friends with someone at MIT, I've got my ears open :) |
| 05:47.28 | Lone_Wanderer | are there any BYU faculty who are friends with MIT professors in CS that you know of, Levi? |
| 05:47.39 | levi-laptop | mheath: No, this is something you research to pick your undergrad school and which professor to impress. |
| 05:47.50 | levi-laptop | And I don't know anyone. |
| 05:48.06 | levi-laptop | I just read something on grad school admission, and what their main criteria are. |
| 05:48.06 | Lone_Wanderer | I wonder how one goes about researching that kind of thing? |
| 05:48.14 | Lone_Wanderer | levi-laptop: was it on PG's site? |
| 05:48.25 | levi-laptop | Hrm. May have been. |
| 05:48.29 | mheath | Ah, OK. Let me just do a google search for "Weber State Faculty who are friends with MIT faculty and who frequently do favors for their students" |
| 05:48.34 | Lone_Wanderer | I just read almost the same thing on his site |
| 05:48.47 | levi-laptop | mheath: It's called social networking. |
| 05:49.02 | Lone_Wanderer | ohhhhhh, Weber State University. I thought you meant Washington State University. |
| 05:50.00 | mheath | Haha, I don't know anyone who knows anyone... |
| 05:50.08 | Lone_Wanderer | you're only 15 :p |
| 05:50.37 | mheath | One of my teacher's girlfriends was, in highschool, stolen by the man who is now President Bush's chief political advisor, but thats as far as that goes :D |
| 05:51.10 | Lone_Wanderer | You could look at all the current faculty at MIT and when and where they graduated, and cross-check that with the graduation records of all the faculty at your school |
| 05:52.09 | Lone_Wanderer | or you could see if any of them have collaborated on papers or research |
| 05:52.48 | mheath | Ah, I've got to run. |
| 05:52.59 | mheath | Wow, I wasted a lot of time on this documentation. |
| 05:53.19 | mheath | Just need to look up bus times for tomorrow, then I'm off |
| 05:55.22 | *** join/#utah osynic (~synic@c-67-172-242-219.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 06:00.22 | Lone_Wanderer | Now I'm all curious to find out if anyone at BYU or the U is friends with an MIT professor. |
| 06:02.20 | levi-laptop | http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2005/04/announcing_head.html |
| 06:02.47 | levi-laptop | Scheme is now officially cool -- there's an O'Reilly book on it. |
| 06:02.57 | Lone_Wanderer | woah |
| 06:03.02 | Lone_Wanderer | I was wondering when that would happen |
| 06:03.13 | Lone_Wanderer | hey, what is the y-combinator? |
| 06:03.17 | mheath | 'bout time.. |
| 06:03.34 | levi-laptop | It's an April Fools joke, I think. |
| 06:03.50 | levi-laptop | The book, not the Y-combinator. |
| 06:04.10 | levi-laptop | But the Y-combinator is a way to recursively call an anonymous function. |
| 06:05.12 | Lone_Wanderer | oh, cool |
| 06:06.08 | Lone_Wanderer | too bad if it's a joke |
| 06:06.20 | Maquis | spr: you around??/? |
| 06:08.28 | levi-laptop | Lone_Wanderer: Do a web search on 'applicative order y combinator' to find out more on how you'd do it in scheme. It's rather mind-bending, as I'm sure you can imagine if you think for a bit about the concept of a recursive anonymous function. |
| 06:09.03 | *** join/#utah Mecworks (~marc@208.186.182.173) |
| 06:09.26 | Lone_Wanderer | oh, wow |
| 06:09.34 | Lone_Wanderer | yeah, it didn't take long for my mind to get bent |
| 06:11.15 | *** join/#utah fishyfire (~fishyfire@65.105.158.130.ptr.us.xo.net) |
| 06:11.50 | levi-laptop | Like, how the heck do you call the thing if it doesn't have a name? |
| 06:11.59 | Lone_Wanderer | yeah |
| 06:12.03 | levi-laptop | And the Y combinator is the answer. |
| 06:12.24 | levi-laptop | But I don't know it nearly enough to explain how it works. |
| 06:12.31 | Lone_Wanderer | or how do you have it call itself if it doesn't have a name, or even a reference, until it gets created |
| 06:15.05 | levi-laptop | I believe SICP has an explanation of it. |
| 06:15.23 | Lone_Wanderer | not surprised |
| 06:15.27 | Lone_Wanderer | haven't gotten that far yet though |
| 06:17.09 | levi-laptop | Learn Scheme in Fixnum days probably covers it, too. |
| 06:17.23 | levi-laptop | And EoPL also has an explanation. |
| 06:18.10 | *** join/#utah indessed (~ross@71-36-72-174.slkc.qwest.net) |
| 06:18.17 | Lone_Wanderer | lol, that's the best name for a book I've ever heard |
| 06:18.25 | Lone_Wanderer | (Learn Scheme...) |
| 06:19.46 | indessed | k, so I've got a program that won't let me paste into it, but it will let me type characters. are there any programs that will send keystroke events to programs like this? (so I don't have to retype everything.) |
| 06:20.02 | indessed | Did that make any sense at all? |
| 06:20.09 | Lone_Wanderer | yes |
| 06:20.15 | Lone_Wanderer | right-click and paste? |
| 06:20.21 | Lone_Wanderer | or have you tried all that? |
| 06:20.30 | indessed | no paste in the right-click menu. |
| 06:20.37 | indessed | (it's actually "pose", the palm pilot emulator.) |
| 06:20.54 | indessed | (so I think it just captures keystrokes and was never really set up to do copy-paste stuff.) |
| 06:21.01 | Lone_Wanderer | ahh |
| 06:21.06 | Lone_Wanderer | I have no idea, I'm afraid. |
| 06:21.14 | indessed | nuts. |
| 06:21.25 | levi-laptop | Try searching for sending X events or something. |
| 06:21.28 | indessed | Surely there must be some Lisp program out there that would do it, right? ;-) |
| 06:21.44 | indessed | thanks levi, i'll give that a shot. |
| 06:23.02 | levi-laptop | http://www.gnu.org/software/xnee/www/index.html |
| 06:23.43 | levi-laptop | BTW, there's a cool Scheme implementation for the Palm. ;) |
| 06:24.13 | Lone_Wanderer | lol |
| 06:24.26 | Lone_Wanderer | Levi, you're a wonderful Lisp evangelist. |
| 06:25.18 | indessed | heh. maybe i'll give it a shot. |
| 06:25.22 | indessed | (it can't be any worse than C.) |
| 06:25.36 | levi-laptop | I'm a smalltalk evangelist, too, but the smalltalk environment for Palm is unmaintained. |
| 06:25.53 | levi-laptop | But you can get Squeak for a Zaurus or PocketPC. |
| 06:26.04 | indessed | I'd really rather write my palm apps in Java, but it just screams "Bloat!". |
| 06:26.14 | indessed | So I'm having fun with C instead. |
| 06:26.23 | levi-laptop | indessed: The scheme is called LispMe, I think. |
| 06:26.52 | Lone_Wanderer | Is there anything good about Java that another language doesn't do better? |
| 06:27.00 | levi-laptop | C is okay if you need things to be really small, but I would really like to get away from it. |
| 06:27.10 | indessed | cross-platformness? |
| 06:27.20 | Lone_Wanderer | Python? |
| 06:27.28 | indessed | i guess that's arguable how well other programs do it. |
| 06:27.34 | levi-laptop | Java's supposed cross-platformness is not really all it's cracked up to be. |
| 06:27.43 | indessed | "Write once test everywhere"? hehe. |
| 06:27.52 | mheath | levi-laptop, why? |
| 06:27.59 | indessed | LW: I don't think Python has built-in GUI capabilities, neh? |
| 06:28.00 | Lone_Wanderer | Stick it to the man, Levi! |
| 06:28.14 | levi-laptop | It's as cross platform as any other language implemented on a virtual machine. |
| 06:28.15 | indessed | I mean, you have to use gtk or some external library which requires porting. |
| 06:28.41 | indessed | I don't know of any other language that includes GUI stuff in its virtual machine, though. |
| 06:29.15 | Lone_Wanderer | I was under the impression that Python did a fantastic job of making GUIs |
| 06:29.20 | levi-laptop | Java cross-platform GUI stuff is slow as molasses, though. |
| 06:29.29 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 06:29.42 | indessed | levi: I don't know. It /was/, but I think on modern hardware it's more than fast enough to be usable. |
| 06:29.54 | indessed | I run quite a few java gui apps though. |
| 06:30.36 | levi-laptop | Well, things like Eclipse actually use native widgets. So you have to port those libraries as well as the jvm. |
| 06:31.18 | levi-laptop | And gtk and qt run on Windows, so effectively python and perl can do cross-platform guis as well as Java. |
| 06:31.28 | indessed | LW: I totally have no idea here, but IIRC Python's GUIs generally use GTK, which is probably ported to most of the "cross-platform" places you'd want it, so it really does do a good job. |
| 06:31.39 | levi-laptop | (though they are certainly slower) |
| 06:31.59 | indessed | You don't get the look and feel of native widgets, though, like you do with SWT. |
| 06:32.34 | indessed | levi: but with SWT (like Eclipse) you don't get the advantage of having them built-in. like you said, you have to port the libraries as well. |
| 06:32.42 | levi-laptop | SWT is really a non-portable glue library, though. |
| 06:32.48 | indessed | but at least you get the choice of Swing (which imho is getting better). |
| 06:32.59 | levi-laptop | It has to be rewritten for every platform. |
| 06:33.25 | indessed | levi: right, but like you said, all it is is glue. it's not like you have to rewrite widgets for every platform, just a mapping of some sort. |
| 06:33.53 | levi-laptop | indessed: My point is that Java really doesn't have as much of an advantage as it claims to. |
| 06:33.57 | indessed | my beefs with SWT tend to be more with the robustness of the widgets available (compared to swing), not the platform dependence. |
| 06:34.18 | indessed | Hey, you were the one who was asking for something Java did better than another language :-) |
| 06:34.48 | indessed | I wasn't claiming it had a really great advantage, just enough of one to use as an example. |
| 06:34.51 | levi-laptop | Not me! |
| 06:35.12 | levi-laptop | That was Lone_Wanderer, unless I totally forgot asking it. |
| 06:35.12 | indessed | Whoops! LW then :-) |
| 06:35.13 | Lone_Wanderer | no, that was me |
| 06:35.30 | indessed | At any rate, I wasn't trying to extol Java's virtues, so you don't have to jump all over me for it :-) |
| 06:35.36 | Lone_Wanderer | I was just hoping that we could come to the conclusion, once and for all, that Java is crap and we needn't deal with it. |
| 06:35.42 | indessed | I was just trying to give an example of something people like using Java for. |
| 06:35.45 | levi-laptop | Java's not total crap. |
| 06:35.51 | Lone_Wanderer | dangit |
| 06:36.11 | indessed | Personally, I like having lots of different programming languages |
| 06:36.18 | indessed | and the choice of choosing which one I want for which project. |
| 06:36.38 | levi-laptop | Java's a step in the right direction away from C++ and towards Smalltalk. |
| 06:37.05 | levi-laptop | Though it's still rather static for my tastes. |
| 06:37.24 | levi-laptop | And horribly verbose. |
| 06:38.04 | levi-laptop | indessed: You may be interested to know that the designer of Java also helped create Scheme and is on the Common Lisp ANSI board. |
| 06:38.24 | indessed | See? He likes having lots of languages around too ;-) |
| 06:39.21 | levi-laptop | Which suggests, at least, that he got garbage collection for Java from Lisp. ;) |
| 06:39.40 | Lone_Wanderer | who was it that was arguing that to death the other night? |
| 06:39.48 | indessed | Heheh, whoa, hey now, remember I never contested that point :-) I think that's a pretty well-established fact. |
| 06:39.54 | levi-laptop | Lone_Wanderer: Me and indessed, I believe. |
| 06:39.57 | Lone_Wanderer | oh |
| 06:39.59 | Lone_Wanderer | *cough* |
| 06:40.03 | indessed | Hehe. |
| 06:40.05 | Lone_Wanderer | and a very stimulating discussion it was! |
| 06:40.56 | levi-laptop | indessed: I think it was very rude of you to go to bed before I convinced you of my correctness. ;) |
| 06:41.24 | indessed | I was attempting, far past my bedtime, to elucidate the reasons why simply because Java and other "new"-ish languages have many features in common with the 1960s Lisp, that doesn't mean programming languages are evolving from C to Lisp |
| 06:41.45 | indessed | in an inexorable trend towards the perfectness of Lisp, the pinnacle of all programming languages |
| 06:41.57 | levi-laptop | Well, I agree with you there. |
| 06:42.04 | Lone_Wanderer | I dunno... it seems pretty self-evident to me... |
| 06:42.18 | indessed | (if I recall correctly, you mentioned how people should stop writing new languages and just extend Lisp instead, |
| 06:42.25 | indessed | since that was the direction new languages were heading anyway) |
| 06:42.48 | indessed | My apologies for not being very clear about it then :-) |
| 06:42.49 | levi-laptop | indessed: You're extrapolating something I didn't say specifically. |
| 06:43.02 | indessed | (And for going to bed before we had a chance to hash it out completely :-) |
| 06:43.21 | indessed | That's true, I am using a bit of purple prose. |
| 06:43.30 | levi-laptop | I don't mean they shouldn't write any new languages, but that sometimes they would be better served by extending lisp. |
| 06:43.48 | levi-laptop | Since lisp is pretty darn extensible thanks to its macro facility. |
| 06:44.19 | indessed | Well, I would rather have php, Java, perl, and Python than extended Lisps. |
| 06:44.23 | indessed | That's all I'm trying to say :-) |
| 06:44.39 | indessed | I'm not saying we should ignore Lisp and let it die the death of other 1960s programming languages, |
| 06:45.04 | indessed | Lisp has done a good job of evolving and becoming a good programming language in its own right, |
| 06:45.43 | indessed | I just like having other languages around too. |
| 06:46.07 | indessed | And I'd be very hesitant to say that Lisp is somehow "better" than, say, php, Java, perl, Python, etc., simply because it had many of those features first. |
| 06:46.24 | indessed | But likewise I wouldn't say it was worse :-) |
| 06:46.29 | indessed | Just, "different". ;-) |
| 06:46.45 | Lone_Wanderer | You're falling into the "all languages are equal" trap |
| 06:46.50 | Lone_Wanderer | (at least, it sounds like you are) |
| 06:47.45 | indessed | I don't think all languages are equal, |
| 06:47.52 | indessed | I mean, perl is not equal to Java, |
| 06:48.01 | indessed | and Python is not equal to bf. |
| 06:48.05 | levi-laptop | indessed: BTW, check out what they're learning in 330 now: http://classes.eclab.byu.edu/330/wiki/index.cgi?Lectures |
| 06:48.13 | indessed | But I think they're all useful for different purposes. |
| 06:48.40 | Lone_Wanderer | I think it's safe to say that some languages are clearly just better than others, though |
| 06:48.54 | levi-laptop | indessed: One thing that has still not caught in in other languages is the metaprogramming facilities of Lisp |
| 06:48.57 | indessed | I don't know about that. Do you have an example? |
| 06:49.19 | indessed | (to LW, not to levi. |
| 06:49.19 | Lone_Wanderer | C, Java, Lisp, PHP, Perl, Python |
| 06:49.21 | indessed | ) |
| 06:49.23 | Lone_Wanderer | are all better than bf |
| 06:49.38 | indessed | I would completely and entirely disagree with you, |
| 06:49.46 | levi-laptop | And, really, I think they ought to catch on. But they're very difficult to do in languages with complex syntax. |
| 06:49.51 | levi-laptop | Do well, at least. |
| 06:49.52 | indessed | unless you put in there somewhere "for the purpose of ..." |
| 06:50.22 | Lone_Wanderer | you can't do anything with bf that you can do better and more easily in one of those other languages |
| 06:50.26 | indessed | bf is better, for some crazy, small, perhaps even stupid set of purposes, than C, Java, Lisp, PHP, Perl, and Python. |
| 06:50.38 | indessed | How about teach people theory about turing machines? |
| 06:50.40 | Lone_Wanderer | for anything meaningful |
| 06:50.43 | indessed | I mean, it's arguable, anyway. |
| 06:50.55 | Lone_Wanderer | right, but you can also argue that black is white and white is black |
| 06:51.13 | indessed | Ok, it's successfully arguable ;-) |
| 06:51.19 | Lone_Wanderer | :p |
| 06:51.32 | *** topic/#utah by spr -> The source for OSS focused discussion in Utah. See sllug.org, plug.org, uug.byu.edu, uvlug.org, fslc.usu.edu, etc. | utwaa.org for Utah windows Admins Anonymous... Please kill your uug voting scripts. The server is /.'ed |
| 06:51.33 | indessed | Sorry, I'm not trying to argue that black is white here. |
| 06:51.37 | Lone_Wanderer | For the purposes of actually writing a program |
| 06:51.54 | indessed | For the purposes of writing a non-educational program, let's say. |
| 06:51.55 | Lone_Wanderer | if you really want to write a program that you're going to use |
| 06:52.00 | Lone_Wanderer | nobody is going to use bf |
| 06:52.01 | indessed | Ok, I'll agree with you. :-) |
| 06:52.24 | indessed | So, now we've said that Set X of languages is better, /at some purpose/, than BF. |
| 06:52.34 | indessed | Does that mean the creator of BF should never have invented BF, |
| 06:52.40 | indessed | and should have used one of those other languages instead? |
| 06:52.55 | Lone_Wanderer | mu |
| 06:53.00 | indessed | Heh. |
| 06:53.23 | indessed | At any rate, that's my only point. |
| 06:53.27 | Lone_Wanderer | okay |
| 06:53.31 | levi-laptop | I would rather not talk about languages being better than one another, but instead discuss metaprogramming. |
| 06:53.39 | Lone_Wanderer | lol |
| 06:53.45 | indessed | levi: Okay, a welcome change of topic :-) |
| 06:53.47 | Lone_Wanderer | one last thing |
| 06:54.27 | Lone_Wanderer | So, indessed , are we in agreement that so long as we're defining a programming language's purpose to be "to be used to write real, actual programs that a person would want to use" |
| 06:54.38 | Lone_Wanderer | that some languages are better than others? |
| 06:54.56 | indessed | Yeah, sure. |
| 06:55.05 | Lone_Wanderer | (although for other definitions, this may not be true) |
| 06:55.07 | Lone_Wanderer | okay |
| 06:55.11 | Lone_Wanderer | so, metaprogramming |
| 06:55.18 | Lone_Wanderer | I need to go get some food. |
| 06:55.27 | indessed | Bah, it's midnight. What do you need food for? |
| 06:55.34 | Lone_Wanderer | umm |
| 06:56.04 | Lone_Wanderer | I thought that was pretty obvious. But I can explain metabolism, nutrition, etc. if you really want ;) |
| 06:56.15 | levi-laptop | Yes, metaprogramming. |
| 06:56.19 | indessed | hehehe :-) |
| 06:56.29 | indessed | metaboli... er, programming. |
| 06:56.30 | indessed | yes. |
| 06:56.39 | indessed | Let's talk. |
| 06:56.55 | indessed | Shall I say something inflammatory to get the ball rolling, or do you have other points you want to raise? |
| 06:56.55 | levi-laptop | So, sometimes you end up writing a bunch of code that's used in similar, but slightly different ways. |
| 06:57.26 | indessed | *nod* True enough. |
| 06:58.15 | levi-laptop | So, it would be nice to have a function that would spit out the right version of the code for each case. |
| 06:58.38 | indessed | yeah, one of my beefs with java is that there's no 'eval', |
| 06:58.38 | levi-laptop | So you'd eliminate the repeated code and make your intent more clear in one stroke. |
| 06:58.51 | indessed | but from what i've read it'd be really hard to implement the way they've done things. |
| 06:58.57 | levi-laptop | eval is another concept pioneered by Lisp. |
| 06:59.04 | levi-laptop | But anyway, this is not eval. |
| 06:59.12 | indessed | I will take issue with the idea that you're making your intent more clear. |
| 06:59.19 | indessed | Sometimes metaprogramming can lead to less clear code. |
| 06:59.45 | indessed | hm. I've found xvkbd, a virtual keyboard, |
| 06:59.48 | levi-laptop | Well, it makes the mechanics less clear, but the intent more clear. |
| 06:59.59 | levi-laptop | Unless you're doing something very strange. |
| 06:59.59 | indessed | but it still only lets me do one character at a time |
| 07:00.16 | indessed | (now by clicking buttons instead of hitting my keyboard, but still. doesn't solve my problem.) |
| 07:01.09 | indessed | Sorry, back to metaprogramming: with regards to this task you're discussing (code that needs to be slightly altered for different tasks), why wouldn't eval be just as convenient? |
| 07:01.32 | indessed | ooohoo! |
| 07:01.39 | indessed | "Assigning Text to Function Keys" |
| 07:01.40 | indessed | muwahaha. |
| 07:02.06 | levi-laptop | Anyway, due to the fact that Lisp syntax is extremely regular and is essentially a representation of the abstract syntax tree, you can use Lisp to rewrite your code before it's compiled/interpreted. |
| 07:02.37 | indessed | true enough. in Lisp there's a big blur between code and data--it's all really represented in much the same way. |
| 07:04.11 | levi-laptop | Exactly. Instead of manipulating strings that represent a program that you'd pass to eval, you manipulate a data structure that represents the program. |
| 07:04.33 | levi-laptop | This can also give a performance boost, since it can expand at compile time rather than requiring a runtime interpretation. |
| 07:05.12 | levi-laptop | Kind of like C++ templates, but designed for more general use than just parameterizing types. |
| 07:06.35 | indessed | Crap. The "assign text to f-keys" has some sort of limit. |
| 07:06.45 | indessed | So I can paste text at like 80 chars at a time. |
| 07:06.48 | indessed | Or something lousy like that. |
| 07:06.53 | levi-laptop | For an example of the usefulness of this; CLOS, the OO system in CL, was originally written as a set of Lisp macros. Most Lisp implentations implement a lot of their operations through macros as well. |
| 07:07.05 | Lone_Wanderer | that's way better than one at a time :p |
| 07:07.11 | indessed | true enough :-) |
| 07:07.16 | indessed | still annoying though. |
| 07:07.50 | levi-laptop | indessed: Did you see this link? http://www.gnu.org/software/xnee/www/index.html |
| 07:07.54 | indessed | probably. but it will probably take more work than just doing it 80 chars at a time :-) |
| 07:08.14 | Maquis | not really |
| 07:08.21 | Maquis | i fyou use head -c 80 |
| 07:08.26 | indessed | ooh, hey, maybe that'll work better. |
| 07:08.30 | indessed | thx levi. |
| 07:08.35 | Maquis | and pipe that repeatedly into the system |
| 07:08.44 | Maquis | it'd be a really easy way to script it |
| 07:08.47 | Maquis | right? |
| 07:08.52 | levi-laptop | indessed: I pasted that before we started talking about lisp again. :) |
| 07:09.01 | indessed | well the way it works is I have to put the stuff in ~/.xvkbd |
| 07:09.14 | indessed | levi: yeah, I know, i looked at it and thought these other things would be better |
| 07:09.20 | indessed | but now i'm finding out that they're not. |
| 07:09.34 | indessed | maquis: anyways, I put stuff in ~/.xvkbd and then run xvkbd |
| 07:09.40 | Maquis | indessed: couldn't you do head -c 80 > ~/.xckbd |
| 07:09.43 | Maquis | and then xvkbd |
| 07:09.54 | indessed | right, then click the F1 button, |
| 07:09.56 | levi-laptop | Anyway, not very many languages have a macro facility quite like lisp's. |
| 07:10.00 | Maquis | and stick that all in a while loop (somehow getting rid of the top 80 characters |
| 07:10.03 | Lone_Wanderer | I think it's a fabulous idea, Maquis, but it's not my palm. |
| 07:10.04 | indessed | then close xvkbd, then do the next characters, |
| 07:10.12 | indessed | then open xvkbd, etc. |
| 07:10.21 | Maquis | well, the only thing you'd have to do then would be click f1 repeatedly |
| 07:10.27 | indessed | unfortunately that's basically what i'm doing now. |
| 07:10.57 | indessed | Awwww. It's okay. |
| 07:11.29 | levi-laptop | Smalltalk is pretty extensible too, also by virtue of an extremely simple syntax and a hackable compiler. |
| 07:11.32 | Lone_Wanderer | We still love you, and admire your intelligence. |
| 07:11.55 | indessed | I'm just going to finish this one this way, but if I have to do anything much larger than this (three or four iterations) I'll probably try gnee. |
| 07:11.56 | Lone_Wanderer | even though you didn't use Maquis's idea |
| 07:12.51 | Lone_Wanderer | is gnee pronounced knee? |
| 07:13.08 | indessed | no idea. |
| 07:13.17 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 07:13.31 | Maquis | Lone_Wanderer: thanks :) |
| 07:13.33 | levi-laptop | indessed: Another cool thing about Lisp is that you can change the behavior of the reader, so you can create new syntax. |
| 07:14.35 | levi-laptop | Maquis: Well, if other people would stop getting sidetracked, there'd be no problem! ;) |
| 07:14.40 | indessed | lol |
| 07:14.42 | Maquis | levi-laptop: :) |
| 07:15.35 | indessed | w00tage! it worketh. |
| 07:15.54 | Maquis | indessed: i could probably script it for you :) |
| 07:15.57 | Lone_Wanderer | it worketh mightily before you, thus saith indessed? |
| 07:16.06 | indessed | thus saith indessed. |
| 07:16.22 | indessed | Although by "worketh" I mean the thing I pasted into the palm pilot, |
| 07:16.31 | indessed | not any program for automating such pasteshneth. |
| 07:17.15 | Lone_Wanderer | you totally just made that word up, huh? pasteshneth. ;) |
| 07:17.25 | indessed | no! it's a real word, I promise! |
| 07:18.02 | Lone_Wanderer | there's a kind of Zaphod Beeblebrox-like logic at work when someone tries to tell me that something is a real word |
| 07:18.23 | *** join/#utah xilch|h (~xilch@67.166.119.0) |
| 07:18.28 | Lone_Wanderer | only with words instead of fun things |
| 07:21.24 | levi-laptop | So, am I to assume that no one wants to talk about programming languages anymore? |
| 07:22.06 | indessed | Well, I started agreeing with everything you said and that was no fun. |
| 07:22.23 | indessed | Maybe I'm just not as ecstatic about metaprogramming as you are :-) |
| 07:22.45 | indessed | Here's a nice converation-sparking question: Why do you think more people don't use Lisp? |
| 07:23.09 | Lone_Wanderer | Do you want my honest opinion? |
| 07:23.14 | indessed | yup. |
| 07:23.20 | indessed | be brutally honest. |
| 07:23.24 | Lone_Wanderer | most people aren't smart enough to get their heads around it |
| 07:23.45 | levi-laptop | I don't think that's true. |
| 07:23.58 | Lone_Wanderer | that, *or* |
| 07:24.14 | Lone_Wanderer | the way that it works is so fundamentally different from C-based languages |
| 07:24.47 | levi-laptop | I don't think that's true, either, but it is perceived as being fundamentally different. |
| 07:24.48 | Lone_Wanderer | that the paradigm shift from one to the other is just too great for programmers born and raised around C-based languages |
| 07:25.11 | *** join/#utah Tene (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 07:25.28 | indessed | I think there's /is/ a big difference between functional programming languages and procedural ones like C. |
| 07:25.30 | levi-laptop | I think the problem is primarily one of perception and familiarity. |
| 07:25.32 | Lone_Wanderer | I'm sure that you've put more thought into this than I have, Levi |
| 07:25.35 | indessed | But I don't think that's the real difference-- |
| 07:25.49 | indessed | after all, many many people were using Lisp dozens of years ago, |
| 07:25.53 | levi-laptop | indessed: I have mentioned before that Common Lisp is not particularly functional. |
| 07:26.00 | indessed | and programming with other functional languages. |
| 07:26.07 | Lone_Wanderer | one thing I've noticed, though, is that the complaints I hear people giving about Lisp are often the same complaints I hear people giving about Unix in general when they're new to it |
| 07:26.10 | indessed | levi: true, but it's still a different paradigm. |
| 07:26.31 | indessed | So why did people "jump ship", so to speak, to languages like C, C++, and so forth? |
| 07:26.38 | Lone_Wanderer | Unix |
| 07:27.15 | Tene | like what, Wanderer? |
| 07:27.17 | levi-laptop | indessed: Because Lisp was tied to AI, and AI failed to produce what it was promising. |
| 07:27.41 | levi-laptop | That's part of it, at least. |
| 07:28.02 | Lone_Wanderer | I knew someone was going to ask that, and I probably shouldn't have brought that up because I can't remember the specific complaints right now :( |
| 07:28.38 | indessed | levi: so you're saying that it was seen as being a language for a specific purpose, and so when that purpose (AI) became a less popular reason to program, the language became less popular as well? |
| 07:28.45 | levi-laptop | indessed: I've been trying to explain that there's not a huge paradigm shift from something like perl or python to Common Lisp. It's mostly the same concepts with a different syntax. |
| 07:29.44 | indessed | levi: I'd have to be more familiar with CL to agree or disagree with you, but I have a feeling that you're comparing the more "functional" aspects of perl and python to CL, rather than the more "procedural" aspects. |
| 07:29.49 | levi-laptop | indessed: Yes. Lisp was slow in execution speed in its day, due to its dynamic nature, but it allowed far greater productivity for the complex tasks of AI programming, so it was a worthwhile tradeoff for the AI guys. |
| 07:30.06 | indessed | I can write a perl program using a very procedural paradigm, |
| 07:30.17 | indessed | but I can likewise write one using a very functional paradigm. |
| 07:30.23 | levi-laptop | indessed: I'm telling you that modern CL programming practice is not particularly functional! How many times do I have to say that? |
| 07:30.50 | indessed | Okay! I'm just saying that when you compare it to perl and python I have a hard time believing you based on nothing more than your word :-) |
| 07:31.01 | levi-laptop | Because all you know is Scheme. |
| 07:31.15 | levi-laptop | And Scheme forces you to do things in a much more functional manner. |
| 07:31.15 | indessed | Like I said before, I'd have to know more about CL to agree or disagree with you. |
| 07:31.54 | indessed | No, because I know perl and python (actually not really), more so than I know Scheme. |
| 07:32.14 | levi-laptop | Well, all you know of lisp is scheme is what I meant. |
| 07:32.40 | indessed | Right, but that's not why I disagree with you :-) |
| 07:32.53 | indessed | Or, pardon me, why I fail to agree or disagree with you ;-) |
| 07:33.05 | levi-laptop | And the scheme you know is from CS330, which emphasizes functional programming. |
| 07:34.15 | levi-laptop | So, you're either going to have to believe me when I tell you you're out of touch with what Common Lisp is and stop comparing your flawed conception of it to things. |
| 07:34.25 | levi-laptop | Or... something else. |
| 07:34.32 | levi-laptop | I forgot where I was going with that. |
| 07:34.39 | indessed | Heh :-) |
| 07:35.23 | indessed | I'm afraid I already know very well that I have no idea what Common Lisp is like other than the stuff I've read that you've linked to. |
| 07:35.27 | levi-laptop | Anyway, the software development world went with fortran's descendants rather than Lisp because they are far closer to the way the machine works and thus faster. |
| 07:36.22 | levi-laptop | And computing resources were waaaay more expensive than programmer resources. |
| 07:36.52 | levi-laptop | Meanwhile, Lisp lived on in academia because it allowed small groups of programmers to accomplish a lot of complicated things. |
| 07:37.30 | indessed | So you are of the opinion, I take it, that it takes considerably less time to program something in CL than it does to program it in a language such a C++, Java, Perl, or PHP? |
| 07:37.33 | levi-laptop | And they did a lot of work on increasing its performance, since resources were so constrained. |
| 07:38.00 | indessed | (Making it a worthwhile effort since programmer-time is more expensive now than computer-time?) |
| 07:38.09 | levi-laptop | indessed: There have been studies comparing it in programmer time and execution speed to C++ and Java, at least. |
| 07:38.34 | indessed | Do you happen to have links to such studies? I think I would find them quite fascinating. |
| 07:38.44 | levi-laptop | It beats both of them in programmer time, is similar to C++ in execution speed, and WAY faster than Java. |
| 07:38.48 | levi-laptop | I can find it... hold on. |
| 07:39.55 | indessed | I'm more interested in programmer time than cpu time. cpu time is cheap these days. |
| 07:41.03 | Lone_Wanderer | google lisp java c and it should be the 4th link down |
| 07:41.34 | Lone_Wanderer | http://www.flownet.com/gat/papers/lisp-java.pdf |
| 07:41.44 | Lone_Wanderer | (I look this one up fairly regularly) |
| 07:41.52 | indessed | Oh, I got this one: http://www.norvig.com/java-lisp.html |
| 07:42.11 | indessed | (Fourth one down with that Google search) |
| 07:42.12 | levi-laptop | indessed: The norvig page links to the pdf LW gave the link for. |
| 07:42.13 | Lone_Wanderer | yeah then from that one |
| 07:42.17 | Lone_Wanderer | you can get the link I pasted |
| 07:42.21 | indessed | oh, cool. thx. |
| 07:43.08 | levi-laptop | Peter Norvig is a smart guy. |
| 07:43.18 | Lone_Wanderer | yes he is |
| 07:43.39 | levi-laptop | Works for Google now. |
| 07:44.03 | levi-laptop | Wrote a couple of textbooks on AI programming, too. |
| 07:44.23 | indessed | My internal effectivemess-of-study skepticism is going at high speed here. |
| 07:45.08 | Lone_Wanderer | yeah, someone linked me to one of his books online in #lisp once but I've long since lost those bookmarks :( |
| 07:45.46 | indessed | The biggest warning sign is: how do they ensure that the results are dependent on the language and not the programmer? |
| 07:46.08 | levi-laptop | indessed: Lots of programmers. |
| 07:46.12 | Lone_Wanderer | by having multiple programmers write the same program |
| 07:46.31 | indessed | The problem is your set of Lisp programmers you have available. |
| 07:46.46 | levi-laptop | Anyway, your skepticism aside, at least there is actually a study rather than just anecdotes. |
| 07:46.53 | indessed | It seems likely enough to me that, if you pick five random programmers who know Lisp, |
| 07:47.00 | indessed | and five random programmers who know C++, |
| 07:47.21 | indessed | you'll end up with higher-quality programmers in the first group than the second, wouldn't you say? |
| 07:47.50 | Lone_Wanderer | and why would that be? |
| 07:48.03 | indessed | It /is/ an interesting study, though! :-) |
| 07:48.05 | *** join/#utah Tene (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 07:48.44 | indessed | They appear to talk about all the concerns I have as well. |
| 07:49.29 | indessed | "Our study contains one significant methodological flaw: all the subjects were self-selected (a necessary expediency given that we did not have ready access to a supply of graduate students who knew Lisp). About the only firm conclusion we can draw is that it would be worthwhile to conduct a follow-up study with better controls." |
| 07:50.19 | indessed | Also: "It might be because the subjects were self-selected. It might be because the benchmark task involved search and managing a complex linked data structure, two jobs for which Lisp happens to be specifically designed and particularly well suited. Or it might be because Lisp programmers tend to be good programmers. This in turn might be because good programmers tend to gravitate toward Lisp, or it might be because programming in Lisp tends to m |
| 07:50.36 | indessed | At least they're honest :-) I like honest researchers. |
| 07:52.48 | indessed | I also want to know what caused that very strange looking spread for Java Development time. |
| 07:53.13 | levi-laptop | In any case, even if the specific results are off, they're probably in the ballpark at least. |
| 07:53.28 | indessed | What makes you say that? |
| 07:55.30 | levi-laptop | Why would you not think so? |
| 07:56.10 | indessed | Because I've seen enough really, really, really bad studies to make me quite skeptical of them. |
| 07:56.30 | levi-laptop | Does this look like a really, really, really bad study to you? |
| 07:56.30 | indessed | One person can do a study and get one result, and another person can do the same study and get the exact opposite. |
| 07:56.59 | indessed | Nope. But it looks like one in which I wouldn't say "The results are probably ballpark accurate." |
| 07:57.27 | indessed | It's one in which I'd say, like them, "About the only firm conclusion we can draw is that it would be worthwhile to conduct a follow-up study with better controls." |
| 07:58.38 | Lone_Wanderer | at least as far as developer time goes |
| 07:58.41 | levi-laptop | Why, do you find it difficult to believe that someone could be productive in Lisp? |
| 07:58.46 | indessed | It's a very interesting study, to be sure--but I wouldn't, for instance, say simply from its results, "It takes more development time to write a program in Java than in C++ or Lisp." |
| 07:58.59 | indessed | Hehe, no, not at all! |
| 07:59.24 | indessed | It's not the results of the study that make me skeptical of it. |
| 07:59.35 | indessed | The results could have been quite the opposite and I'd still be skeptical :-) |
| 07:59.49 | Lone_Wanderer | if you accept it as true that (as Fred Brooks observed) the amount of time it takes to write a program is proportiote to the number of lines of code you have to write to finish it |
| 08:00.36 | indessed | I just have a skeptical nature (one might call it "scientific") when it comes to studies, always looking for other causes than the expected for the results achieved, "post hoc ergo propter hoc" sort of things. |
| 08:01.35 | Lone_Wanderer | then you would also have to accept that writing programs in Lisp is faster than in C or C++, because there are several cases (which I'm sure Levi knows how to find *cough*) where programs have been ported from Lisp to C/C++ and expanded as much as 20 times in size |
| 08:02.01 | Lone_Wanderer | I think that's a healthy outlook, and I don't think that that study proves anything |
| 08:02.09 | indessed | LW: The article mentions two reasons why this might be true: (1) Type declarations, and (2) powerful abstraction facilities. |
| 08:02.49 | Lone_Wanderer | oh, is it in that article there? |
| 08:03.02 | indessed | yeah, page 3, bottom-left. |
| 08:03.14 | Lone_Wanderer | I don't remember where I read it, which can cause problems both in considering my sources and in conversations like this where citing them would be expected |
| 08:03.20 | indessed | "The third result is the smaller size of the Lisp code" |
| 08:04.49 | Lone_Wanderer | so it is |
| 08:05.09 | indessed | See? Good study :-) |
| 08:05.25 | Lone_Wanderer | in summary |
| 08:05.27 | Lone_Wanderer | learn lisp |
| 08:05.37 | Lone_Wanderer | ;) |
| 08:05.49 | indessed | hehe. maybe one day I will. |
| 08:05.54 | indessed | Or, maybe I won't :-) |
| 08:06.06 | levi-laptop | indessed: Did you look at the Norvig page that you got to the link from at all? |
| 08:06.16 | levi-laptop | indessed: His entry for the program is at the bottom. |
| 08:06.17 | indessed | levi: yup |
| 08:06.29 | indessed | Yes, I read through it. |
| 08:06.43 | levi-laptop | indessed: You'll notice a distinct lack of recursive functions, and lots of iterative looping constructs. :) |
| 08:07.10 | *** join/#utah SpecialK (~scott@216.126.221.115) |
| 08:07.30 | indessed | maybe it's just the syntax, but it still looks more functional than procedural to me :-) |
| 08:07.38 | levi-laptop | It's just the syntax. |
| 08:07.55 | indessed | Probably just a matter of getting used to it. |
| 08:07.57 | levi-laptop | Have you looked at Haskell or ML code? |
| 08:08.10 | indessed | nope |
| 08:08.17 | SpecialK | ~lart me |
| 08:08.24 | indessed | is it more procedural? |
| 08:08.30 | indessed | er, functional |
| 08:08.34 | levi-laptop | Haskell, at least, is far more purely functional, yet doesn't have parentheses like Lisp. |
| 08:09.07 | levi-laptop | They're really interesting languages, though. |
| 08:09.54 | indessed | whoa, haskell looks like prolog. heh. |
| 08:11.01 | indessed | I wonder, are there any implementations of Lisp that don't use parens? |
| 08:11.06 | indessed | That would be interesting to see. |
| 08:11.30 | levi-laptop | Logo |
| 08:11.39 | indessed | oh, that's right, i was reading about that. |
| 08:11.46 | levi-laptop | Logo is a fixed-arity non-parenthesized lisp. |
| 08:11.46 | indessed | it's a pretty small subset though, right? |
| 08:12.22 | levi-laptop | Sure, but that's what a non-parenthesized lisp might look like. |
| 08:12.35 | Lone_Wanderer | Logo was the first language I learned |
| 08:12.37 | Lone_Wanderer | in 5th grade |
| 08:12.46 | indessed | I'm doing an experiment ... taking norvig's program, |
| 08:12.52 | indessed | and removing all the parens |
| 08:12.58 | indessed | using tabs instead. |
| 08:13.17 | levi-laptop | Remove the parens and change prefix to infix where appropriate. |
| 08:13.55 | indessed | i'm leaving everything else the same (prefix notation doesn't bother me), so it would be identical to a parser, |
| 08:13.59 | indessed | just different to a human. |
| 08:14.38 | levi-laptop | Actually, there's /no/ functional-style code in that example at all. |
| 08:16.19 | levi-laptop | At least no more functional-style than you'd find in C. |
| 08:17.30 | indessed | quite interesting. |
| 08:18.23 | levi-laptop | Very straightforward stuff. |
| 08:19.13 | indessed | I'm trying to think of what the "best" syntax would be if you got rid of all the parens. |
| 08:19.44 | levi-laptop | The best would be to put them back. :) |
| 08:20.03 | indessed | Obviously :-) |
| 08:20.14 | levi-laptop | You get used to them very quickly, and they are very simple and regular. |
| 08:21.12 | levi-laptop | The only tricky part of lisp syntax is when you get into quoting and quasi-quoting shorthand. |
| 08:21.30 | Lone_Wanderer | must.... |
| 08:21.39 | Lone_Wanderer | sleep... |
| 08:21.40 | indessed | so, hey, hmmm... |
| 08:21.41 | levi-laptop | But anyway, I hope that all of this discussion has at least changed your perspective on Lisp a bit. |
| 08:21.49 | indessed | just thinking now, |
| 08:22.07 | indessed | if this little challenge program is all iterative and procedural, |
| 08:22.16 | indessed | what would have given the Lisp programmers an advantage? |
| 08:22.52 | levi-laptop | Once again you've forgotten THE SAME POINT I'VE MADE A HUNDRED TIMES NOW. |
| 08:23.35 | indessed | No, I mean, it looks like you can take Norvig's program and translate it basically line for line into C++ or Java, right? |
| 08:24.35 | levi-laptop | Well, in C++ you have to deal with static typing and creating the datastructures you need, dealing with memory allocation, etc. |
| 08:25.01 | indessed | (Incidentally, I haven't forgotten it, but thanks for the slap anyway ... what I'm trying to figure out is: what's the big difference between Lisp and other programming languages?) |
| 08:26.01 | levi-laptop | The big difference between Lisp and the pair of C++ and Java is that Lisp is far more dynamic in feel. |
| 08:26.20 | levi-laptop | It's dynamically typed, for one. |
| 08:26.42 | levi-laptop | It's also interactive in nature, so you can toy with bits of code as you're writing them. |
| 08:26.55 | levi-laptop | There's no edit/debug/compile/run cycle. |
| 08:27.09 | indessed | I thought you could compile Lisp? |
| 08:27.22 | levi-laptop | Yes, but not like you compile C++. |
| 08:27.31 | levi-laptop | As soon as you type it in, it's compiled. |
| 08:27.55 | indessed | Oh. Can you create native executables, or do you always need the interpreter/VM around? |
| 08:28.27 | levi-laptop | Not an interpreter/VM, but the runtime support libraries and such. |
| 08:28.52 | levi-laptop | The code is native, but you have to have the support stuff for it to run. |
| 08:29.04 | indessed | Weird! |
| 08:29.08 | levi-laptop | Commercial Lisps generally make it easier to package a standalone system. |
| 08:29.13 | indessed | What's all the support stuff? |
| 08:29.29 | levi-laptop | Well, you know how C programs need libc to run, right? |
| 08:29.33 | indessed | right |
| 08:29.46 | levi-laptop | It's like liblisp. |
| 08:30.11 | indessed | yeah, but i mean if I don't #include anything in my C program I don't need libc, right? |
| 08:30.17 | levi-laptop | Except there's a lot more of it. |
| 08:30.32 | indessed | but you never #include stuff in Lisp to link to these "support stuff"s, right? |
| 08:30.38 | levi-laptop | Yes, you still need parts of the C runtime. |
| 08:30.48 | levi-laptop | What do you think calls main()? |
| 08:31.04 | indessed | I was under the impression it all just turned into assembly. |
| 08:31.07 | levi-laptop | Lisp has a garbage collector, etc. |
| 08:31.26 | indessed | With main() at the start of it. |
| 08:31.53 | levi-laptop | indessed: Nope. |
| 08:31.58 | indessed | Well, ya learn something new every day. |
| 08:32.09 | levi-laptop | C's runtime support stuff is small, but it's there. |
| 08:32.31 | indessed | What does it do? do you know? |
| 08:32.34 | *** join/#utah Tene (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 08:32.40 | levi-laptop | Plus you couldn't do very much without at least the system call wrappers that libc provides. |
| 08:32.41 | indessed | (Now this is way more interesting than Lisp ;-) |
| 08:33.58 | levi-laptop | It provides stuff to set up your program and call main, stuff to clean up when your program finishes, the standard C library, and system call wrappers so you can make system calls. |
| 08:34.39 | indessed | Is it possible to statically link those basic libs so it's inside your executable? |
| 08:34.42 | levi-laptop | Maybe other stuff, too. :) Try running objdump on an executable to see what symbols it has that you didn't put there. |
| 08:35.03 | levi-laptop | indessed: Yes, some of it's always statically linked. |
| 08:36.21 | levi-laptop | Anyway, Lisp is a much more complicated language that does a lot more at runtime than C does, so naturally its runtime support stuff is a lot bigger. |
| 08:38.53 | levi-laptop | I do embedded C programming for work, so I've had to get to know a lot about how C works. |
| 08:39.31 | levi-laptop | And I've come to really not like it all that much. |
| 08:40.02 | indessed | I like C even less than I like Lisp. |
| 08:40.21 | levi-laptop | C'mon, I thought we were getting over your dislike of Lisp. |
| 08:40.40 | indessed | Heh, well, only in theory. |
| 08:40.55 | levi-laptop | I won't try to persuade you to like C, though. |
| 08:41.00 | indessed | Thank heavens! |
| 08:41.24 | levi-laptop | I would like nothing better right now than a viable replacement for C in my project at work. |
| 08:41.46 | indessed | How about assembly? ;-) |
| 08:41.56 | levi-laptop | No. :) |
| 08:42.27 | levi-laptop | I did get hedgehog lisp compiled for it and running, but that's a bit too far to the functional side of things for me. |
| 08:42.44 | levi-laptop | Though that can be a good thing for embedded systems. |
| 08:43.00 | indessed | What, that it's functional, or that it's not for you? |
| 08:43.17 | levi-laptop | Immutable data and lack of side-effects can be a great boon for program correctness. |
| 08:44.14 | *** join/#utah scottj (~scott@128.187.245.205) |
| 08:44.38 | levi-laptop | I should probably look at hedgehog lisp again now that I've grokked erlang. |
| 08:45.14 | levi-laptop | I should probably sleep now. G'night! |
| 08:45.15 | *** join/#utah Tene (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 08:45.22 | indessed | 'night |
| 08:45.54 | scottj | hey Tene, I got e up and running |
| 08:46.03 | scottj | it's great, super fast |
| 08:48.32 | indessed | e as in enlightenment? |
| 08:48.40 | scottj | yeah |
| 08:49.02 | indessed | i'm addicted to enlightenment. that's why i can't use any other OS. |
| 08:49.16 | indessed | are you just starting to use it? |
| 08:49.31 | scottj | I used to be addicted to enlightenment during versions 13-15, but e16 did add anything interesting and it got old |
| 08:49.42 | scottj | s/did/didn't |
| 08:49.47 | indessed | are you using e17 now? |
| 08:49.55 | scottj | yeah |
| 08:50.01 | scottj | it's really impressive, very cool |
| 08:50.06 | indessed | how is it compared to e16? (that's what i'm using. |
| 08:50.12 | indessed | and have been using for the past six years :-P) |
| 08:50.29 | scottj | get rid of e16, download 17 |
| 08:50.52 | scottj | 17 doesn't have keybindings, and the pager doesn't work right (no dragging to other workspaces) |
| 08:50.53 | indessed | is it enough the same that i'll be able to survive? |
| 08:51.02 | indessed | hm. sounds like a No. |
| 08:51.22 | indessed | Most of what I use E for is the custom keybindings. |
| 08:51.24 | scottj | personally I die for cool graphics, and it has some sweet animations |
| 08:51.34 | scottj | and the drop shadows are a thousand times faster than xcompmgr |
| 08:51.49 | scottj | the new login manager is SWEET |
| 08:51.51 | scottj | way way cool |
| 08:52.08 | scottj | I can't get it to work right though :) |
| 08:52.15 | indessed | dang it! all eye candy and no functionality. |
| 08:52.21 | indessed | see, that's why I liked e16 :-) |
| 08:52.34 | indessed | Just more solidity and less new crap. |
| 08:52.47 | scottj | yeah, I don't care about stability |
| 08:52.51 | scottj | to a degree |
| 08:53.40 | indessed | I'm all about customizability |
| 08:54.07 | indessed | I have my own skin for e16 that does exactly what I want it to when I click each button, |
| 08:54.10 | scottj | I imagine it should have shortcuts in a month or so |
| 08:54.16 | scottj | it's been progressing really fast recently |
| 08:54.28 | scottj | it's basically a few months old is all |
| 08:54.30 | indessed | i have all the key combinations set exactly so i can have maximum productivity, etc. |
| 08:54.38 | indessed | Yeah, e17 has really been moving lately. |
| 08:54.39 | scottj | the pager, dock, applets, and theme etc are all way new |
| 08:54.48 | indessed | (Compared to the last four years of vaporware, hehe.) |
| 08:54.50 | *** join/#utah Tene_ (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 08:54.53 | scottj | a few months ago it didn't have anything |
| 08:55.12 | scottj | yeah, I'm excited to see what they come with for a filemanager |
| 08:55.18 | scottj | the old efm was way cool |
| 08:55.25 | indessed | are they going to make a filemanager too? |
| 08:55.35 | scottj | I don't know, I imagine, but I haven't followed closely |
| 08:55.36 | indessed | i still have yet to find a decent filemanager for linux. |
| 08:55.43 | indessed | never tried efm tho. |
| 08:55.56 | scottj | Tene_ you there? |
| 08:56.16 | scottj | it lacked a ton of features, but for looks it dominated |
| 08:57.55 | indessed | Guess not. |
| 08:59.43 | *** part/#utah indessed (~ross@71-36-72-174.slkc.qwest.net) |
| 09:04.28 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 09:18.31 | *** join/#utah Tene (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 10:09.42 | *** part/#utah SpecialK (~scott@216.126.221.115) |
| 14:10.23 | *** join/#utah L3hi8rk5 (~L3hi8rk5@CPE00045af32e95-CM00080d863044.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) |
| 14:16.50 | *** join/#utah mrpull_ (~mrpull@xmjake.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 15:34.03 | *** join/#utah emcnabb (~emcnabb@c-67-169-254-149.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 15:50.45 | *** join/#utah L3hi8rk5 (~L3hi8rk5@CPE00045af32e95-CM00080d863044.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) |
| 15:56.06 | *** join/#utah Newsome (~sorenson@byu-gw.customer.csolutions.net) |
| 16:03.59 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 16:29.30 | *** join/#utah mheath (~Michael@c-67-161-213-34.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 16:40.58 | *** join/#utah bonez39 (~aint@drjones.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 16:41.23 | *** join/#utah bigdog_ut (~bigdog_ut@166.70.192.70) |
| 16:52.03 | Maquis | ~lart professors |
| 17:06.48 | *** join/#utah misterpull (~mrpull@xmjake.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 17:12.18 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 17:22.14 | *** join/#utah L3hi8rk5 (~L3hi8rk5@CPE00045af32e95-CM00080d863044.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) |
| 17:30.41 | *** join/#utah tensai (~tensai@kite.zmonkey.org) |
| 17:33.07 | hans | tensai: have you seen mon? |
| 17:33.20 | hans | http://www.kernel.org/software/mon/ |
| 17:33.57 | Tene | it's not |
| 17:40.12 | tensai | hans: nope, never seen that before |
| 17:40.32 | hans | it looks very cool |
| 17:40.36 | hans | everything nagios should be |
| 17:40.42 | hans | wonder how it has eluded me this long |
| 17:46.23 | misterpull | does mon have a gui? |
| 17:46.51 | hans | there are several www front ends, and some cell-phone based one. also a text client |
| 17:47.03 | hans | it's properly designed so you could write your own UI if you wanted |
| 18:00.34 | *** join/#utah mheath (~Michael@c-67-161-213-34.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 18:44.46 | *** join/#utah mheath (~Michael@c-67-161-213-34.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 18:49.55 | *** join/#utah vontrapp (~von@falcon.fugal.net) |
| 18:53.39 | *** join/#utah L3hi8rk5 (~L3hi8rk5@CPE00045af32e95-CM00080d863044.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) |
| 18:55.24 | *** join/#utah drewbono (~andrew@c-67-161-242-223.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 19:01.11 | mheath | Huh? Why are you watching the tabernacle choir? |
| 19:01.29 | levi-laptop | mheath: General Conference |
| 19:01.45 | mheath | Ah, yes, that is this week, isn't it? :D |
| 19:02.30 | mheath | Hmmn. I have to catch a bus at 1:45...takes me 20 minutes to walk to the bus stop, plus I want to stop and get some food...I'm going to have to leave in 50 minutes. |
| 19:05.26 | levi-laptop | Okay. |
| 19:05.26 | mheath | I don't know why I told you that. |
| 19:05.30 | levi-laptop | Neither do I. |
| 19:05.48 | levi-laptop | My cat's breath smells like cat food. |
| 19:10.24 | *** join/#utah SpecialK (~scott@216.126.221.115) |
| 19:27.21 | Maquis | levi-laptop: that's probably good.. |
| 19:27.51 | Maquis | it means that your cat hasn't been eating something else |
| 19:39.22 | levi-laptop | It's a classic non-sequitur line from The Simpsons. |
| 19:56.08 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 20:10.35 | tensai | I bent my wookie :( |
| 20:11.28 | Maquis | huh???? |
| 20:15.31 | *** part/#utah SpecialK (~scott@216.126.221.115) |
| 20:25.10 | *** join/#utah L3hi8rk5 (~L3hi8rk5@CPE00045af32e95-CM00080d863044.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) |
| 20:31.22 | *** join/#utah mooneroid (~mooneroid@jmoon.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 20:32.32 | *** join/#utah wps (~wps@ns2.digis.net) |
| 20:37.34 | *** join/#utah markl_ (mark@dsl093-225-013.slc1.dsl.speakeasy.net) |
| 20:37.50 | *** join/#utah markl_ (mark@dsl093-225-013.slc1.dsl.speakeasy.net) |
| 20:47.24 | goozbach | "That's where I'm a pirate!" |
| 20:47.44 | goozbach | this is my swingset |
| 20:47.53 | goozbach | this is my slide |
| 20:48.39 | goozbach | this is my sandbox... that's the deep end over there... I can't go over there that's where I see lenny the leprechan and he tells me to BURN THINGS!!! |
| 20:54.33 | Maquis | goozbach: sup? |
| 20:57.55 | *** join/#utah phinux (~phinux@208.187.181.227) |
| 21:01.35 | goozbach | just sitting in the office finishing a lab |
| 21:01.43 | goozbach | before I leave for an entire month |
| 21:38.48 | goozbach | rioting and looting |
| 21:38.58 | goozbach | looting and rioting |
| 21:39.06 | goozbach | raping and pillaging!!! |
| 21:39.17 | mrpull_ | rhyming and stealin'? |
| 21:39.19 | goozbach | IOW we're out of mt dew again |
| 21:41.45 | *** part/#utah bigdog_ut (~bigdog_ut@166.70.192.70) |
| 23:27.21 | *** join/#utah Tene_ (~tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |