| 00:19.21 | Maquis | hans: yeah... i need to call some people and see if they can sign for me or something... |
| 01:04.29 | *** join/#utah mrpull__ (i=xmjake@xmission.xmission.com) |
| 01:07.09 | *** join/#utah niquil (n=niq@echoradio.org) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 01:08.27 | *** join/#utah tewk (i=tewk@192.41.88.101) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 01:11.19 | *** join/#utah mrpull (I=xmjake@xmission.xmission.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 01:11.19 | *** join/#utah lars-ut-away (N=me@67.137.31.58) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 01:17.25 | levi | Oh man, I'm beat. |
| 01:21.57 | levi | 28 miles on my bike, with 1500 ft. of climbing and a nasty headwind that made the descent almost as hard as the climb. |
| 01:27.22 | *** join/#utah Supaplex (n=supaplex@shell.aros.net) |
| 01:27.25 | Supaplex | napoleon dynamite > forest gump |
| 01:32.40 | *** join/#utah lars-ut-away (n=me@67.137.31.58) |
| 01:34.59 | vontrapp | ~lart ticket outlets |
| 01:35.07 | vontrapp | ~botsnack |
| 01:35.07 | ibot | :), vontrapp |
| 01:35.30 | *** part/#utah linuxalien (n=bastage@c-24-2-80-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 01:35.41 | vontrapp | $5 "convenience fee" |
| 01:36.08 | vontrapp | i can drive up to salt lake and buy the ticket from the venue for less than $5 |
| 01:41.22 | *** join/#utah lars-ut-away (n=me@67.137.31.58) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 01:41.34 | levi | vontrapp: Yeah, but that wouldn't be convenient. |
| 01:45.06 | *** join/#utah lars-ut-away (n=me@67.137.31.58) |
| 02:26.56 | *** join/#utah JoshH (n=josh@josh.dsl.aros.net) |
| 02:32.05 | *** join/#utah emcnabb (n=emcnabb@65.248.11.183) |
| 02:34.54 | *** join/#utah amcnabb (n=amcnabb@c-24-10-237-76.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 02:40.13 | emcnabb | amcnabb, hello little baby brother |
| 02:41.29 | xbmodder | LMAO |
| 02:43.55 | vontrapp | jim carey is obnoxious |
| 02:55.45 | amcnabb | emcnabb, hello big baby brother |
| 02:56.14 | emcnabb | haha |
| 02:57.17 | xbmodder | hm |
| 02:57.23 | xbmodder | anyone willing to write a program |
| 02:57.38 | graphyx | everyone here is willing to write a program for the right price. |
| 03:07.58 | *** join/#utah JoshH (n=josh@josh.dsl.aros.net) |
| 03:15.25 | *** join/#utah wps (n=wade@65.73.113.199) |
| 03:36.42 | Maquis | ~lart mcnabbs :) |
| 04:20.19 | *** join/#utah linuxalien (n=bastage@c-24-2-80-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 04:20.39 | Maquis | doh... |
| 04:20.45 | Maquis | i can't remember the test account info |
| 04:20.49 | linuxalien | Same here |
| 04:20.51 | linuxalien | ;) |
| 04:25.06 | Maquis | `ha |
| 04:25.07 | Maquis | got it |
| 04:25.23 | linuxalien | :P |
| 04:33.15 | Maquis | so, if any of you are pro-sellers on amazon, be sure to edit the "Category" of a product just for the sake of doing so |
| 04:44.14 | *** join/#utah xbmodder (I=nobody@dsl092-015-136.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 06:02.11 | *** join/#utah bonez41 (n=aint@c-67-166-77-14.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 06:05.54 | *** join/#utah levi (n=levi@levi.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 07:23.39 | *** part/#utah bonez41 (n=aint@c-67-166-77-14.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 08:23.26 | *** join/#utah xbmodder (I=nobody@dsl092-015-136.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 08:27.16 | *** join/#utah xbmodder (i=nobody@dsl092-015-136.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 12:16.31 | *** join/#utah RyanE_ (n=ryan@rberick.dsl.xmission.com) |
| 12:54.53 | *** join/#utah tene_ (n=tene@c-67-182-199-40.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 13:44.11 | *** join/#utah synic (n=synic@c-67-177-16-249.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 14:16.10 | *** join/#utah gthornock (n=gthornoc@translate.sento.com) |
| 14:17.38 | *** join/#utah tensai (n=tensai@207.141.37.66) |
| 14:19.55 | *** join/#utah LrnChndlr (n=unknown@208-186-103-38.customer.csolutions.net) |
| 14:24.18 | *** join/#utah wps (n=wade@66.237.80.85) |
| 14:35.32 | *** join/#utah Newsome (n=sorenson@216-190-206-130.customer.csolutions.net) |
| 14:50.13 | hans | ~lart vontrapp |
| 14:51.10 | vontrapp | ~pancake |
| 14:51.10 | ibot | extra, extra, read all about it, pancake is ch-ch-mmmmm |
| 14:51.31 | hans | ~no, pancake is <reply>ch-ch mmmmmm |
| 14:56.00 | *** join/#utah JoshH (n=josh@firebat.aros.net) |
| 14:58.14 | tensai | ~lart evolution memory leaks |
| 14:58.39 | *** join/#utah emcnabb (n=emcnabb@bi01p1.co.us.ibm.com) |
| 14:59.19 | *** part/#utah Newsome (n=sorenson@216-190-206-130.customer.csolutions.net) |
| 15:14.02 | *** join/#utah synic (n=synic@66.239.17.226.ptr.us.xo.net) |
| 15:21.40 | *** join/#utah macnewbold (n=mac@69.2.248.251) |
| 15:21.58 | macnewbold | Any of you seen this? http://www.ecost.com/ecost/shop/detail.asp?DPNo=194280 |
| 15:22.08 | macnewbold | I'd never heard of a Wireless DVD player before... |
| 15:23.15 | macnewbold | it's got a PCMCIA slot, and will let you browse your home network with the remote... |
| 15:25.27 | tensai | that's pretty awesome. just as long as it doesn't require some "special" server software to be the streaming source. |
| 15:25.48 | tensai | it doesn't really say how it obtains the list of available movies |
| 15:30.09 | *** part/#utah LrnChndlr (n=unknown@208-186-103-38.customer.csolutions.net) |
| 15:34.51 | macnewbold | Yeah, my bet is it has a built in SMB client, and browses for windows file shares on your network |
| 15:34.55 | *** join/#utah Jayce^ (n=Jayce_@pollux.northsky.com) |
| 15:34.55 | *** mode/#utah [+o Jayce^] by ChanServ |
| 15:35.13 | macnewbold | and for $89, I was surprised |
| 15:49.48 | *** join/#utah spr (n=spr@128.187.221.251) |
| 15:53.13 | *** join/#utah fungus (n=fungus@firebat.aros.net) |
| 15:55.23 | *** join/#utah jsmith (n=jsmith@64.50.35.114.2O7.net) |
| 16:08.20 | *** join/#utah Newsome (n=sorenson@obelix.cs.byu.edu) |
| 16:16.10 | *** part/#utah macnewbold (n=mac@69.2.248.251) |
| 16:23.26 | vontrapp | ~lart utilities |
| 16:23.58 | *** join/#utah levi_ (n=levi@208.177.141.226.ptr.us.xo.net) |
| 16:26.42 | *** join/#utah JoshH (n=josh@firebat.aros.net) |
| 16:41.11 | levi_ | Gah. I'm using yum for the first time, and its insistence on updating the repository every time is REALLY annoying. |
| 16:42.37 | hans | levi_: nonsense, that's just a misconception. It's not really annoying, it's fast and cool and totally better than a. |
| 16:42.42 | hans | apt |
| 16:43.36 | levi_ | hans: Sure, sure. I'm staying away from that kool-aid. |
| 16:44.18 | *** join/#utah sjansen (n=sjansen@206.183.14.132) |
| 16:44.36 | levi | sjansen: You coming to tell me how cool yum is? |
| 16:44.43 | vontrapp | wha? kool-aid?!? |
| 16:44.52 | sjansen | huh? uhm, sure... |
| 16:45.26 | sjansen | yum is as cool as deodarant, you don't want to imagine living without it and have to wonder why it took so long to invent |
| 16:45.39 | sjansen | ~beat Jayce^ |
| 16:45.39 | ibot | ACTION beats Jayce^ with a large stick. |
| 16:45.44 | *** join/#utah TimRiker (n=timr@pdpc/supporter/bronze/TimRiker) |
| 16:45.44 | *** mode/#utah [+o TimRiker] by ChanServ |
| 16:45.50 | levi | I just said, a moment ago, that I'd just used yum for the first time and found its insistence on updating the repository every time VERY annoying. |
| 16:45.59 | Jayce^ | damian is doing the regex presentation to us right now :) |
| 16:46.56 | levi | Are Perl 6 regular expressions going to be faster than Perl 5 ones? |
| 16:47.19 | sjansen | ~whack Jayce^ |
| 16:47.19 | ibot | ACTION whacks Jayce^ upside the head. |
| 16:47.23 | Jayce^ | supposedly, however perl5 ones are very fast (kinda like c, if you know *how* to do them) |
| 16:47.28 | Newsome | ~whack perl |
| 16:47.28 | ibot | ACTION whacks perl upside the head. |
| 16:47.43 | Newsome | oh, wait. Perl is already whacked |
| 16:47.49 | Jayce^ | ~adore perl |
| 16:47.53 | levi | Well, they're pretty fast, but cl-ppcre is often faster. |
| 16:48.46 | Jayce^ | special cases... perl turns off most optimizations in generalization letting you choose them |
| 16:49.04 | tene | levi: yes, quite annoying |
| 16:52.32 | levi | Jayce^: I was just trolling you, but if you're interested there are benchmarks on this page: http://www.weitz.de/cl-ppcre/ |
| 16:52.48 | Jayce^ | yeah, I read his stuff last year when we were discussing it |
| 16:59.17 | graphyx | jsmith: Do you have a moment to answer an asterisk question? |
| 16:59.37 | jsmith | graphyx: Gimme just a second, please... |
| 17:03.21 | jsmith | hans: Did you ever get rid of your echo problems? Did you try fxotune? |
| 17:04.37 | hans | no and no. I'm not familiar with fxotune |
| 17:08.23 | jsmith | fxotune is a utility included with the zaptel source, that will supposedly "tune" your fxo ports to get rid of echo. |
| 17:08.35 | jsmith | I just found out about it last night. |
| 17:08.43 | jsmith | Haven't tried it yet, as I don't have bad echo :-) |
| 17:11.08 | hans | I'll give it a whirl. |
| 17:11.17 | jsmith | Might help... |
| 17:11.30 | jsmith | tensai: Were you the other person in here having echo problems? |
| 17:11.37 | *** join/#utah sz00fy (n=sz00fy@111.24-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu) |
| 17:12.56 | *** part/#utah sz00fy (n=sz00fy@111.24-182-adsl-pool.axelero.hu) |
| 17:24.22 | tensai | jsmith: yes, I've got bad echo. I tried fxotune but I'm not clear on how it works. |
| 17:25.04 | tensai | I tried a different computer with the same lines and it exhibited quite a bit less echo. I haven't tried the old fxo cards with the new computer yet. |
| 17:25.07 | jsmith | tensai: Apparently, it figures out how to tune your FXO port, and then you re-run it every time you boot up, to "program" your FXO port nicely... |
| 17:26.54 | hans | i also need to figure out how to get it off the same IRQ as everything else |
| 17:27.34 | jsmith | hans: Yeah, that's bad. |
| 17:27.50 | hans | don't know if it would affect echo, but I'm sure it affects the quality. |
| 17:27.55 | tensai | jsmith: what happens in that case? |
| 17:28.10 | tensai | hmm. all I get from fxotune is "Skipping non-TDM / non-FXO" |
| 17:29.41 | sjansen | echo |
| 17:29.44 | sjansen | echo |
| 17:30.02 | sjansen | ~pinch Jayce^ |
| 17:30.09 | Jayce^ | ~poke sjansen |
| 17:30.09 | ibot | but then who will poke the pokers, jayce^? graphyx? |
| 17:30.10 | hans | oh, another annoyance I need to figure out is that when I reboot I can't start asterisk until I run /etc/init.d/udev resrt; rmmod wcfxo zaptel; modprobe wcfxo |
| 17:30.32 | Jayce^ | "a do statement is the first step in the road to hell" -- damian |
| 17:30.33 | hans | iow, udev isn't getting setup properly |
| 17:30.58 | sjansen | http://eagle.auc.ca/~dreid/index.html |
| 17:31.08 | jsmith | hans: Do you have an /etc/udev/rules.d/60-zaptel.rules? |
| 17:31.17 | sjansen | IP over Bongo drum |
| 17:31.41 | sjansen | levi: If you read that carefully, it sounds like the university dedicates an entire year to teaching forth. |
| 17:32.13 | jsmith | sjansen: I always wanted to do "IP over Voice" |
| 17:32.21 | hans | negative, but I just noticed a README.udev in the zaptel sources. that would be a good starting place I bet. :) |
| 17:32.38 | jsmith | hans: Bingo! You win the "Golden Asterisk" award. |
| 17:32.51 | hans | sweet! |
| 17:33.22 | Jayce^ | jsmith, but then you'd need ASIPL (American Sign IP Language) |
| 17:33.41 | graphyx | Oh my.. |
| 17:34.07 | levi | sjansen: They stole their little calendar graphic on the university homepage from Apple. |
| 17:34.40 | jsmith | Jayce^: Why? Can't I just have one guy say "SYN" and another say "ACK"? |
| 17:34.55 | levi | sjansen: And I didn't see the reference to forth anywhere. |
| 17:35.00 | Jayce^ | yeah, but what' about the deaf folks... it'd be required :) |
| 17:35.07 | graphyx | Jayce^: does that IBot line really have my name on it or is it random? |
| 17:35.15 | Jayce^ | random |
| 17:35.47 | jsmith | Jayce^: Naw... the RFC will use the word "must" with regards to hearing. |
| 17:35.49 | tensai | ~poke Jayce^ |
| 17:35.49 | ibot | but then who will poke the pokers, tensai? spr? |
| 17:35.57 | tensai | ~poke graphyx |
| 17:35.57 | ibot | but then who will poke the pokers, tensai? Maquis? |
| 17:36.06 | tensai | ~poke ibot |
| 17:36.06 | ibot | but then who will poke the pokers, tensai? niquil? |
| 17:36.18 | RyanE | the nice thing about IP over Bongo is that it's wireless. |
| 17:36.24 | graphyx | right.. |
| 17:36.34 | graphyx | I like the quote on the front page.. |
| 17:36.39 | graphyx | "Dial up never looked so good...." |
| 17:36.42 | RyanE | of course, it's a bit hard to work while a co-worker is surfing the web. |
| 17:37.06 | graphyx | it's wireless, but oh man.. the cross talk... |
| 17:52.56 | *** join/#utah vex (i=nwood@stutter.prohosting.com) |
| 17:54.02 | hans | queue is a lovely word |
| 17:54.34 | tene | queueue is better |
| 17:54.44 | sjansen | levi: "Professor George Townsend offered extra credit to anyone in his forth year Computer Networks course who could take up the challenge" |
| 17:55.02 | levi | sjansen: Ahh, okay. |
| 17:55.23 | levi | tene: queueueueueueue! |
| 17:55.33 | vontrapp | what challenge? IP over Bongo? |
| 17:55.41 | vontrapp | ~lart lag |
| 17:56.37 | hans | eat lag, bot! |
| 17:57.15 | levi | Time for lunch. |
| 17:59.53 | tene | vontrapp: I think that there's an extension that lets you do that |
| 18:02.59 | vontrapp | "If you're using javascript: pseudo-links for any reason, stop. Just stop. Do not pass go..." |
| 18:02.59 | vontrapp | amen |
| 18:17.31 | RyanE | what time does the meeting start tonight? Is there a Perl Mongers meeting first? |
| 18:17.38 | Jayce^ | 6:30 |
| 18:17.44 | Jayce^ | no, it's combines |
| 18:17.48 | Jayce^ | combined.. |
| 18:19.27 | RyanE | thanks |
| 18:43.37 | *** join/#utah markl (i=mark@dsl093-225-013.slc1.dsl.speakeasy.net) |
| 19:29.04 | *** join/#utah linuxalien (n=bastage@c-24-2-80-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 19:36.42 | *** part/#utah fungus (n=fungus@firebat.aros.net) |
| 19:37.00 | linuxalien | Hi people! |
| 19:38.24 | *** join/#utah fungus (n=fungus@2001:470:1f00:645:20a:95ff:fec5:636a) |
| 19:38.25 | jsmith | Hi linuxalien |
| 19:42.26 | linuxalien | What's happening? |
| 19:43.23 | jsmith | I'm getting fat. |
| 19:51.16 | linuxalien | Me too |
| 19:51.20 | linuxalien | It's all those sodas |
| 19:51.37 | graphyx | Jared where are you living now? |
| 19:52.46 | jsmith | graphyx: Riverton... |
| 19:58.31 | hans | jsmith: I'm not seeing fxotune in the zaptel sources (1.0.9.1) |
| 19:58.43 | jsmith | hans: Oh, it's in -HEAD |
| 19:59.09 | jsmith | hans: But I don't see why you couldn't use it with 1.0.9.1 -- it's independent from the rest of zaptel |
| 19:59.22 | jsmith | hans: (Well, at least I think it is) |
| 19:59.36 | hans | i don't mind going to cvs for zaptel |
| 20:02.13 | levi | Anyone read the 'Syntactic Heroin' piece on ACM Queue? |
| 20:03.12 | linuxalien | Check this out: http://www.opengl.org/ |
| 20:03.20 | levi | That guy obviously needs to look outside the C++ box. |
| 20:03.28 | linuxalien | M$ is gonna make OpenGL run on top of Direct3D rendering it useless in many cases. |
| 20:04.03 | *** join/#utah fungus_ (n=fungus@fungus.air.aros.net) |
| 20:05.28 | hans | linuxalien: I don't get it. since when does MS run opengl project? |
| 20:07.07 | levi | hans: If MS makes OpenGL on their OS a layer over Direct3D, it will kill support for OpenGL in the marketplace. |
| 20:07.45 | hans | but isn't opengl in windows now an add-on? |
| 20:07.56 | levi | hans: Who will write OpenGL apps when they'll always have degraded performance compared to Direct3d apps? |
| 20:08.19 | levi | hans: Currently, yes. But this is talking about Windows Vista. |
| 20:08.19 | hans | could it not also be an add-on later? or is it technically impossible to get opengl out from under direct3d on vista? |
| 20:08.55 | hans | who will buy vista if their opengl apps don't run? I'm not a big 3d guy, but isn't opengl fairly widespread? |
| 20:09.03 | linuxalien | If support for opengl drops in windows, there won't be much of a market in linux either since they make more money with it in windows. |
| 20:09.08 | levi | They'll run, they'll just be slower. |
| 20:09.20 | hans | same diff for 3d apps |
| 20:09.45 | levi | hasn: Sure, but future development of 3d apps will go towards Direct3d. |
| 20:09.57 | hans | no, you've got it all wrong dataw0lf. Don't you know yum is way cool and fast? |
| 20:10.09 | dataw0lf | I thought getting my RHCE would help me like, or at least understand, rpm based distros. |
| 20:10.13 | dataw0lf | 'twas wrong. |
| 20:10.32 | hans | first fix is free, man. |
| 20:10.35 | dataw0lf | hans: oh, yeah, I read those lies on the ml too. |
| 20:10.38 | levi | hans: And there's no Direct3d for Linux, so fewer 3d apps would get ported. Or something like that. Not that I really care, particularly. |
| 20:11.17 | hans | me either. I just find it odd that windows can dictate that it must run on top of direct3d. but if they let ms tell them that, then go ahead. |
| 20:13.13 | linuxalien | With fewer games on linux fewer people will switch to linux too. I can't say how many fewer but I imagine more than a few. :) |
| 20:13.42 | *** join/#utah fungus_ (n=fungus@firebat.aros.net) |
| 20:13.57 | levi | Heh. Phil Windley summarized Damian Conway's 'Perl Best Practices for OO' presentation at OSCON, and... yow, I can barely follow it. Makes Perl OO look like a total mess. |
| 20:14.05 | hans | i can't participate in this discussion because I don't give a whit about games except for a few decidedly non-mainstream ones. |
| 20:14.29 | levi | I also couldn't care less how many new people switch to Linux on the desktop. |
| 20:19.40 | levi | You know, one of the big disadvantages to learning Perl would be that I'd no longer be able to marvel at its sheer incomprehensibility to someone who doesn't know it. |
| 20:20.04 | Jayce^ | just like any other language :) |
| 20:20.12 | levi | No, not at all. |
| 20:20.33 | Jayce^ | bull |
| 20:21.03 | levi | Whatever. We've had this discussion before and I'm not going to have it again. |
| 20:21.21 | Jayce^ | s/perl/lisp/ same damn argument |
| 20:23.00 | levi | No, if you recall, I think they're imcomprehensible to the novice for entirely different reasons. |
| 20:23.34 | Jayce^ | whatever.. |
| 20:23.56 | tene | levi: I'd be interested in hearing what your reasons are. |
| 20:24.00 | *** join/#utah hans (i=fugalh@falcon.fugal.net) |
| 20:24.02 | levi | Primarily, that perl has a ton of implicit behavior and is syntax heavy, while Lisp is a very simple, but foreign syntax. |
| 20:24.40 | tene | hmm |
| 20:25.08 | tene | could you elaborate, possibly with some examples? |
| 20:27.42 | hans | jsmith: looks like fxotune is only for tdm (not x100p) |
| 20:28.34 | levi | I'm already familiar with the syntactic tradition that Perl derives from, so that's not the barrier to my understanding of perl code. Whereas Lisp derives from a totally different syntactic tradition, but is otherwise very explicit in how it's written. |
| 20:28.50 | levi | I was looking at this page: http://www.windley.com/archives/2005/08/best_practices.shtml |
| 20:29.09 | tene | and what exactly do you mean by "syntax heavy"? |
| 20:29.25 | hans | root@falcon:/etc/asterisk# /home/fugalh/src/zaptel/fxotune -i 4 |
| 20:29.25 | hans | Skipping non-TDM / non-FXO |
| 20:29.25 | hans | fxotune: successfully set echo coeffecients on FXO modules |
| 20:29.35 | levi | Well, look at the first code block in that link. |
| 20:30.45 | Jayce^ | and how is that heavier than pretty much any other c-esque language out there? |
| 20:32.18 | levi | 'my % root_of', for example. What's % supposed to mean? Then there's @_ for parameters, there's \do, which I have no idea what it's supposed to do. I don't know what 'bless' is supposed to do, but that's not really syntax. |
| 20:33.56 | levi | And then there are a few instances I can't remember specifics of where there are some implicit variables that you can use with io and such so you don't have to define your own variable. |
| 20:34.03 | Jayce^ | sigils are nice, says it's a hash...\do is creating an anonymous method (creating an enclosure), bless is the basic 'object creation function' |
| 20:34.31 | levi | So the % is a sigil attached to root_of? |
| 20:34.34 | Jayce^ | @_ is the default stack.. |
| 20:34.42 | Jayce^ | yeah, he just put a space in when he typed it |
| 20:35.37 | Bradipo | Anyone know of a good RBL where one can upload 5000 spam messages at once? |
| 20:36.13 | Jayce^ | the whole bless \do is a way of doing what most perl OO folks do in three lines into one, while also making use of an enclosure to protect information |
| 20:36.28 | Jayce^ | which is part of what he teaches in the lesson, why they are useful/good |
| 20:36.32 | Jayce^ | which is something that lisp teaches too |
| 20:36.46 | dataw0lf | Bradipo: DNSRBL? |
| 20:37.16 | levi | Jayce^: I'm not arguing with his lessons, which I'm sure are really good perl practices. |
| 20:37.41 | Bradipo | dnsrbl.com resolves to 127.0.0.1... |
| 20:37.47 | Bradipo | dataw0lf: Which one are you talking about? |
| 20:37.49 | *** part/#utah linuxalien (n=bastage@c-24-2-80-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 20:38.12 | mrpull_ | anybody noticing routing problems on Sprint's network? |
| 20:40.21 | Jayce^ | levi, think of it as providing a way to have those features you like in lisp, along with the things you like in most every other language too :) |
| 20:40.26 | dataw0lf | Bradipo: huh, that's weird, dnsrbl.org just up and vanished. |
| 20:40.51 | Bradipo | Ahh, .org... |
| 20:41.02 | Bradipo | Yeah, looks like its gone. |
| 20:41.30 | jsmith | mrpull_: I'm seeing problems between Sprint in Boston and Verio in San Diego, but other than that, I'm not seeing anything from here... |
| 20:42.10 | levi | Jayce^: I'm not saying that perl is bad because it's incomprehensible to me right now. I'm just saying it has a significant learning curve. You probably climbed it gradually, and a long time ago, so I don't really expect you to have the same perspective I do. |
| 20:42.32 | tene | I climbed it rapidly rather recently |
| 20:43.01 | levi | I'm also sure I'd have no trouble actually learning it if I took the time. |
| 20:43.03 | Jayce^ | my argument is that it's curve *really* isn't much harder than most of it's "competitors", C,PHP,Python,ruby,etc.. not really more syntax.. |
| 20:43.16 | mrpull_ | jsmith: thanks. it isn't affecting me, but one of my customers |
| 20:43.26 | hans | openssl sha1 =? SSHA |
| 20:43.50 | jsmith | mrpull_: Check out http://scoreboard.keynote.com |
| 20:44.10 | levi | Jayce^: Well, this is a measurable thing, actually. It would be interesting to compare the size of the grammars that accepted C, Perl, Python, PHP, and Ruby. |
| 20:44.47 | Jayce^ | one good place to look at that would actually be the parrot project, having to create a VM and syntax that can handle allof those |
| 20:46.41 | mrpull_ | jsmith: subscription site? |
| 20:48.17 | *** join/#utah GvzEvxre (n=timr@pdpc/supporter/bronze/TimRiker) |
| 20:48.17 | *** mode/#utah [+o GvzEvxre] by ChanServ |
| 20:48.48 | levi | Hmm. Apparently perl's grammar is too complex to be expressed in BNF or EBNF. |
| 20:49.06 | levi | I keep running across "the only thing that can parse perl is perl" |
| 20:49.11 | Jayce^ | :) |
| 20:49.18 | Jayce^ | hence perl 6 :) |
| 20:49.24 | Jayce^ | perl5 internals are nasty... |
| 20:49.38 | jsmith | mrpull_: http://scoreboard.keynote.com/ shouldn't be |
| 20:49.44 | jsmith | mrpull_: Their other services are |
| 20:50.00 | levi | Yeah. Well, I think this supports my argument, even if it doesn't clinch it. |
| 20:51.06 | Jayce^ | actually the largest part of the problem is the regex syntax, which that would include |
| 20:51.07 | mrpull_ | jsmith: thanks. it is asking for credentials. |
| 20:51.23 | Jayce^ | that get's tough when you have a separate embedded language inside your language |
| 20:52.09 | jsmith | mrpull_: Seriously? |
| 20:52.19 | mrpull_ | jsmith: ahhh... if I click a link from the home page I get a grid now -- no credentials needed |
| 20:52.36 | mrpull_ | if I go directly to the URL you mentioned it asks for user/pass |
| 20:52.59 | Jayce^ | if you have an account you get your own stuff, that's probably why |
| 20:53.27 | jsmith | Jayce^: But I'm not logged into my own account. |
| 20:54.28 | sjansen | ~lart RBLs |
| 20:57.25 | Maquis | ~beat sjansen |
| 20:57.26 | ibot | ACTION beats sjansen with a large stick. |
| 20:58.41 | levi | Jayce^: Sure, but having regular expressions built into the syntax of the language means you add that complexity to the language and not a library. You can't read too many useful perl programs without understanding the syntax of regular expressions and how they interact with the rest of perl. Regular expressions are hardly ever used in C, though, and you can't conceivably consider their syntax along with the syntax of C when comparing languages. |
| 20:58.41 | *** join/#utah emcnabb (n=emcnabb@bi01p1.co.us.ibm.com) [NETSPLIT VICTIM] |
| 20:59.08 | levi | Jayce^: The complexity is the price perl pays for the integration of stuff. |
| 20:59.36 | Jayce^ | it's the point of perl, really, the practical toolkit of what previously were disparate concepts |
| 20:59.43 | *** join/#utah vontrapp (i=fuglv@falcon.fugal.net) |
| 20:59.45 | sjansen | As compared the complexity of deciding which of the many possible regex implementations to use with your C app? |
| 20:59.45 | hans | how does one get from say the output of cut (or a pwent) to a bash array? |
| 20:59.46 | vontrapp | ~lart hans |
| 21:00.05 | Jayce^ | sjansen, hey, at least those are better than certain other languages :) |
| 21:00.46 | *** join/#utah vex (i=nwood@stutter.prohosting.com) |
| 21:01.00 | sjansen | to paraphrase another language "perl comes with batteries included" |
| 21:01.07 | levi | Jayce^: And thus you have the complexity of a bunch of different systems, plus the complexity of adding them together. I agree it's the point of perl, but I also believe it's made perl more complex than other languages that weren't trying to mix a bunch of different syntaxes together. |
| 21:01.24 | sjansen | Like Java? |
| 21:01.44 | levi | sjansen: I've never used a regular expression library in any of my C code. |
| 21:01.50 | Jayce^ | levi, but then let's compare, say PHP, whose whole point was to strip out the 'extra' stuff from perl... |
| 21:01.51 | levi | sjansen: What about Java? |
| 21:01.56 | Jayce^ | is it's syntax actually easier? |
| 21:02.06 | levi | Jayce^: Believe me, I don't have a high opinion of PHP. |
| 21:02.08 | sjansen | as easy as a straight jacket |
| 21:02.54 | Jayce^ | but that's the exact argument most php folks use for promoting/learning php over perl.. |
| 21:03.26 | levi | I think the syntax for PHP is probably a bit more regular, but the rest of the language is a total mess. |
| 21:03.39 | levi | And I've never said anything about PHP before you brought it up. |
| 21:04.12 | Jayce^ | levi, note, I said php folks... same could be said of most other people promoting language $x over perl |
| 21:04.36 | sjansen | "I like bf because its syntax is simple!" |
| 21:04.53 | vontrapp | i like ibot cause her syntax is simple |
| 21:04.56 | vontrapp | ~lart sjansen |
| 21:04.59 | Jayce^ | sjansen, I almost brought that up earlier :) but it's such a *special* case :) |
| 21:05.29 | levi | Jayce^: Because most languages DO have a simpler syntax than perl. |
| 21:06.12 | levi | PHP just went off and screwed up in an entirely different way. |
| 21:06.15 | *** join/#utah neybar_laptop (n=jalance@pollux.northsky.com) |
| 21:06.45 | Jayce^ | neybar_laptop, just couldn't keep out eh? tired of looking over my shoulder? :) |
| 21:06.47 | levi | (not that I think that perl is a screw-up, I just think it's a mess) |
| 21:06.48 | sjansen | levi: Anybody that has nice things to say about C++ is disqualified from criticizing Perl. |
| 21:06.51 | neybar_laptop | pretty much |
| 21:07.22 | levi | sjansen: I have nice things to say about particular parts of C++ in comparison to C. |
| 21:07.34 | sjansen | heh |
| 21:08.05 | sjansen | I have nice things to say about PHP in comparision to Ruby... no... wait, no I don't. |
| 21:08.11 | levi | I have plenty of critical things to say about C++, too. |
| 21:08.54 | tene | sjansen: do you have nice things to say about PHP in comparison to anything at all? |
| 21:09.08 | neybar_laptop | it beats out VB? |
| 21:09.09 | Jayce^ | VB |
| 21:09.21 | levi | It's up there with perl in the 'really complex' languages, but it tends to be a bit more explicit and verbose than perl, which lends to readability. The devil is in the details in C++, though. |
| 21:09.38 | sjansen | I prefer PHP over C++. |
| 21:10.06 | sjansen | PHP is good for hacking together _very_ simple web apps. |
| 21:10.27 | sjansen | PHP == shell scripting for the web |
| 21:10.39 | sjansen | Good for quick one-offs. Lousy for big stuff. |
| 21:10.44 | tene | and for adding a small bit of dynamic functionality to an otherwise static website. |
| 21:11.30 | tene | I shudder at the hacks I've seen lately that people have had to use to get their large PHP apps working. |
| 21:11.32 | levi | I don't think there's much comparison between php and C++. |
| 21:11.59 | sjansen | You're right, PHP can conceivably be learned in a lifetime. |
| 21:12.35 | sjansen | C++ -- the J2EE of languages! |
| 21:12.43 | levi | You can learn and create nice programs in several different subsets of C++. |
| 21:13.21 | *** join/#utah orbit_ (n=hanksdc_@pollux.northsky.com) |
| 21:13.39 | tene | how much do these subsets differ, levi? |
| 21:13.50 | Jayce^ | howdy orbit_, long time no see :) |
| 21:13.58 | orbit_ | Thought I'd join the fun. |
| 21:14.08 | Jayce^ | tired of reading over the shoulder too ? |
| 21:14.08 | orbit_ | Need to steal my nick back, though. |
| 21:14.11 | *** join/#utah JoshH (n=josh@josh.dsl.aros.net) |
| 21:14.30 | levi | tene: Sometimes significantly. For example, you can achieve polymorphism through both the OO system and the template system. |
| 21:14.44 | levi | tene: Or you can write straight C programs in it. |
| 21:15.01 | sjansen | Mostly straight C programs. |
| 21:15.11 | sjansen | The always turn out a little crooked. |
| 21:15.25 | levi | Heh. |
| 21:16.02 | orbit | Ah, that's better. |
| 21:16.45 | levi | I'd like something like templates in C without all the OO baggage. |
| 21:19.12 | Bradipo | For what its worth, I prefer templates in C without C++ as well. :-) |
| 21:20.00 | levi | Is there such a thing, or do you just use a C++ compiler for it? |
| 21:20.02 | Bradipo | But that sounds more like the makings of a macro. |
| 21:20.34 | Bradipo | Doesn't exist except through macros most likely. |
| 21:20.36 | levi | Well, C++ was initially just a macroprocessor. |
| 21:21.01 | levi | But C macros aren't up to the task. |
| 21:21.21 | Bradipo | Depends. I've seem some pretty interesting macros. |
| 21:21.57 | levi | Well, I wouldn't want to try to implement a generic programming mechanism for C in C macros. |
| 21:28.02 | levi | I don't really like to do much with C macros at all. |
| 21:28.24 | sjansen | Destroys the beautiful simplicity of C. |
| 21:29.40 | sjansen | ~whack Jayce^ |
| 21:29.40 | ibot | ACTION whacks Jayce^ upside the head. |
| 21:35.17 | levi | I don't know about beautiful simplicity. C macros are just a disgustingly weak system, and not at all safe to use for anything more complex than conditional compilation of sections of code or defining constants, which really should be better supported in the language itself. |
| 21:38.36 | Jayce^ | levi, http://www.webpronews.com/webdevelopment/webapplications/wpn-27-20030702Perl6DesignPhilosophy.html |
| 21:38.51 | Jayce^ | specifically, check the section on "the waterbed theory of language design" |
| 21:44.39 | *** join/#utah hagna (n=me@67.50.46.118) |
| 21:46.43 | levi | Jayce^: That's all nice, and I agree with it to an extent. I'm sure perl is very readable when you know perl, and the human language influences and such sound like a plausible idea. But that all assumes you've taken the time to lern perl and you're using it frequently enough to keep it fresh in your mind. Human languages are complex, and take a while to learn. |
| 21:47.52 | neybar_laptop | so any language you aren't currently comfortable with is a bad language? |
| 21:47.55 | levi | Jayce^: I've never said that Perl is hard to read for Perl programmers. I've never said that Perl is uncomfortable to use for Perl programmers. I've just said that Perl is relatively inaccessible to non-Perl programmers, and that article doesn't say anything that'd disagree with that notion. |
| 21:48.04 | levi | neybar_laptop: I never said it was 'bad'. |
| 21:48.36 | levi | neybar_language: I said it was complicated, messy, and had a learning curve before you could read a lot of it. |
| 21:48.50 | levi | Uh, that was to neybar_laptop. |
| 21:48.53 | *** join/#utah bwhiteley (n=bwhitele@charybdis-ext.suse.de) |
| 21:49.32 | levi | Human languages are complicated, messy, and have a fairly steep learning curve before you can read a lot of them. |
| 21:49.43 | Jayce^ | but the theory is promoting the aspect that it sin't *more* difficult because it maps the encessary complexity into something you already use daily.. |
| 21:49.44 | levi | Inasmuch as perl is a human language, it shares those qualities. |
| 21:50.08 | Jayce^ | but the complexity is equal in all, given the same functionality |
| 21:50.08 | tene | and computer languages are relatively inaccessible to non-programmers |
| 21:50.22 | RyanE | fortunately. :) |
| 21:50.34 | levi | Jayce^: That's not at all what it's saying. The document is about /using/ the language, not learning it. |
| 21:50.57 | Jayce^ | applies equally.. |
| 21:51.04 | levi | No, I don't think so. |
| 21:51.40 | Jayce^ | if you can speak a language, the ability to *speak* a new language is easier... so mapping onto that construct is a way of making it easier |
| 21:51.42 | levi | Human languages are harder to learn /because/ of their ambiguities, complexities, and other features that make them attractive to their frequent users. |
| 21:52.08 | tene | I don't find ambiguities attractive to my natural language use. |
| 21:52.22 | tene | Ambiguities in natural languages actually really piss me off. |
| 21:54.31 | levi | Jayce^: So, is it easier to learn enough French to read a grade school primer or enough Ada to read a simple program? Is it easier to express a complicated idea in French or Ada? |
| 21:55.03 | *** join/#utah TimRiker (n=timr@pdpc/supporter/bronze/TimRiker) |
| 21:55.03 | *** mode/#utah [+o TimRiker] by ChanServ |
| 21:56.49 | Jayce^ | depends, are you already a computer programmer? |
| 21:57.31 | tene | Jayce^: what's the answer for (yes, no)? |
| 21:57.42 | Jayce^ | because you already then understand many of the concepts that apply... it's the concept of applying the principles you already now towards the new learning |
| 21:58.01 | levi | Sure. I'm assuming you already know a human language and a computer language. |
| 21:58.56 | levi | There are mappings between human languages, but you still have to learn the correspondences before you can pick up a new one. |
| 21:59.13 | Jayce^ | correct, but it sure is easier |
| 21:59.17 | levi | And there are a lot more to learn between two human languages than between two programming languages. |
| 21:59.31 | hagna | does not being able to express yourself in a language limit your scope of thought? |
| 21:59.58 | levi | So, if a programming language is more like a human language, it's going to have more correspondences to learn. |
| 22:00.18 | levi | But may be more 'natural' to use afterward, if you agree with the paper. |
| 22:00.41 | Jayce^ | but a) those concepts are already there b) that complexity still must exist somewhere, it's just your choice of where to put it |
| 22:00.43 | levi | hagna: That's an entirely different question. |
| 22:00.55 | Jayce^ | hence the waterbed theory |
| 22:00.56 | hagna | levi: true |
| 22:01.19 | levi | Jayce^: Yes, the concepts are already there. But there's a lot more to learn before you can read. |
| 22:01.48 | Jayce^ | so, do you ever find yourself approaching non-computer problems differently since learning lisp? |
| 22:03.41 | bwhiteley | Hi TimRiker! |
| 22:04.32 | levi | Jayce^: Not really, but I don't see the relevance of that to our discussion either. |
| 22:04.58 | TimRiker | bwhiteley: heya. you heard I'm back in the area, yes? up in south jordan. |
| 22:05.29 | bwhiteley | TimRiker: no, I hadn't heard. What are you doing? |
| 22:05.35 | Jayce^ | it's exactly what we're discussing.. because lisp (this case) moves it's complexity to different areas, you've approached things differently, which usually, you then map back to other parts of thinking.. reverse direction of the reason perl chose to map to language |
| 22:06.33 | TimRiker | bwhiteley: working on the new FamilySearch.org in SLC. |
| 22:06.46 | TimRiker | Linux clusters all the way. ;-) |
| 22:07.00 | neybar_laptop | sweet |
| 22:07.33 | bwhiteley | TimRiker: sounds like a nice landing for an ex-SilverPlatter, ex-Caldera boy. |
| 22:07.52 | Jayce^ | TimRiker, you coming tonight? |
| 22:09.12 | Maquis | weirdest problem... |
| 22:09.26 | levi | Jayce^: You want to somehow make Perl's complexity disappear by making it a natural language and therefore already familiar. That's just not the case. The complexity of Perl is in the syntax, and that means it takes more learning to pick up the syntax. What you get afterwards is ease of use. That's the tradeoff. It's perhaps partially supplanted by familiarity of natural language concepts, but if one is already familiar with math or computer l |
| 22:09.32 | Maquis | when i tried to log into my windoze box here at work a few minutes ago, most keys wouldn't do anything |
| 22:09.52 | Maquis | however, if i pressed backspace, it would display a little * in the password field |
| 22:10.02 | Maquis | and if i pressed h, it would act as a backspace |
| 22:10.11 | Maquis | none of the other keys did *anything* |
| 22:10.18 | Maquis | anyone ever seen this? |
| 22:11.19 | levi | Jayce^: And has any computer language you've learned made you approach non-computer things differently? |
| 22:11.28 | Jayce^ | yes |
| 22:11.42 | Jayce^ | just as spoken languages have modified the way I've approached things |
| 22:11.50 | Jayce^ | and thought about them |
| 22:12.05 | levi | Some examples would be enlightening. |
| 22:12.07 | Jayce^ | mental processes are constrained by the language they are thought/cast in |
| 22:12.18 | Jayce^ | can you think, outside of a language? |
| 22:12.28 | TimRiker | Jayce^: probably not. move is settling down, but my 6 year old broke his arm last weekend so things are busy around the house again. |
| 22:13.55 | levi | Jayce^: Strong linguistic determinism has some pretty strong evidence against it. |
| 22:14.36 | Jayce^ | and has very strong evidence *for* it.. |
| 22:14.56 | levi | Except that no serious linguists believe in it anymore. |
| 22:15.08 | Jayce^ | proof |
| 22:15.19 | levi | What? |
| 22:15.19 | Maquis | anyone? |
| 22:15.31 | Jayce^ | of your statement, I've never seen that |
| 22:15.45 | Jayce^ | I've seen plenty otherwise |
| 22:17.05 | levi | Are you saying that language determines the limits of our ability to think about things, or that it influences it? |
| 22:17.41 | Jayce^ | influences, constrains and promotes.. |
| 22:17.43 | Maquis | has anybody seen anything like the problem i just described? |
| 22:17.43 | levi | The former is strong linguistic determinism, and the latter is weak linguistic determinism. |
| 22:17.53 | Maquis | or are you all too busy in a flame-war to notice??? |
| 22:18.00 | levi | Maquis: No, I haven't. |
| 22:18.13 | neybar_laptop | we noticed, but don't have an answer? |
| 22:18.53 | neybar_laptop | additionally it was an uninteresting problem... :P |
| 22:19.07 | Maquis | neybar_laptop: it's uninteresting? |
| 22:19.27 | Maquis | and figuring out how to do it to someone would be even funnier |
| 22:19.51 | Jayce^ | bend out a pin or two from the keyboard plug.. |
| 22:20.04 | Jayce^ | or make a keyboard-killer |
| 22:20.06 | TimRiker | Maquis: sounds like a stuck/reversed ctrl key, yes? should be a way to get the stickykeys to do that. Ie: treat ctrl as a ctrl-lock etc. |
| 22:20.34 | Maquis | but... ctrl-backspace doesn't normally type anything |
| 22:20.41 | Maquis | and ctrl-h doesn't normally delete |
| 22:20.43 | Maquis | right? |
| 22:20.57 | Jayce^ | you sure? try ctrl-alt-backspace on your linux box and see what comes out... |
| 22:20.59 | Jayce^ | :-p |
| 22:21.03 | TimRiker | dunno. /me has not used windows in quite sometime. |
| 22:21.24 | Maquis | Jayce^: this is in windoze |
| 22:21.29 | Maquis | TimRiker: me neither |
| 22:21.33 | Maquis | aside from this summer |
| 22:21.34 | Jayce^ | just comparing :) |
| 22:21.41 | Maquis | ~lart Jayce^ |
| 22:21.43 | TimRiker | ~backwards |
| 22:21.43 | ibot | Did you know, Ctrl-Q makes your text go backwards in many IRC clients? You might be able to read this: .stneilc tsom sesolc tsuj siht esruoc fO |
| 22:22.05 | levi | Jayce^: If languages determined the concepts we could manipulate, it would be impossible to translate between languages. Because translation is possible, there must be some something to an idea beyond language. Some things are just a lot harder to express in some languages than others. So, I agree that they influence what we think about (since we'll typically avoid things that are too hard to think about in our language) but not that they strong |
| 22:22.29 | TimRiker | levi: not all things translate. |
| 22:22.41 | levi | TimRiker: Not directly, no. |
| 22:22.42 | hans | like what? |
| 22:23.04 | hans | turing complete languages can be "translated" between |
| 22:23.05 | Jayce^ | and why so many verses start with '*' |
| 22:23.10 | hans | performance notwithstanding |
| 22:23.19 | levi | TimRiker: But you can generally explain to someone what a concept means, even if it takes a lot more verbiage. |
| 22:23.32 | hans | or are we talking natural languages? |
| 22:23.35 | levi | hans: Sure, but we've now gone into the realm of natural languages. |
| 22:23.42 | Jayce^ | hans, natural |
| 22:23.49 | hans | ah. well if an idea can be expressed on a tape... |
| 22:23.57 | Jayce^ | levi, but then that's an example of moving complexity |
| 22:24.06 | levi | Jayce^: Yup. |
| 22:24.26 | Jayce^ | which is what the waterbed theory is talking about |
| 22:24.37 | levi | Jayce^: Duh. I understood that. |
| 22:25.06 | TimRiker | things like swapping two bytes. easy and extremely fast in assembly (well, most...) but not exposed in other languages. |
| 22:25.36 | levi | Jayce^: I'm just saying that perl's complexity is arranged such that it's hard for someone who hasn't learned perl to understand it! |
| 22:26.09 | TimRiker | generally the more abstract the languages get, the more difficult it becomes to express a byteswap. |
| 22:26.14 | levi | Python is easier for someone who hasn't learned Python to understand, because its complexity was allotted differently. It makes it harder to do some things in Python. |
| 22:26.39 | Jayce^ | and what I'm saying is all languages have that complexity.. and perl is exposing it in a way that is easier to learn.. |
| 22:26.58 | TimRiker | hogwash |
| 22:27.13 | hans | ~pig |
| 22:27.13 | ibot | *oink* *oink* *oink* |
| 22:27.14 | Jayce^ | it's like saying it's easier to learn something when you have a mnemonic.. |
| 22:27.32 | levi | I agree that all languages have complexity. |
| 22:28.44 | levi | Gah. I didn't want to get into this again. Obviously we aren't going to agree on this point. |
| 22:29.06 | vontrapp | the learning curves are reversed for each camp |
| 22:29.33 | vontrapp | in perl, you struggle a lot to get proficient, but once you've learned it well, the things you can do increase rapidly |
| 22:30.21 | vontrapp | with python, you can learn to understand it basically pretty quickly and be able to do stuff right off, but when you try to get real complex, you have to work at it and it becomes more difficult |
| 22:30.39 | vontrapp | or somethilg like that |
| 22:30.54 | levi | Right, that's what I arguing. |
| 22:31.39 | levi | But Jayce wants Perl to be both easier to learn and easier to do powerful things with. No complexity tradeoff at all, since it can take advantage of being somehow similar to a human language, which we're already familiar with. |
| 22:31.50 | Jayce^ | and yet, when I was switching languages, I was looking at java, python, and perl... deciding what I liked... I found perl easier than the other two |
| 22:32.24 | Jayce^ | levi, no, the complexity is there, you just are already familiar with it |
| 22:33.10 | levi | Jayce^: Okay, well, that's essentially what I meant when I was trying to depict your stance. |
| 22:33.39 | Jayce^ | right |
| 22:33.46 | levi | But I don't agree, and that's about all there is to be said about it at this point. |
| 22:37.55 | *** join/#utah jce_ (I=jce@192.41.88.101) |
| 22:38.32 | jce_ | anyone going to video tape the Damian Conway talk tonight? I can't make it, but would like to see it. |
| 22:38.36 | TimRiker | weel, if what you know is sed and awk, then you would "know" a lot of perl. |
| 22:38.41 | Jayce^ | no |
| 22:38.46 | TimRiker | ~spell weel |
| 22:38.54 | Jayce^ | jce_, this is how he makes money, so no taping :) |
| 22:38.58 | TimRiker | yeah, Peel. that's it. |
| 22:47.30 | *** join/#utah decriptor (n=decripto@166.70.98.58) |
| 22:57.28 | vontrapp | does php have a function to print something to the error logs? |
| 23:01.44 | *** part/#utah orbit (n=hanksdc_@pollux.northsky.com) |
| 23:02.47 | *** join/#utah gthornock (n=gthornoc@158.91.203.11) |
| 23:06.11 | jce_ | too bad |
| 23:09.20 | *** join/#utah jce (i=jce@192.41.88.101) |
| 23:13.55 | *** part/#utah Newsome (n=sorenson@obelix.cs.byu.edu) |
| 23:24.58 | vontrapp | so what's with this n= and i= stuff in host information? |
| 23:26.45 | Bradipo | I was wondering that. |
| 23:26.50 | Bradipo | I think i= is Identified. |
| 23:26.56 | Bradipo | As in identified to NickServ. |
| 23:27.23 | vontrapp | hmm, makes sense as far as the i goes |
| 23:27.28 | Bradipo | n= might be not identified. |
| 23:27.37 | Bradipo | I think I saw one more... |
| 23:27.57 | vontrapp | i guess the = thing is just some strange delimiter then |
| 23:28.33 | Bradipo | Odd to say the least. |
| 23:29.11 | vontrapp | i see both N and I as well |
| 23:29.25 | vontrapp | very identified and very not-identified? |
| 23:29.39 | Bradipo | Well, they show up in different places though. |
| 23:29.59 | Bradipo | Oh I see. |
| 23:30.15 | Bradipo | Yeah, there is an upper and lower case, I noticed that as well but didn't know if it had any significance. |
| 23:30.49 | *** part/#utah Bradipo (I=bradipo@166.70.238.3) |
| 23:30.51 | *** join/#utah Bradipo (I=bradipo@166.70.238.3) |
| 23:31.00 | Bradipo | Did that have i= or I=? |
| 23:31.03 | vontrapp | I |
| 23:31.09 | Bradipo | Hmm. |
| 23:31.28 | Bradipo | Actually, have you ever seen an i=? |
| 23:31.33 | vontrapp | yeah |
| 23:31.42 | Bradipo | I don't recall seeing lower case i, only I. |
| 23:31.43 | vontrapp | more than I |
| 23:31.54 | Bradipo | jce (i=jce@192.41.88.101) has joined #utah |
| 23:32.05 | Bradipo | When I joined was it I or i? |
| 23:32.15 | vontrapp | well, maybe not more |
| 23:32.24 | vontrapp | I agian when you joined |
| 23:32.33 | Bradipo | I on part and I on join... interesting. |
| 23:32.50 | Bradipo | Yet jce was i on join. |
| 23:33.18 | Bradipo | http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#userequals |
| 23:34.16 | Bradipo | Hmm, not sure that clarifies it as well as I would like. |
| 23:35.18 | Bradipo | Doesn't address i vs I. |
| 23:59.24 | *** join/#utah linuxalien (n=bastage@c-24-2-80-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |