00:00:46 greyhame [n=jao@134.Red-83-50-67.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 00:00:58 dysinger [n=dysinger@cpe-75-85-132-170.hawaii.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 00:01:07 -!- greyhame [n=jao@134.Red-83-50-67.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has left #scheme 00:02:45 -!- copumpkin [n=copumpki@c-24-63-67-154.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 00:05:45 -!- hotblack23 [n=jh@p5B053FDB.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit ["Leaving."] 00:10:12 copumpkin [n=copumpki@c-24-63-67-154.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 00:11:59 bombshelter13b [n=bombshel@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 00:15:28 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has joined #scheme 00:18:46 -!- perdix_ [n=perdix@sxemacs/devel/perdix] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 00:20:22 r0bby [n=wakawaka@guifications/user/r0bby] has joined #scheme 00:28:03 synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has joined #scheme 00:31:35 -!- samth is now known as samth_away 00:41:44 jcowan [n=jcowan@72.14.228.137] has joined #scheme 00:42:03 -!- jcowan [n=jcowan@72.14.228.137] has left #scheme 00:49:16 -!- underspecified [n=eric@softbank220043052007.bbtec.net] has quit [] 00:53:58 splork [n=ben@dsl092-075-228.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #scheme 00:58:07 -!- synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 01:03:59 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has quit [] 01:05:24 -!- davazp [n=user@143.Red-88-1-103.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 01:09:51 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has joined #scheme 01:12:05 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has quit [Client Quit] 01:12:56 synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has joined #scheme 01:15:04 -!- masm [n=masm@bl9-115-164.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit ["Leaving."] 01:19:51 -!- ray [i=ray@drong.notacat.org] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 01:19:54 ray [i=ray@drong.notacat.org] has joined #scheme 01:29:30 -!- mabes [n=mabes@66.236.74.194] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 01:34:23 underspecified [n=eric@walnut.naist.jp] has joined #scheme 01:36:35 -!- mmc [n=mima@cs27122078.pp.htv.fi] has quit ["Leaving."] 01:36:41 segoe [n=segoe@83.231.46.49] has joined #scheme 01:37:11 -!- bokr [n=eduska@95.154.102.124] has quit ["Ex-Chat"] 01:37:26 bokr [n=eduska@95.154.102.124] has joined #scheme 01:47:26 -!- mrsolo [n=mrsolo@nat/yahoo/x-vivoapslnsjpulxj] has quit ["Leaving"] 01:58:51 mabes [n=mabes@bmabey.fttp.xmission.com] has joined #scheme 02:00:35 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110] has joined #scheme 02:05:14 Penth_ [n=rachel@pool-98-114-153-236.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 02:05:56 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-98-114-159-131.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 02:09:53 -!- flonklebonkle [n=nobody@p5B03A18E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 02:16:25 -!- synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has quit ["Leaving."] 02:18:44 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110] has quit [] 02:19:48 MononcQc [n=mononcqc@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 02:22:39 -!- rstandy [n=rastandy@net-93-144-189-93.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 02:22:55 synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has joined #scheme 02:29:57 -!- mejja [n=user@c-49b6e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 02:33:39 -!- bgs100 [n=ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit ["Leaving"] 02:48:54 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has joined #scheme 02:51:24 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has quit [Client Quit] 02:52:19 -!- wgsilkie [i=wgsilkie@free-shell.eu] has quit ["ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)"] 02:53:06 -!- xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 02:53:25 so, still can't get the PLT SVN. 02:53:35 I tried a number of different strategies, but no such luck. 02:54:28 Getting non-recursively, adding some kind of halting problem solution, using the svn of subversion (which doesn't work with the svn of apr, go figure) 02:56:51 going to try non-recursive again in a minute 03:06:30 -!- MononcQc [n=mononcqc@modemcable062.225-20-96.mc.videotron.ca] has left #scheme 03:06:34 karlw [i=17389@tsunami.OCF.Berkeley.EDU] has joined #scheme 03:13:58 xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has joined #scheme 03:14:53 -!- minion [n=minion@common-lisp.net] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)] 03:15:07 -!- lisppaste [n=lisppast@common-lisp.net] has quit [No route to host] 03:15:39 -!- specbot [n=specbot@common-lisp.net] has quit [No route to host] 03:16:43 -!- Penth_ [n=rachel@pool-98-114-153-236.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 03:17:28 The main problem with PLT is that it is not written with the worse-is-better approach in mind. 03:18:44 One may make similar observations about RnRs and R(+ n 1)RS. 03:19:07 *eli* groans 03:21:56 *karlw* realizes his grievous error and starts the MrEd twitter client on his cell phone. 03:22:56 *synx* sighs, doesn't understand code distributey thingies enough to recommend what to do at this point. 03:23:40 All I can say is subversion has infinite loops, forwards incompatibility, is run by the (ugh) apache project and doesn't afraid of anything. 03:28:43 if it has infinite loops, chances are it's Turing complete. At least, that's good to know. 03:28:48 *Axioplase_* vanishes 03:32:47 frankly I don't think any program is Turing complete. They have to in some way be created from irreversible processes, since there isn't anything else in the universe. 03:33:06 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-92-105.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:40:27 synx, that's an assertion of belief, not a statement of fact. 03:40:42 As such, it makes your stance clear, but it does nothing to support your argument. 03:41:21 gnomon: if there were a reversible process in the universe, you could use it to create a perpetual energy generator. Therefore the very concept of such a process is rather absurd. 03:42:16 Only assuming the process generated energy. 03:43:04 Third law of thermodynamics states that every process above absolute zero increases in entropy. 03:43:06 http://snapplr.com/awy4 03:43:10 Therefore, it always halts. 03:43:13 whoops, wrong channel 03:43:54 blackened` [n=blackene@ip-89-102-22-70.karneval.cz] has joined #scheme 03:44:35 synx, and Newton's laws of motion state a bunch of things which turned out to not be entirely correct, either. 03:44:59 There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your natural philosophy. 03:45:23 -!- bombshelter13b [n=bombshel@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [] 03:46:11 well gnomon let me know once you've found a program that can generate unlimited power. I'm sure the world will thank you for solving the energy crisis. 03:49:51 bombshelter13b [n=bombshel@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has joined #scheme 03:50:25 flonklebonkle [n=nobody@p5B03B289.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #scheme 03:50:32 SharkBrain [n=gerard@210.48.104.34] has joined #scheme 03:52:35 tjafk [n=timj@e176205104.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 03:54:11 synx, you're either mis-stating your point or misunderstanding mine. Either way, this is hardly the forum for that discussion. 03:54:12 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-92-105.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 03:54:47 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-80-162.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:55:07 -!- SharkBrain [n=gerard@210.48.104.34] has quit [Client Quit] 04:08:54 -!- tjaway [n=timj@e176193205.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 04:09:46 -!- Nshag [n=shag@lns-bzn-35-82-250-241-252.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 04:10:07 Nshag [i=user@lns-bzn-35-82-250-241-252.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 04:23:24 -!- segoe [n=segoe@83.231.46.49] has quit [] 04:37:37 jonrafkind [n=jon@c-98-202-86-149.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 04:45:34 -!- bombshelter13b [n=bombshel@76-10-149-209.dsl.teksavvy.com] has quit [Client Quit] 04:46:50 Someone should write a program to randomly generate pleasing recitations of R5RS in Arabic. 04:48:29 awarrington_ [n=quassel@static-71-249-252-224.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 04:54:34 karlw: well I did make this once... https://synx.us.to/hidden/terrist.cgi 04:57:36 vaios [n=novalis@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de] has joined #scheme 04:57:52 Google translated that page for me, and it's ... shocking 04:58:15 -!- vaios [n=novalis@aixd3.rhrk.uni-kl.de] has left #scheme 04:58:47 also https://synx.us.to/hidden/terrist.cgi?timeLeft=600000 04:59:08 offby1: It's a great page to leave as the website open in fullscreen mode, when you're about ready to leave the computer lab or public library. 05:03:08 synx: Does David Horowitz have a dossier on you? 05:04:30 -!- awarrington [n=quassel@officebv.conductor.com] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 05:04:37 *karlw* likes peanuts, but not soda 05:09:07 *synx* forgets the significance of that quote. 05:11:09 samth [n=samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 05:20:52 awarrington [n=quassel@officebv.conductor.com] has joined #scheme 05:21:36 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has joined #scheme 05:21:51 The Ultimate Browser: function browse; { URL=$1; wget -qO- | less; } 05:22:59 err, function browse; { URL=$1; wget -qO- $URL | less; } 05:27:28 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has quit [] 05:31:24 function browse { (echo GET $1 HTTP/1.1; echo Host: $2; echo; ) | nc -q 1 -C `host $2 | awk '{print $3}' | head -n1` 80; } 05:37:15 -!- awarrington_ [n=quassel@static-71-249-252-224.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 05:39:34 -!- xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 05:42:42 MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has joined #scheme 05:44:09 oh dear... 05:44:12 -!- samth [n=samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 05:44:21 net/url doesn't even... damn 05:45:14 HEAD http://www.pixiv.net/member_illust.php?mode=medium&illust_id=5965262 HTTP/1.0\r\nHost: www.pixiv.net\r\n\r\n is wrong! 05:45:30 It's supposed to elide the host from the URL part. 05:48:51 xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has joined #scheme 05:54:05 not that "/member_illust.php?mode=medium&illust_id=5965262" is any URL at all without even a schema, but that strategy was established a bit before they figured out URLs. 05:54:23 maybe I should poke at my http 1.1 pipelining client library again... 06:02:18 -!- jmcphers [n=jmcphers@218.185.108.156] has quit ["Leaving..."] 06:08:53 -!- karlw [i=17389@tsunami.OCF.Berkeley.EDU] has left #scheme 06:21:35 -!- Nshag [i=user@lns-bzn-35-82-250-241-252.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 06:31:13 untouchabl [i=untoucha@dhcp-129-64-166-32.dorm.brandeis.edu] has joined #scheme 06:32:04 -!- ski_ [n=md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has quit ["Lost terminal"] 06:35:54 -!- xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 06:37:57 optimizer [n=x@128.12.241.170] has joined #scheme 06:38:03 are there any usable schemes that run on llvm? 06:38:11 i've been playing with llvm, and it's just awesome 06:44:49 -!- leppie|work [i=52d2e3c8@gateway/web/freenode/x-gekvbzjnbyysnlcb] has quit ["Page closed"] 06:49:12 -!- untouchable [i=untoucha@dhcp-129-64-166-32.dorm.brandeis.edu] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 07:01:09 -!- TR2N [i=email@89-180-135-135.net.novis.pt] has left #scheme 07:07:57 -!- chops [n=nope@202.3.37.233] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 07:08:06 chops [n=nope@dyn-128.greentreefrog.net.au] has joined #scheme 07:16:41 xwl_ [n=user@esprx01x.nokia.com] has joined #scheme 07:17:34 dysinger_ [n=dysinger@cpe-75-85-132-170.hawaii.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 07:20:32 -!- dysinger [n=dysinger@cpe-75-85-132-170.hawaii.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 07:20:33 -!- dysinger_ is now known as dysinger 07:34:23 prince [n=prince@203.246.179.177] has joined #scheme 07:37:33 attila_lendvai [n=ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has joined #scheme 07:41:55 mmc [n=mima@cs27122078.pp.htv.fi] has joined #scheme 07:46:38 -!- MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 07:46:51 MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has joined #scheme 08:00:59 leppie|work [i=52d2e3c8@gateway/web/freenode/x-fphbtzpmnqddlifu] has joined #scheme 08:02:52 -!- mmc [n=mima@cs27122078.pp.htv.fi] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 08:04:45 -!- Fufie [n=innocent@86.80-203-225.nextgentel.com] has quit ["Leaving"] 08:20:27 -!- Kusanagi [n=Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has quit [] 08:24:01 schmir [n=schmir@mail.brainbot.com] has joined #scheme 08:25:30 -!- jonrafkind [n=jon@c-98-202-86-149.hsd1.ut.comcast.net] has quit [Connection timed out] 08:26:49 Kusanagi [n=Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has joined #scheme 08:29:18 mmc [n=mima@esprx02x.nokia.com] has joined #scheme 08:29:50 -!- Kusanagi [n=Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has quit [Client Quit] 08:37:10 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 08:44:08 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 08:45:20 Kusanagi [n=Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has joined #scheme 08:57:35 Fufie [n=poff@Gatekeeper.vizrt.com] has joined #scheme 09:20:53 -!- dysinger [n=dysinger@cpe-75-85-132-170.hawaii.res.rr.com] has quit [] 09:31:13 -!- underspecified [n=eric@walnut.naist.jp] has quit [] 09:33:54 base3_ [n=base3@host81-141-232-102.wlms-broadband.com] has joined #scheme 09:33:58 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:33:59 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:33:59 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:00 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:01 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:03 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:03 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:05 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:06 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:08 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:10 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:12 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:14 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:16 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:18 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:20 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:22 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:24 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:26 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:28 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:30 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:32 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:34 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:36 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:38 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:34:39 -!- base3_ [n=base3@host81-141-232-102.wlms-broadband.com] has quit [Excess Flood] 09:36:37 Ohh, not this again 09:41:44 base3_ [n=base3@host81-141-232-102.wlms-broadband.com] has joined #scheme 09:44:52 kilimanjaro: what triggered this? 09:45:04 base3_: I'm impressed 09:45:26 copumpkin, i'm an operator in 2 different channels and have banned him their numerous times for basically being a troll 09:45:33 there* 09:45:36 blech, I'm sleepy 09:45:42 ah :) 09:46:01 -!- ChanServ has set mode +o foof 09:46:20 I'm impressed at his persistence 09:46:25 quite a grudge 09:46:29 Yea, truly 09:46:39 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:41 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:41 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:41 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:41 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:41 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:42 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:44 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:46 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:48 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:50 kilimanjaro is hugely retarded kilimanjaro is hugely retarded 09:46:50 -!- foof [n=user@FL1-119-239-8-134.osk.mesh.ad.jp] has been kicked from #scheme 09:47:54 I'd say it's probably worth just banning him, although he happens to have a ton of proxies. At one point in time about 10 different bans in #math were somehow related to him 09:48:20 Maybe I'll just make an alias to hang out in here, I don't imagine he'd spam the channel if I wasn't in here 09:48:40 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 09:49:59 -!- foof has set mode +b *!base3@host81-141-232-102.wlms-broadband.com 10:00:01 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 10:04:21 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 10:06:27 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 10:14:12 -!- clog [n=nef@bespin.org] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)] 10:15:43 mejja [n=user@c-49b6e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has joined #scheme 10:20:29 foof has op ? 10:22:22 optimizer: Nope, I just hacked your IRC client and made it look like I have ops. 10:22:53 in that case; you can also hack my irc client to make it look like i got kicked; so i'll assume you have ops 10:23:18 why is there no good scheme on llvm yet? 10:23:25 -!- ChanServ has set mode -o foof 10:23:29 there are so many schdmes out there with their own vm, jit, etc ... 10:23:38 and now that someone comes along and writes a nice jitted vm, 10:23:46 no scheme impl uses yet? :-) 10:23:54 Because LLVM is huge and complicated. 10:25:42 it's isa is quite elegant 10:29:26 -!- chops [n=nope@dyn-128.greentreefrog.net.au] has quit [] 10:33:08 -!- prince [n=prince@203.246.179.177] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 10:37:53 wingo [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 10:44:32 -!- optimizer [n=x@128.12.241.170] has quit ["leaving"] 10:53:47 -!- kilimanjaro [n=kilimanj@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit ["Leaving"] 10:55:42 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 11:00:45 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 11:01:38 mario-goulart [n=user@67.205.85.241] has joined #scheme 11:03:03 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-80-162.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 11:17:16 perdix [n=perdix@g225192246.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 11:19:22 -!- wingo [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 11:20:02 wingo [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 11:20:58 -!- MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 11:21:22 MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has joined #scheme 11:33:12 hmm, does PLT's `(scheme include)' library work from R6RS code? 11:33:15 I get: 11:33:34 masm [n=masm@bl5-104-95.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 11:35:00 AFAICT, this should be a valid `include' form; like the one used in lang/private/teach-shared.ss 11:37:57 lol rotty :) 11:38:29 IMO, I like the approach we (me and Ikarus) takes with read-annotated 11:39:44 leppie|work: I tried to emulate that on PLT, and realized it was more complicated, since you'd need to use the R6RS reader with `read-syntax', which I don't know if it's possible 11:39:56 rstandy [n=rastandy@net-93-144-209-166.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has joined #scheme 11:40:01 I've now given up on that, at least for now 11:41:06 But I'd still like to get PLT's include macro work from R6RS code, so I can provide an R6RS version of SRFI-67 without duplicating the code from the reference implementation 11:46:25 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 11:48:49 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 11:59:33 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 12:03:16 Transformer [n=Transfor@ool-43563460.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #scheme 12:03:38 ok, it seems I have to use the scheme/base or mzscheme languages to use the `include' macro 12:04:16 now how do I remove bindings from the language, so I can redefine e.g. `car' and `cdr'? 12:04:44 Ideally, I'd like to use a language that has only `provide' and `require' 12:04:48 visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has joined #scheme 12:06:52 -!- Transformer [n=Transfor@ool-43563460.dyn.optonline.net] has left #scheme 12:07:05 rotty: Why don't you just ask on the list? 12:07:17 Yeah, should do that 12:07:21 Keeping a single source for the r6rs library is certainly a good idea. 12:10:58 albacker [n=eni@ASt-Lambert-153-1-117-252.w90-2.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 12:11:20 functional programming Lecture's on youtube "Mit lectures " are great 12:17:24 Edico [n=Edico@unaffiliated/edico] has joined #scheme 12:27:25 wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 12:31:54 jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has joined #scheme 12:33:41 -!- wingo [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 12:35:10 how can i start plt interpreter ? 12:35:15 plt doesn't work 12:44:28 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 12:45:59 Jafet [n=Jafet@1.247.48.60.kmr02-home.tm.net.my] has joined #scheme 12:48:09 visof: If you are looking for just the REPL, try `mzscheme'; if you'd like the editor and GUI tools, try `drscheme'. 12:48:34 mrd`_ [n=matthew@shinobi.dempsky.org] has joined #scheme 12:48:46 underspecified [n=eric@softbank220043052007.bbtec.net] has joined #scheme 12:48:59 -!- wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 12:49:07 chandler thanks 12:49:28 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 12:49:54 wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 12:53:13 lisppaste [n=lisppast@common-lisp.net] has joined #scheme 12:54:48 minion [n=minion@common-lisp.net] has joined #scheme 12:54:56 specbot [n=specbot@common-lisp.net] has joined #scheme 12:57:11 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 12:59:26 (last '(for every one)) , doesn't work ? 13:00:54 -!- mrd` [n=matthew@shinobi.dempsky.org] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 13:01:24 (last 'oop) don't work too 13:01:33 is there something wrong ? 13:02:56 morrison [n=ekarasel@hopper.cs.bilgi.edu.tr] has joined #scheme 13:06:04 -!- MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@213.171.48.239] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 13:08:25 -!- splork [n=ben@dsl092-075-228.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit ["Computer has gone to sleep"] 13:10:05 'oop isn't string constants 13:11:46 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 13:12:42 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 13:15:37 xwl [n=user@125.34.173.222] has joined #scheme 13:17:26 davazp [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 13:24:24 samth [n=samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 13:28:04 ski_ [n=md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has joined #scheme 13:41:34 (first (bf '(go to hello))) 13:41:39 hi 13:41:45 is there anyone around ? 13:42:09 -!- morrison [n=ekarasel@hopper.cs.bilgi.edu.tr] has quit ["Leaving"] 13:50:27 -!- samth [n=samth@c-65-96-168-99.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 13:50:36 forcer [n=forcer@e177147131.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 13:54:55 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 13:55:31 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 14:00:32 visof: what is 'last'? 14:01:38 give the last thing 14:01:53 (last 'hello) should get 'o' 14:01:58 ok, but that is a non-standard procedure, so it could mean anything 14:02:39 what can 'thing' be? I would have thought it can only be a list 14:03:02 i watched that in lecture on youtube 14:03:06 (last 'hello) => o ; what is 'o'? a symbol or a char or string? 14:03:22 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmYqShvVDh4 14:03:30 yeah 14:03:33 it's o 14:03:39 sorry 14:04:43 -!- attila_lendvai [n=ati@catv-89-134-66-143.catv.broadband.hu] has quit ["..."] 14:05:01 error "no sense made" 14:05:08 i dunno, it sounds like LISP not scheme or by knowing the lecturer, he likes tonnes of little non-standard procedures 14:05:39 look at 'Simply Scheme' (i think that is what his book is caleld) 14:07:38 IIRC he treats symbols and strings the same 14:08:19 which is a very sad thing (IMO) 14:11:22 -!- Fufie [n=poff@Gatekeeper.vizrt.com] has quit ["Leaving"] 14:14:15 That's strange, because scheme doesn't 14:15:11 look at his book :( 14:15:35 i thought it might help my GF learn scheme, but it confused me more than anything else :p 14:15:50 -!- Jafet [n=Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit ["Leaving."] 14:15:55 Jafet1 [n=Jafet@1.247.48.60.kmr02-home.tm.net.my] has joined #scheme 14:16:09 -!- Jafet1 is now known as Jafet 14:20:03 sepult [n=levgue@xdsl-87-78-172-115.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 14:30:20 davazp` [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 14:31:10 Yes, he uses strings and symbols and I think even numbers as things that can be passed to `first', `second', `last', etc. 14:31:56 visof: The bottom line is that if you're trying to learn scheme with those lectures you'll need to find some library that implements those functions as done in the course. 14:32:33 -!- davazp [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 14:32:48 eli: I think 'Simply Scheme''s code does that, but it was too weird to port to R6RS 14:34:29 leppie: Yes, Simply Scheme is his textbook, so obviously it uses the same thing. 14:34:40 eli is that course good ? 14:34:44 As for porting to R6RS, I don't think that it should be too difficult. 14:35:19 R6RS should actually make it easy, since you can define `first' and `car' to work on anything you want without changing any other code. 14:35:24 eli: he has a very weird style, well to me anyways 14:35:51 eli: that would involve 1. understanding everything, 2. rewrite everything, 3. no thanks :) 14:36:00 visof: Ugh... You don't want to hear my opinion about it... But it really depends on what your goals + needs are. For example, if you're a Berkley student, then you don't have much choice. 14:36:30 leppie: Well, FWIW, his ideas on the recent R6RS circus are much more ... difficult to swallow. 14:37:03 (Eg, the sacred REPL that should dictate how everything works, and fexprs, and other dusty oddities.) 14:37:07 eli: you try read this: http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/~bh/ssch27/appendix-simply.html 14:37:07 eli is there another online good courses somewhere ? 14:38:19 it just looks like he is using a lot of 'lexical' tricks 14:38:49 too much usage of set! 14:38:59 leppie: Heh... However negative your motivation for porting this might be, I can promise you that mine is *way* bigger (to the negative side). 14:39:54 leppie: Yes, lots of `set!'s is not surprising at all. Notice also the R5RS-induced hacks of: (let ((> >) (- -) (< <) ...) ...) 14:40:13 SLIB sources used to be infested with these stupidities. (Might still be.) 14:40:19 well i can those the 'lexical' tricks 14:40:28 s/can/call/ 14:40:52 -!- jeapostrophe [n=jay@69.169.141.110.provo.static.broadweavenetworks.net] has quit [] 14:41:05 visof: What exactly are you looking for? Learning Scheme? Learning how to hack real code in Scheme? Learning how to program? Having fun with all kinds of mind twisters? Learning about programming languages? 14:41:37 the last 14:41:37 leppie: They're not that much of "lexical" tricks as they are "mutation" tricks. 14:41:51 visof: And how much Scheme do you know? 14:42:08 anyways this makes nils holm's implicit letrec's look pretty ;p 14:42:21 visof: Also, how much programming experience do you have? (In Scheme or whatever.) 14:42:44 intermediate level 14:42:51 leppie: What implicit `letrec's? 14:43:10 visof: intermediate what -- scheme or programming or both? 14:43:27 he uses letrec instead of internal defines, like always 14:43:48 So what's implicit about it? 14:43:48 C and ruby , beginner haskell 14:44:04 and i have read 2 chapters from SICP 14:44:15 visof: And how did you like SICP? 14:44:28 Nshag [i=user@lns-bzn-35-82-250-241-252.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 14:44:40 by doing Exercises 14:45:05 and Scheme is suitable for the book explanation 14:45:06 visof: Not how did you do it, did you *like* it? 14:45:14 yeah 14:45:16 -!- Jafet [n=Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)] 14:45:20 i'ts very good book 14:45:28 visof: If you like it, then you can just go ahead with it. 14:45:46 but i have heard about haskell i moved to learn haskell and leaving the rest of the book 14:45:47 It has some serious issues here and there, but if you find it appealing you can just go on with it. 14:46:05 Haskell would also be a good choice, but that's not really a book. 14:46:33 As for other books -- there's HtDP which is a more gentle introduction to programming in general, 14:46:58 there's PLAI (see www.plai.org) which is a good textbook about programming languages done mostly in Scheme 14:47:01 sorry eli: i think my word usage is incorrect, let me find a link as an example 14:47:31 eli did you try Haskell ? 14:47:34 (which I recommend strongly, but I'm biased since my course goes with it, mostly.) 14:47:56 And there's also the little schemer (etc) which are good for exercising your brain. 14:48:08 Yes, I know some Haskell, but that's not really my department. 14:48:15 leppie: ok. 14:48:25 hmmm, his site is not really there anymore 14:48:34 eli are you CS student ? 14:49:06 visof: I was, until 2003, when I switched to the other side of the force. 14:52:13 lisppaste: url 14:52:13 To use the lisppaste bot, visit http://paste.lisp.org/new/scheme and enter your paste. 14:52:58 -!- davazp` [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)] 14:52:58 leppie pasted "weird style" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/91575 14:53:11 eli: I mean that 14:54:28 nothing wrong with it, just feel weird ;p 14:54:33 leppie: Ah, I see what you mean. That definitely would look better with internal defines and named-`let's, and it's definitely much more minor than the Simply Scheme thing. 14:54:40 but Simply Scheme's code OTOH 14:56:04 Fufie [n=innocent@86.80-203-225.nextgentel.com] has joined #scheme 14:56:12 yeah, I would probably write it like that too 14:59:14 reprore [n=reprore@ntkngw356150.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 15:02:00 good day 15:03:24 hi wingo_ 15:05:37 lol, i just found how amusing it is to look at the popular twitter feeds and see exactly how dumb some people are 15:08:35 damn it gets boring fast though... 15:12:23 dysinger [n=dysinger@cpe-75-85-132-170.hawaii.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 15:15:55 you are in a pessimistic mood today leppie :) 15:16:17 no it's been like that for almost a month :( 15:16:26 working too hard 15:16:31 deadline in 2 weeks 15:16:44 brain gets too tired to hack afterhours 15:16:52 yeah i dig that. 15:16:53 wanna try this weekend 15:17:20 what? you like that I cant code SCheme? 15:18:10 wingo_: did you mean did? 15:19:46 -!- GodsHawk [n=Nathan@unaffiliated/nathan/x-8754142] has quit [Connection timed out] 15:21:25 i mean, "i understand the feeling". 15:22:06 oh, in this part of the world, 'dig' is slang for 'really like' 15:22:13 :) 15:27:13 it might mean that where i come from too, perhaps i've been away too long ;) 15:27:16 -!- visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has quit ["Leaving"] 15:27:33 visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has joined #scheme 15:35:28 -!- bokr [n=eduska@95.154.102.124] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 15:36:32 -!- mabes [n=mabes@bmabey.fttp.xmission.com] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 15:38:55 bweaver [n=user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 15:44:57 jlongster [n=user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 15:45:23 -!- a-s [n=user@nat-240.ro.66.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 15:48:42 -!- ASau_ [n=user@host186-230-msk.microtest.ru] has quit ["off"] 15:50:10 mabes [n=mabes@66.236.74.194] has joined #scheme 15:51:49 -!- reprore [n=reprore@ntkngw356150.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 15:55:26 -!- leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has quit [] 16:03:42 -!- visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has quit ["Leaving"] 16:06:02 Riastradh [n=riastrad@tissot.csail.mit.edu] has joined #scheme 16:08:32 Earlier someone mentioned the `R5RS-induced' idiom of (let ((+ +) (- -) ...) (lambda ....)). Although some of those LETs make sense (in it is used to bootstrap modified versions of those oerations), the general idiom is induced not by the R5RS but by a trivial misunderstanding of the R5RS perpetuated for no reason I have been able to discern. 16:10:03 -!- samth_away is now known as samth 16:10:31 Riastradh, what's the difference between the idiom you're describing and that used in the Simply Scheme appendix? 16:10:37 The assignments such as (SET! + ...), though, are not valid in the R5RS; that they work at all is an implementation-specific quirk. 16:10:59 samth, there are two idioms here, really, which are somewhat related. One is the following: 16:11:08 (define operation ...initial value of the operation...) 16:11:18 (define another-operation (let ((operation operation)) ...another operation...)) 16:11:35 (set! operation ...bootstrapped version of the operation...) 16:12:15 This is reasonable, although it could be done much more simply just by using two different definitions, one for the initial version of the operation and one for the bootstrapped version. 16:12:33 whereas the other is saving away the values of primitives in case they are mutated later by some other part of the program 16:12:39 ? 16:12:49 (It doesn't work if the name OPERATION has a built-in binding, though, rather than the initial definition I showed: the R5RS does not permit assignments to variables not introduced by definitions in the program.) 16:13:13 Yes, samth. And that's the ridiculous idiom induced by a misunderstanding of, or a misreading of, or a failure to read, the R5RS. 16:13:15 Riastradh: I thought one of the reasons for using this style was performance (I'm a bit out of context, so maybe I'm talking bullshit). 16:13:29 Riastradh, I think that's a little sloppy wrt to what the R5RS says 16:13:39 i expect that it says that 'it is an error' to do that 16:13:54 which means that implementations may or may not mutate the primitives 16:14:05 Here is what it says: 16:14:26 and since plenty of R5RS implementations do allow that, defensive coding practices seem sensible 16:14:44 R5RS, Section 6 `Standard procedures': `A program may use a top-level definition to bind any variable. It may subsequently alter any such binding by an assignment (see 4.1.6). These operations do not modify the behaviour of Scheme's built-in procedures.' 16:15:09 This does not require the standard bindings to be mutable. 16:15:21 right, but it doesn't prohibit it either 16:15:28 Implementations in which they are mutable, well, get what they deserve. Being defensive about it is the stupid part. 16:16:12 the last sentence only means that if you do (set! + (lambda x 1)), the meaning of `*' will not change 16:16:38 Nothing even guarantees that (SET! + ...) will work at all. 16:16:45 also, a significant fraction of R5RS implementations allow such mutations 16:18:37 That still doesn't justify using the idiom, though. 16:19:26 here's a quote from right after your quote: "Altering any top-level binding that has not been introduced by a definition has an unspecified effect on the behavior of the built-in procedures." 16:20:27 also, the statement "For example, the variable abs is bound to (a location initially containing) a procedure of one argument that computes the absolute value of a number" suggests that the R5RS authors anticipate such mutation 16:21:00 otherwise, the variable `abs' would be bound to a location *always* containing that procedure 16:21:40 That still doesn't mean that a program running in the implementation may SET! the variable. For example, the implementation may have a procedure to assign it, without permitting user programs to do so. 16:22:57 however, that would still justify the idiom you were criticizing 16:23:29 since if the location that `abs' is bound to may change, it might be necessary to save the desired value 16:27:57 also, note this section of the larceny user manual: http://larceny.ccs.neu.edu/doc/user-manual-alt.html#PerformanceSection 16:27:58 leppie [n=lolcow@dsl-244-201-199.telkomadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 16:27:59 Following that justification, it may have already changed by the time your program is run, so what's the good of saving it? 16:28:26 where will points out that the assumption that standard procedures will not be mutated is not allowed by the R5RS 16:28:57 Riastradh, obviously you can't do anything about that case, so it doesn't matter 16:29:23 whereas you can, via the precise idiom you are criticizing, ensure that subsequent mutations don't damage your code 16:29:47 If you're worried about the possibility that it will ever change (other than to be non-EQ? but behave identically per the standard), you've already lost. 16:29:54 reprore [n=reprore@ntkngw356150.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 16:30:45 there are arbitrarily many things that could happen to cause your program to behave incorrectly 16:30:54 for example, + might actually subtract 16:31:00 you can't protect against all of them 16:31:09 however, you can protect against some of them 16:31:21 You can protect against lists being updated, too, by making your own local copies of them. 16:31:42 That is no more or less sensible than saving whatever were the values of the standard bindings at the time your program was run. 16:31:48 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-62-231-90.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 16:32:04 indeed, and if you had a list that was exposed to user code, and whose contents you needed to stay the same, making a local binding with the contents would be sensible 16:33:22 also, the simply scheme page that you pointed to performs exactly the kind of mutation you think is disallowed 16:33:32 Yes, and that's a bug in the program. 16:34:08 why? 16:34:25 -!- wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 16:34:33 Larceny, for example, in the mode to most strictly conform to the R5RS, allows such mutations 16:35:06 That's only because it doesn't have a sensible way to distinguish the bindings that the user has introduced, and can assign, from the bindings that the user has not introduced, and can't necessarily assign. 16:35:13 wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 16:35:56 that isn't true at all 16:35:58 Conversely, in Scheme48, there is a sensible way to do that, and you can't evaluate assignments to the standard bindings. 16:36:14 it has a compiler switch to do precisely that, and does my default 16:36:22 -!- sstrickl [n=sstrickl@pool-68-160-40-45.bos.east.verizon.net] has quit [] 16:36:24 s/my/by/ 16:36:53 however, in the most standard-compliant version, it allows that 16:37:32 Not exactly. Does Larceny refuse to evaluate, say, (SET! + -), or does that just not affect procedures whose calls to + have been compiled in-line, while future references to + as a variable now yield the subtraction procedure? 16:38:09 Although Scheme48 doesn't refuse to evaluate (SET! + -) by signalling an error when that happens, it gives a compiler warning, and the assignment has no effect. 16:38:37 with the 'integrate-usual-procedures compiler option on (which it is by default), it behaves like Scheme48, but without the warning 16:38:52 So the Simply Scheme program doesn't run as intended in Scheme48, which is a very strictly R5RS-conformant implementation. 16:39:08 with the sidecurls and the beard and everything 16:39:09 samth, does it behave exactly like Scheme48, or does the assignment have an effect while calls to + are still compiled in-line as the compiler expects? 16:39:27 Riastradh, exactly like scheme48 16:39:45 the assignment 'succeeds', but has no effect on subsequent uses of + 16:40:58 I just tested this, and confirmed my hypothesis. 16:41:08 Now, this is with a somewhat old version of Larceny; perhaps it has changed. 16:41:29 > (define foo +) 16:41:29 foo 16:41:29 > (foo 1 2) 16:41:29 -1 16:41:29 > (+ 1 2) 16:41:31 3 16:41:42 So that's pretty weird, and I'd say that the `fast-safe' option is rather unsafe! 16:42:16 when did you change the meaning of + in that sequence? 16:42:49 Sorry, I didn't want to clutter up the channel. The previous six lines of interactions consisted of evaluating (fast-safe-code), (set! + -), and +. 16:43:09 also, it's safe in the sense of 'said to be safe' from earlier (but not the final) drafts of the R6RS 16:44:04 also, since this works in scheme48: 16:44:11 > (define + *) 16:44:11 ; no values returned 16:44:11 > (+ 3 4) 16:44:11 12 16:44:11 > 16:44:34 That's different. In that, (define + *) introduces a new binding; it does not affect the existing binding. 16:44:47 it's hard to see how that squares with the sentence in the r5rs that says: At the top level of a program, a definition (define ) 16:44:47 has essentially the same effect as the assignment expression (set! ) if is bound. 16:45:06 since those do not have 'essentially the same effect 16:45:15 Yes -- but the R5RS doesn't permit assignments to standard bindings, the effects are unspecified. 16:45:33 dzhus [n=sphinx@95-24-67-77.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 16:45:41 ...add the word `since' or the word `so' somewhere in that sentence. 16:46:25 So Scheme48 chose a particular effect for (define + *), which has no standard effect. 16:47:25 Now, if I evaluate (set! + -), Scheme48 gives a compiler warning, and does nothing (well, it stores - in a location that is otherwise inaccessible, but that's an implementation detail). Then after (define foo +), both (foo 1 2) and (+ 1 2) give 3, as they should. 16:47:55 Riastradh, you have demonstrated neither that 'the R5RS doesn't permit assignments to standard bindings' nor that (define + *) 'has no standard effect' 16:48:32 The R5RS says that programs may assign bindings after they have defined them; it does not say that programs may assign standard bindings. 16:49:59 that isn't what it says at all 16:50:11 it says that the initial environment binds a number of variables to locations 16:50:21 and that set! modifies the location pointed to by the variable 16:50:58 (One could argue over whether the authors of Larceny or the authors of Scheme48 had a clearer idea of what the R5RS meant -- but then that would be an argument over which editor of the document had the clearer idea!) 16:51:26 the only thing you have quoted is a statement that means that (set! + *) should not change the behavior of *other* primitive procedures 16:51:49 (define + *) does not necessarily introduce a new binding. 16:52:20 wingo_, that's right: its effects if + is already bound to a location that the user may not modify are unspecified (in the sense that the R5RS says nothing about it, not even that it uses the word unspecified). 16:52:35 -!- CaptainMorgan [n=CaptainM@c-24-62-183-102.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 16:52:42 if one considers all possible identifiers as being bound initially, a possibility that the r5rs admits, (define + *) is the same as (set! + *) 16:52:56 In some implementations, it will actually modify the standard binding of +, which is a pretty silly thing to do. 16:53:10 In some implementations, it will introduce a new binding, shadowing the standard binding of +. 16:53:18 davazp [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 16:53:35 (That's a more sensible thing to do.) 16:53:54 In some implementations, it will just fail altogether. (That's also sensible.) 16:54:20 introducing a new binding would be an error imo. 16:54:22 At the top level of a program, a definition 16:54:22 (define ) 16:54:22 has essentially the same effect as the assignment expression 16:54:22 (set! ) 16:54:22 if is bound. 16:54:36 Similarly, in some implementations, (set! + *) will modify the standard binding of *, and some implementations will fail. 16:54:43 if + is bound, then (define + ...) is the same as (set! + ...) 16:54:45 ...er, `and in some implementations it will fail'. 16:55:46 introducing a new binding pushes you into non-r5rs territory it seems to be, based on 5.2.1 16:55:50 *seems to me 16:56:02 Evaluating (set! + *) pushes you into non-R5RS territory. 16:56:16 *wingo_* reads the set! section again 16:56:47 The R5RS permits you to assign variables you defined; that's what it says at the beginning of Section 6. It does not permit you to assign any other variables (although there are implementations that do allow this; the R5RS does not prohibit it either). 16:56:50 i don't see anything in the document prohibiting modification of bound variables. 16:56:59 it doesn't make a distinction as to whether you bound them or not. 16:57:09 Riastradh, the R5RS section on set! makes no such distinction 16:57:49 Certain locations may be modified; certain locations may not be modified. 16:57:56 heresy! :) 16:58:07 (set-car! '(a . b) 5) is no more valid than (set! car 5). 16:58:14 and that is exactly why i refuse to even try port that code to R6RS! 16:58:30 and the beginning of section 6 explicitly anticipates the mutation of top-level bindings not introduced by definitions 16:58:51 r5rs permits constants to be immutable. 16:59:03 it also permits (scheme-report-environment) to be immutable. 16:59:04 that's it. 17:00:01 Riastradh, there's certainly potentially immutable locations in the R5RS, but the one denoted by + isn't one of them 17:00:18 -!- reprore [n=reprore@ntkngw356150.kngw.nt.ftth.ppp.infoweb.ne.jp] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 17:02:15 -!- mmc [n=mima@esprx02x.nokia.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 17:11:24 I've asked Jonathan what the intent was. 17:13:43 the intent was to provoke deep discussions about it :p 17:13:45 It is pretty clear, at least, that Larceny's interpretation of the R5RS-compliant mode is not useful for anyone, and that the Simply Scheme code is pretty bogus. 17:14:13 i don't think either of those things are clear 17:16:04 the mode of larceny you were complaining about was not the R5RS-compliant one 17:16:31 I know. When I said `the R5RS-compliant mode' that's what I meant, not the `fast-safe' mode (which is also pretty bogus). 17:16:56 ok so "useful" here is straying from the point :) 17:16:59 it is only bogus in precisely the scenarios that you believe are an error 17:17:14 the r5rs makes explicit allowances for viewing all variables as initially bound. 17:17:40 wingo_, that's also something that's not useful for anyone (even if it is in the R5RS), but a separate issue. 17:18:13 samth, it's bogus in the sense that it leads to bizarre behaviour whose technical reason is understandable but that lacks semantic justification. 17:18:34 Riastradh: can you point to something in the r5rs that would suggest that evaluating (set! + *) is undefined? 17:19:21 wingo_, Section 6 begins by saying programs may evaluate assignments to bindings they have introduced with definitions. It does not say anything about assignments to other bindings, however. 17:19:49 Riastradh, that isn't either the specification of defintions or of assignments, nor does it prohibit anything 17:20:31 It may not be the specification of definitions or assignments, but it is part of the specification of the standard bindings. 17:20:38 ah i see that now. it essentially permits inlining of primitives within the implementation. 17:21:04 sctb [n=sctb@S0106001217057777.cg.shawcable.net] has joined #scheme 17:21:06 wingo_, it also permits implementations just not to allow assignments to standard bindings, even if they are not compiled in-line. 17:21:26 i don't see that. 17:21:31 "Altering any top-level binding that has 17:21:31 not been introduced by a definition has an unspecified effect on the 17:21:31 behavior of the built-in procedures." 17:21:43 it speaks of the effect of the mutation on built-in procedures 17:21:50 not of the permissibility of the mutation itself 17:24:02 Anyway, I've sent mail to Jonathan Rees, who may have written that text in the first place, asking what the intent was. 17:26:37 i agree that (set! + *) is nonsensical; but (set! + some-extended-+) might make sense in some cases. 17:26:53 e.g. (trace! +) or something 17:28:15 -!- saccade_ [n=saccade@209-6-54-113.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit ["This computer has gone to sleep"] 17:30:26 NNshag [i=user@lns-bzn-43-82-249-155-185.adsl.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 17:32:30 jonrafkind [n=jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has joined #scheme 17:38:46 -!- Nshag [i=user@lns-bzn-35-82-250-241-252.adsl.proxad.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 17:38:47 -!- rstandy [n=rastandy@net-93-144-209-166.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 17:42:14 hotblack23 [n=jh@p5B053C52.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 17:46:04 sstrickl [n=sstrickl@nomad.ccs.neu.edu] has joined #scheme 17:54:08 -!- sctb [n=sctb@S0106001217057777.cg.shawcable.net] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 17:55:51 It only makes sense in the absense of a proper module system. 17:56:07 snearch [n=olaf@e179129163.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 17:57:39 -!- mreggen [n=mreggen@cm-84.215.28.167.getinternet.no] has quit ["leaving"] 17:58:34 rgrau [n=user@228.Red-88-17-164.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 18:02:02 absence of a proper module system == r5rs 18:02:43 and r6rs' module system isn't proper either, as you couldn't mutate any binding in that sense, to add tracing for example. 18:03:11 -!- schmir [n=schmir@mail.brainbot.com] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 18:07:36 mrsolo [n=mrsolo@nat/yahoo/x-xrymulwtoyhkjhrx] has joined #scheme 18:10:44 -!- Riastradh [n=riastrad@tissot.csail.mit.edu] has quit ["leaving"] 18:18:31 langmartin [n=user@exeuntcha.tva.gov] has joined #scheme 18:20:32 -!- xwl [n=user@125.34.173.222] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 18:23:20 -!- dzhus [n=sphinx@95-24-67-77.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 18:29:33 arvenex [n=raven@mm-198-239-84-93.leased.line.mgts.by] has joined #scheme 18:30:11 -!- nowhere_man [n=pierre@lec67-4-82-235-57-28.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 18:30:17 nowhere_man [n=pierre@lec67-4-82-235-57-28.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #scheme 18:39:01 -!- albacker [n=eni@unaffiliated/enyx] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 18:54:33 saccade_ [n=saccade@dhcp-18-111-70-156.dyn.mit.edu] has joined #scheme 18:59:40 -!- wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 19:00:08 wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 19:02:06 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-62-231-90.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 19:02:34 MichaelRaskin [n=MichaelR@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 19:23:32 rstandy [n=rastandy@net-93-144-216-235.t2.dsl.vodafone.it] has joined #scheme 19:24:06 -!- snearch [n=olaf@e179129163.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 19:24:10 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-89-139.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 19:26:10 snearch_ [n=olaf@g225059081.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 19:27:20 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-59-89-139.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 19:30:41 sepult` [n=levgue@xdsl-87-78-102-21.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 19:35:11 eno__ [n=eno@adsl-70-137-164-145.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 19:35:49 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-62-225-52.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 19:39:43 amoe [n=amoe@cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust380.brig.cable.ntl.com] has joined #scheme 19:39:46 -!- sepult [n=levgue@xdsl-87-78-172-115.netcologne.de] has quit [Nick collision from services.] 19:39:53 hi all 19:39:55 -!- sepult` is now known as sepult 19:41:11 from PLT manual: "In general, the rel-string in (lib rel-string) consists of one or more path elements that name collections, and then a final path element that names a library file ... If the final element has no file suffix, then /main.ss is implicitly appended to the path." 19:41:51 so for instance (require (lib "text/libxslt")) should look for text/libxslt/main.ss - correct? 19:42:04 -!- ski_ [n=md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has quit ["Lost terminal"] 19:42:25 however, it seems to instead look for text/libxslt.ss. anyone know why? 19:42:35 -!- Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-62-225-52.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 19:44:20 another part of the manual describes the actual behaviour: "If the last element has no file suffix, ".ss" is added." 19:44:29 docs bug? 19:45:11 http://docs.plt-scheme.org/reference/collects.html and http://docs.plt-scheme.org/reference/require.html respectively 19:46:36 -!- perdix [n=perdix@sxemacs/devel/perdix] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 19:47:30 -!- eno [n=eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 19:49:14 -!- arvenex [n=raven@mm-198-239-84-93.leased.line.mgts.by] has quit [Client Quit] 19:50:12 davazp` [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 19:50:17 hmmm, require.html also describes the single path element main.ss behaviour 19:50:20 -!- davazp [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 19:50:50 so I guess it's the winner, since the other section is a bit more obscure 19:52:29 -!- copumpkin [n=copumpki@c-24-63-67-154.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [] 19:52:48 -!- michaelw [i=michaelw@88.198.49.16] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 19:54:00 amoe, the rule is that for things with no "/", main.ss is added, otherwise just ".ss" is added 19:55:05 but that introduction is pretty out-of-date, and should be rewritten 19:55:31 these days, we'd write (require setup/getinfo games/cards/cards) 19:57:26 Penth [n=rachel@pool-173-62-232-34.phlapa.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 20:01:46 samth: out of interest do you know the rationale for the main.ss special case? personally I prefer the main.ss behaviour and wish it was the general case, but I can see the other behaviour is probably more popular. but why not make (require single-lib) look for /single-lib.ss under the collection path? 20:02:18 ski_ [n=md9slj@remote1.student.chalmers.se] has joined #scheme 20:02:19 just to keep the collections root more tidy? or maybe historical reason... 20:02:57 amoe, collections are in general substantial directories 20:03:08 so, the `scheme' collections contains many files 20:03:15 but it's nice to just have it have a simple name 20:04:46 jamesswaine [n=jamesswa@c-67-186-97-221.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 20:05:02 samth: I agree with this... but if I want a subcollection, I have to explicitly say main-collection/sub-collection/main to get the same behaviour as at the root 20:05:17 you could say "deal with it", and you'd probably be right ;) 20:05:49 does bug me, though 20:05:56 amoe, it's a pragmatic compromise 20:06:10 otherwise `scheme/vector' would have to be a whole directory 20:06:18 whereas right now it's just one file 20:06:28 but it's certainly a fairly ad-hoc choice 20:06:44 samth: makes sense, thanks :) 20:07:25 amoe, I filed a bug about the documentation error, so hopefully that will get fixed soon as well 20:08:10 samth: did you already know about that? 20:08:31 amoe, no I didn't, so thanks for reporting it 20:08:48 cheers samth 20:11:52 -!- amoe [n=amoe@cpc1-brig13-0-0-cust380.brig.cable.ntl.com] has left #scheme 20:11:59 -!- synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has quit ["Leaving."] 20:25:20 -!- wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)] 20:27:18 wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has joined #scheme 20:33:32 synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has joined #scheme 20:45:53 bgs100 [n=ian@h188.21.131.174.dynamic.ip.windstream.net] has joined #scheme 20:46:17 -!- brx [i=brx@71.6.194.243] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 20:46:21 TR2N [i=email@89-180-185-187.net.novis.pt] has joined #scheme 20:58:08 -!- awarrington [n=quassel@officebv.conductor.com] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 21:04:15 visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has joined #scheme 21:11:47 riastradh: You made a "typo" in WALK-GLOBAL. 21:13:18 acieroid` [n=acieroid@ks23738.kimsufi.com] has joined #scheme 21:14:50 -!- wingo_ [n=wingo@ATuileries-153-1-5-18.w82-123.abo.wanadoo.fr] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)] 21:19:20 MrFahrenheit [n=RageOfTh@users-55-176.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 21:19:48 -!- bgs100 [n=ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit ["Leaving"] 21:20:03 bgs100 [n=ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 21:27:10 -!- acieroid [n=acieroid@91.121.15.173] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 21:27:33 Lemonator [n=kniu@CMU-311358.WV.CC.CMU.EDU] has joined #scheme 21:31:55 -!- synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 21:35:49 -!- jamesswaine [n=jamesswa@c-67-186-97-221.hsd1.il.comcast.net] has left #scheme 21:39:51 synx [i=synx@gateway/gpg-tor/key-0xA71B0C6A] has joined #scheme 21:41:20 -!- kniu [n=kniu@HOHOHO.RES.CMU.EDU] has quit [Connection timed out] 21:43:21 -!- metasyntax [n=taylor@75-149-208-121-Illinois.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit ["Nichts mehr."] 21:48:04 -!- davazp` [n=user@206.Red-88-25-187.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 21:51:09 bweaver` [n=user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 22:06:04 -!- nowhere_man [n=pierre@lec67-4-82-235-57-28.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 22:07:48 -!- bweaver [n=user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)] 22:08:06 -!- bweaver` is now known as bweaver 22:11:08 -!- Edico [n=Edico@unaffiliated/edico] has quit ["Ex-Chat"] 22:35:19 kilimanjaro [n=kilimanj@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 22:35:36 copumpkin [n=copumpki@dhcp-212-204.cs.dartmouth.edu] has joined #scheme 22:39:35 -!- mabes [n=mabes@66.236.74.194] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 22:39:51 -!- jonrafkind [n=jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)] 22:39:59 jcowan [n=jcowan@72.14.228.129] has joined #scheme 22:45:15 mabes [n=mabes@66.236.74.194] has joined #scheme 22:49:17 -!- langmartin [n=user@exeuntcha.tva.gov] has quit ["ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)"] 22:54:20 -!- mario-goulart [n=user@67.205.85.241] has quit [Remote closed the connection] 22:57:36 -!- sstrickl [n=sstrickl@nomad.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [] 23:13:54 -!- copumpkin is now known as TheHunter 23:13:59 -!- TheHunter is now known as copumpkin 23:14:38 -!- visof [n=visof@41.238.234.82] has quit ["Leaving"] 23:17:43 MegaTron [n=Transfor@ool-43563460.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #scheme 23:22:27 Riastradh [n=riastrad@tissot.csail.mit.edu] has joined #scheme 23:26:38 -!- hotblack23 [n=jh@p5B053C52.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit ["Leaving."] 23:27:43 splork [n=ben@dsl092-075-228.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has joined #scheme 23:30:21 Interested parties may find the implementation of the `stubber' of which I have occasionally spoken at . 23:30:34 Heed the warning in the README, however. 23:30:36 -!- snearch_ [n=olaf@g225059081.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit ["Ex-Chat"] 23:31:20 -!- MegaTron [n=Transfor@ool-43563460.dyn.optonline.net] has left #scheme 23:31:30 -!- borism [n=boris@213-35-235-152-dsl.end.estpak.ee] has quit [Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)] 23:35:42 borism [n=boris@213-35-235-152-dsl.end.estpak.ee] has joined #scheme 23:40:20 -!- splork [n=ben@dsl092-075-228.bos1.dsl.speakeasy.net] has quit ["Computer has gone to sleep"] 23:51:21 -!- Lemonator [n=kniu@CMU-311358.WV.CC.CMU.EDU] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 23:55:15 mreggen [n=mreggen@cm-84.215.28.167.getinternet.no] has joined #scheme 23:56:13 Lemonator [n=kniu@HOHOHO.RES.CMU.EDU] has joined #scheme