00:10:21 i'm still not sure i understand what you mean by "by any positive n, and every division operator but the ceiling one, the remainder of zero should be zero" 00:10:55 it seems to me that you're first requiring `n' to be positive, then setting it to be zero -- but i must be misunderstanding 00:12:16 *jcowan* grabbed the PLT units doc and hopes it makes more sense than most PLT docs do. 00:14:51 Riastradh : in `least-positive-residue', surely `(euclidean-remainder n d)' can be zero (assuming `d' is nonzero) ? 00:15:49 ski, oops, you're right. (define (least-positive-residue n d) (cond ((zero? d) n) ((divisible? n d) d) (else (euclidean-remainder n d] 00:16:06 would it be a precondition that `d' in those two are non-negative ? 00:17:10 No... I guess it should be (cond ... ((divisible? n d) (abs d)) ...). 00:18:26 (Note that EUCLIDEAN-REMAINDER always gives a nonnegative answer, irrespective of the signs of n and d.) 00:21:07 jcowan, there are several papers about units 00:21:17 all by matthew flatt and coauthors 00:21:23 *Riastradh* vanishes for a while. 00:23:53 -!- Azuvix [~Azuvix@174-27-34-218.bois.qwest.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:24:45 *ski* just checked that 00:25:19 -!- masm [~masm@2.80.140.39] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 00:26:20 -!- bweaver [~user@75-148-111-133-Chattanooga.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 00:26:52 -!- pygospa [~pygospa@217.191.167.215] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 00:28:46 pygospa [~pygospa@217.191.166.153] has joined #scheme 00:33:02 samth: Thanks, I've got them now. 00:33:25 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 00:34:42 -!- jcowan [c6b912cf@gateway/web/freenode/ip.198.185.18.207] has left #scheme 00:35:53 Has #scheme slashdotted Matthew Flatt's webpage, or is it pure coincidence? :> 00:39:10 coincidence, i think 00:40:10 Riastradh : hm, the name `least-positive-residue' still seems misplaced in the case `d' is zero, and `n' is negative 00:40:13 Yes, in fact, it appears that I can't connect cs.utah.edu at all. I don't think #scheme is capable of that. At least not by slashdotting. 00:41:56 Riastradh : apart from that, i think `least-positive-residue' and `least-nonnegative-residue' are ok. i still wonder how much sense respectively non-sense it would make to move the zero case into (e.g.) the euclidean remainder operation 00:45:33 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-78-229-84.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 00:47:44 cs.utah is back up 00:59:19 -!- aidalgol [~user@114-134-7-235.rurallink.co.nz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:09:37 aidalgol [~user@114-134-7-235.rurallink.co.nz] has joined #scheme 01:13:57 -!- Mohamdu [~Mohamdu@unaffiliated/mohamdu] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 01:17:03 -!- samth [~samth@punge.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 01:24:00 -!- Blkt [~user@net-93-151-226-225.cust.dsl.teletu.it] has quit [Quit: Error: do not makunbound t please!] 01:30:50 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 01:33:23 adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-11-168.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 01:39:17 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 01:39:43 ski, you're right -- (cond ((zero? d) (abs n)) ((divisible? n d) (abs d)) (else (euclidean-remainder n d] 01:40:44 except that makes it no longer give back `n' when `d' is zero, which was my original aim 01:41:31 That's true, but (-n)Z = nZ, so does it matter? 01:42:02 (obviously it's ok, if the name and semantics of `least-positive-residue' is to be retained) 01:42:27 well, `-n' is not congruent to `n' modulo zero 01:42:35 (unless `n' is zero, of course) 01:43:03 Of course, I still don't know what applications this computation has. 01:43:09 i'd like `a' to be congruent to `b' modulo `d' iff they have the same remainder wrt `d' 01:43:15 of course 01:44:09 Um, excuse me: nZ and (-n)Z have nothing to do with anything here. 01:45:01 (hm, don't you want `n' (or something depending on it) rather than `0' in `least-nonnegative-residue' ?) 01:45:11 For negative n and zero d, the least nonnegative/positive residue of n modulo d makes no sense at all! 01:46:00 -!- ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:46:29 So maybe you really want an operation called PROJECT-ZMOD or something... 01:46:55 -!- wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@17.101.89.205] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 01:47:03 -!- tokam1 [~tokam@p57B8F77C.dip.t-dialin.net] has left #scheme 01:47:48 Anyway, I give up. Let me know if you have an application for a remainder-like operation that is defined on zero divisors. 01:47:55 Meanwhile, I'm heading home. 01:48:05 hm, i should probably head off to sleep, since i apparently have a hard time thinking coherently on this 01:48:49 yes (istr i've seen one or two (at least possible) applications, but i don't recall. i'll try to remember to mention them here, if i do recall them again) 01:49:12 (thank you for your time) 01:51:57 ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 01:52:13 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 02:04:17 -!- zeroish [~zeroish@135.207.174.50] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:09:48 AtnNn [~welcome@173.176.174.233] has joined #scheme 02:15:41 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-199.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 02:29:52 Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 02:42:10 -!- pavelludiq [~quassel@87.246.12.73] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:07:51 wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@pool-72-70-66-31.bstnma.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:13:32 Mohamdu [~Mohamdu@74.112.44.160] has joined #scheme 03:14:07 -!- Mohamdu [~Mohamdu@74.112.44.160] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:14:10 Is a copumpkin unwise? 03:14:46 Also, what happens if you make a jack-o-lantern out of a copumpkin? 03:16:23 -!- imran_sr [~imran@75-18-254-4.lightspeed.uncyca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:16:39 you get a jakcolantern 03:16:44 or something 03:16:54 a copumpkin is less wise than a wisepumpkin, certainly 03:33:49 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: nighty night] 03:52:47 timj__ [~timj@e176193133.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #scheme 03:55:58 -!- timj_ [~timj@e176194019.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 03:57:20 wbooze` [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 03:57:37 homie` [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 03:59:36 -!- wbooze [~user@xdsl-84-44-252-124.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:59:53 -!- homie [~user@xdsl-84-44-252-124.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 04:24:10 -!- aidalgol [~user@114-134-7-235.rurallink.co.nz] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 04:45:17 Is there a standard procedure to generate sequential lists, for example (count-to-n 5) -> (0 1 2 3 4 5)? 04:45:41 In SRFI 1 it is called IOTA. 04:46:19 Ah, I see. Thanks Riastradh 04:47:56 Out of interest, why is it called IOTA? Just to aid my memory. 04:48:09 Blame APL. 04:48:25 Heh 04:48:36 All I know about APL is that it makes no sense. 05:21:22 wuj [~wuj@pool-74-101-71-212.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 05:25:01 -!- Fare [~Fare@ita4fw1.itasoftware.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 05:25:54 mmc [~michal@cs27120227.pp.htv.fi] has joined #scheme 05:31:48 -!- wuj [~wuj@pool-74-101-71-212.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 05:44:25 -!- tupi_ [~david@186.205.37.15] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:00:39 Would anyone like to pass judgement on this function: http://paste.lisp.org/display/116858 ? 06:01:11 It works fine, I'm just interested to know if there's anything I could've done better 06:03:27 Dawgmatix [~dman@203.187.211.68] has joined #scheme 06:09:25 franki^: oh. 1/ don't use that formula, but the simple recursive formula. 06:10:07 mmc: Why? 06:10:21 and while recursing, keep both the values, and the sum 06:10:42 Hm, I see, rather than applying at the end 06:21:12 The nicest way to express that is with streams. 06:23:59 Generate a stream of the Fibonacci numbers using the usual iterative approach; filter the stream by EVEN?; take the prefix below four million; sum the stream. This looks like the naive approach with lists, but its space usage is like a carefully written iteration. 06:25:22 -!- chemuduguntar [~ravi@118-93-189-209.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 06:25:27 (stream-sum (stream-take-while (lambda (x) (< x #e4e6)) (stream-filter even? (fibonacci-stream] 06:25:38 Cowmoo [~Cowmoo@c-71-192-163-98.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 06:25:42 chemuduguntar [~ravi@118-92-28-98.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has joined #scheme 06:29:47 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [] 06:50:11 -!- drdo [~user@2.208.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 06:54:23 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 06:57:14 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 06:57:14 -!- Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo3.23.cust.blixtvik.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 06:57:53 Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo3.23.cust.blixtvik.net] has joined #scheme 07:11:16 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 07:13:32 -!- mmc [~michal@cs27120227.pp.htv.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:25:54 mmc [~michal@cs27124157.pp.htv.fi] has joined #scheme 07:38:02 sts193 [~sts193@c-76-104-226-126.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 07:39:09 -!- sts193 [~sts193@c-76-104-226-126.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has left #scheme 07:46:39 HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-121-57.dip.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 07:55:48 -!- adu [~ajr@pool-173-66-11-168.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: adu] 07:59:50 eli: and other PLT hackers, how did you get GitHub to recognize your project as using Racket? I started my project using the .scm extension but just switched to .rkt and GitHub seems to insist I'm still writing in Scheme. 08:00:01 Despite dropping the syntax highlighting 08:16:23 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@173.176.174.233] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 08:17:07 kar8nga [~kar8nga@i-173.vc-graz.ac.at] has joined #scheme 08:45:04 gravicappa [~gravicapp@91.78.229.84] has joined #scheme 09:19:26 -!- kar8nga [~kar8nga@i-173.vc-graz.ac.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:38:16 jewel [~jewel@196-215-88-59.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 10:08:18 -!- araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 10:26:16 femtoo [~femto@95-89-197-196-dynip.superkabel.de] has joined #scheme 10:28:07 choas [~lars@p578F6B49.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 10:28:56 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 10:42:55 wingo [~wingo@88.0.167.219] has joined #scheme 10:44:24 -!- pygospa [~pygospa@217.191.166.153] has quit [Quit: leaving] 10:44:53 pygospa [~pygospa@217.191.166.153] has joined #scheme 10:47:04 fradgers- [~fradgers-@5e012c18.bb.sky.com] has joined #scheme 10:49:29 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 11:05:36 -!- Dawgmatix [~dman@203.187.211.68] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 11:12:52 notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.156.99] has joined #scheme 11:13:39 -!- Axsuul [~someone@97-93-99-133.static.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 11:23:45 masm [~masm@bl19-135-179.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 11:26:01 pavelludiq [~quassel@91.139.194.110] has joined #scheme 11:28:04 -!- jensn [~ceres@c-83-233-145-103.cust.bredband2.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 11:35:37 jensn [~ceres@c-83-233-145-103.cust.bredband2.com] has joined #scheme 11:48:03 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 11:48:05 -!- notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.156.99] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 12:01:46 alaricsp [~alaric@relief.warhead.org.uk] has joined #scheme 12:07:33 notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.156.99] has joined #scheme 12:16:42 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:25:57 -!- martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 12:26:45 martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme 12:34:29 tupi [~david@186.205.37.15] has joined #scheme 12:40:59 nmg [~nick@dsl78-143-207-11.in-addr.fast.co.uk] has joined #scheme 12:46:12 -!- ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Quit: reboot] 12:54:45 araujo [~araujo@190.38.50.25] has joined #scheme 12:54:45 -!- araujo [~araujo@190.38.50.25] has quit [Changing host] 12:54:45 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme 12:54:48 ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 12:56:19 olosomedudepizza [~olosomedu@jesus.roamr.utk.edu] has joined #scheme 12:56:59 -!- olosomedudepizza [~olosomedu@jesus.roamr.utk.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:57:46 olosomedudepizza [~olosomedu@jesus.roamr.utk.edu] has joined #scheme 12:58:39 -!- olosomedudepizza [~olosomedu@jesus.roamr.utk.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:58:56 drdo [~user@2.208.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #scheme 13:02:22 -!- notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.156.99] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:02:28 kar8nga [~kar8nga@k-102.vc-graz.ac.at] has joined #scheme 13:08:09 -!- ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Quit: reboot] 13:13:14 -!- martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:15:12 ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 13:16:13 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-121-57.dip.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 13:20:58 -!- ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 13:21:41 ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 13:48:39 Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has joined #scheme 13:52:29 pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has joined #scheme 13:54:49 -!- drdo [~user@2.208.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:11:11 -!- kar8nga [~kar8nga@k-102.vc-graz.ac.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:37:14 -!- foof [~user@li126-140.members.linode.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 14:39:10 drdo [~user@2.208.54.77.rev.vodafone.pt] has joined #scheme 14:48:35 -!- ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Quit: reboot] 14:49:39 -!- decaf [~mehmet@88.252.51.178] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 15:00:47 -!- wbooze` [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 15:00:53 -!- homie` [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 15:02:17 Blkt [~user@net-93-151-226-225.cust.dsl.teletu.it] has joined #scheme 15:07:34 wbooze [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:07:38 homie [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:08:34 ASau [~user@89-178-104-155.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 15:09:51 good day everyone 15:10:07 -!- femtoo [~femto@95-89-197-196-dynip.superkabel.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 15:13:13 good day Blkt 15:13:38 AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable233.174-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 15:16:02 :) 15:23:08 haesbaert [~haesbaert@187.36.37.122] has joined #scheme 15:24:29 -!- haesbaert [~haesbaert@187.36.37.122] has left #scheme 15:46:29 -!- antoszka [~antoszka@unaffiliated/antoszka] has quit [Quit: +++ killed by SIGSEGV +++] 15:57:54 kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-3.vc-graz.ac.at] has joined #scheme 15:58:03 wbooze` [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 15:58:04 homie` [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 16:00:08 -!- homie [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 16:00:34 -!- wbooze [~user@xdsl-78-34-204-229.netcologne.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 16:04:48 -!- wbooze` [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 16:04:57 -!- homie` [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 16:05:30 gapeme [mao@sYx.sk] has joined #scheme 16:05:45 hi 16:08:47 -!- kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-3.vc-graz.ac.at] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:09:21 homie [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 16:09:31 wbooze [~user@xdsl-87-79-142-59.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 16:11:27 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 16:11:30 kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-3.vc-graz.ac.at] has joined #scheme 16:18:42 Genosh [~Genosh@56.Red-79-155-31.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 16:18:48 Hi. 16:27:29 dfkjjkfd [~paulh@245-15-ftth.onsnetstudenten.nl] has joined #scheme 16:28:03 -!- EbiDK [~ebi@3e6b7ac3.rev.stofanet.dk] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 16:28:11 foof [~user@li126-140.members.linode.com] has joined #scheme 16:31:37 francogrex [~user@109.130.109.123] has joined #scheme 16:32:19 hmm 16:32:25 hi what's a really good scheme tutorial. i tried scheme in fixnum days but I don't like it that much... 16:34:15 You can start with the tutorials at the Racket site. 16:34:36 if i have a function (called f3) that runs with (logn) time complexity and on every iteration it calls a function f2 which runs at (n) and returns its input incremented by on.... if i run (f3 4) it will look like (f2 (f2 1)) and then (f2 2) => 3 16:35:55 what would be its (f3's) time complexity? (n) 16:36:30 actually, i didn't word that one properly 16:36:52 f3 takes its input and divides it by half... so it does logn iterations... for every iteration it runs f2 16:40:34 Modius [~Modius@cpe-70-123-158-125.austin.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 16:41:57 Caleb pasted "code" at http://paste.lisp.org/display/116870 16:42:05 ^ that's the code if anyone is interested 16:42:13 -!- wingo [~wingo@88.0.167.219] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 16:45:13 -!- francogrex [~user@109.130.109.123] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:45:35 -!- tonyg [~tonyg@navarone.ccs.neu.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:50:16 Caleb--: ...that looks seriously gnarly. 16:50:28 homework assignment 16:50:31 :( 16:50:56 (f2 n) simply returns n+1 16:51:15 Perhaps, but that does not make it an O(1) operation. :-P 16:51:19 I'd start with looking at f0 first. 16:51:50 f0 is logn 16:51:59 f1 is O(1) 16:52:39 f1 is O(1) 'cause it calls f0 with a constant 16:52:55 "with a constant"? 16:53:12 that k 16:53:23 If you mean, "it doesn't loop", then fine. 16:53:31 yeah 16:53:35 Oh, that. I see. 16:54:22 Right, f0 is O(log n) on the parameter y. And f1 is O(1) on the parameter x. 16:54:40 yeah 16:54:55 *cky* 's notation is absolutely crap, btw, so don't follow it in your homework answers. :-P 16:56:02 So, yep, f2 is O(n) on x (because it calls f1 x times, and f1 is O(1)). 16:57:05 now to figure out f3 16:57:11 f3 calls f2 a times, where a is proportional to log2 y. So, what complexity does that make f3? :-P 16:57:28 *roughly proportional, duh. 16:57:52 logn? 16:58:57 Yes, _if_ x is an O(1) operation. 16:59:09 (x as far as f3's parameter goes.) 16:59:40 in my case x is f2 17:01:36 the thing is, that f2 is always being called first with (f2 1), and then it returns 2 for the next f2 call, which returns 3 for the next call, and we do this log2y times 17:02:05 I think it helps to trace the process a bit. 17:02:07 i'm not sure how to consider that 17:02:47 So, the context we're looking at starts with 100000. So, to help us understand f3's complexity, you may as well use that as the starting value (though of course, true complexity analysis doesn't care what the specific starting value is). 17:06:12 right, so we start dividing it by half, and accumulating pending calls of f2 until y<=1, and then we return 1 17:06:57 pchrist_ [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has joined #scheme 17:06:58 this happens about log2(100000) times 17:07:50 -!- pchrist_ [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has quit [Client Quit] 17:08:30 pchrist_ [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has joined #scheme 17:09:12 -!- pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 17:09:35 notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.152.69] has joined #scheme 17:10:48 Eventually, you get to this: (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 (f3 f2 0.762939453125)))))))))))))))))) 17:11:53 So, then, since (f3 f2 0.762939453125) returns 1, then you get (f2^17 1). 17:12:22 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable233.174-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 17:13:17 wuj [~wuj@pool-74-101-71-212.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 17:14:32 (f2^17 1). ? 17:14:47 at the end? 17:15:24 17 is log2(y) 17:15:30 (rounded up) 17:16:23 -!- notsonerdysunny [~chatzilla@59.92.152.69] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 17:16:36 hiyuh [~hiyuh@KD124214245222.ppp-bb.dion.ne.jp] has joined #scheme 17:16:49 Right, that is my shorthand for (f2 (f2 (f2 (f2 ... 17 times ... (f2 1) ... ) 17:16:56 so what does this mean? 17:17:11 Well, this is actually complicated. 17:17:12 we have log2y calls of f2 once we end the recursion 17:17:23 Yes, but the complexity for each of those f2 calls is different. 17:17:27 yes 17:17:42 And in this case, what value f2 returns is important. 17:18:06 Because it determines the complexity of the next f2 operation. 17:18:23 it will be 1, 2, 3, ....., log2y 17:18:47 (the inputs for f2) 17:19:06 Will it? Have you tested? 17:19:23 well, i know what f2 does 17:19:37 it takes x and returns x+1 17:19:41 the last f3 call will return 1 17:19:48 and we have log2y pending f2 calls 17:20:04 So, supposing it just returns x + 1. 17:20:49 -!- kar8nga [~kar8nga@m-3.vc-graz.ac.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:21:27 Then, yes, the values will be (in this case) 1..17. In which case, since f2 has O(n) runtime, you have runtime of 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + 17. 17:22:02 I don't have a rigorous answer for this, but from what I'm seeing, you're looking at complexity of O(log(n)^2). 17:22:13 i see 17:22:53 can you tell me how you got to that? 17:23:01 Well, okay. You derived 17 from log(n0. 17:23:05 log(n), even. 17:23:16 Now, the steps is 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + 17. 17:23:39 That is the same as 17 * 18 / 2 (IIRC). 17:23:57 i.e., 1 + 2 + ... + n == n * (n + 1) / 2. 17:23:58 arithmetic progression from 1 to logn? 17:24:04 sum of ^ 17:24:06 That makes it proportional to n^2. 17:24:09 Right. 17:24:26 i see 17:24:49 AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable233.174-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 17:25:10 thanks ^_^ 17:25:16 didn't think it would be this complicated 17:25:36 Hahahaha. My pleasure, but don't take my answer as gospel. Get a second opinion. 17:25:37 -!- Cowmoo [~Cowmoo@c-71-192-163-98.hsd1.nh.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:26:01 BTW, if you change k to higher values, that is likely to seriously change the complexities too. 17:26:03 i just stupidly assumed that since f2 is O(n), and we do log2y steps then T(n) = T(n/2) + O(n) which is O(n) 17:26:09 And I bet your lecturer is going to do it. 17:26:40 the recurrence relation that i thought described this function ^ 17:26:52 Hahahahaha. 17:27:20 i'm glad that i amuse you :p 17:27:32 :-P 17:27:41 As I said, get a second opinion. You might get an even better answer. 17:28:03 I'm just doing it the ghetto way, without using recurrence relations or anything like that. :-P 17:28:39 A question on tail recursion implementation... 17:28:41 that's how you roll? 17:29:06 (define (foo x) (foo x)) should run forever 17:29:12 Genosh: Yep. 17:29:17 how about (define (foo x) (eval (foo x)))? 17:29:56 It crashes on both s48 and racket (I didn't test anywhere else). 17:29:57 Genosh: Then (foo x) is no longer in tail position, and tail recursion doesn't apply. 17:30:18 cky: but does eval ever get called in this context? 17:30:22 No. 17:31:44 What confuses me is that I've read this in the r5rs: "Similarly, eval must evaluate its argument as if it were in tail position within the eval procedure". 17:32:00 And I don't really know what that exactly means. 17:32:07 Yes, but (eval (foo x)) evaluates the _result_ of (foo x). 17:32:18 And since (foo x) doesn't return in this case, no result is forthcoming. 17:32:27 -!- vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@122.167.114.245] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:32:53 Mmmm a good catch. 17:33:01 Thanks I think it's clearer now. :) 17:33:11 [07:23:08pm] Now, the steps is 1 + 2 + 3 + ... + 17. 17:33:17 cky, what exactly are we counting here? 17:33:24 Caleb--: The number of calls to f2. 17:33:41 Uh, I mean, the number of steps f2 executes. 17:33:44 1 2 3 4 ... 17 are the inputs to f2? 17:33:57 Yes, that's what you're telling me. 17:33:58 and since it's O(n) then it will also be the compleixties? 17:34:18 Right, whereas if it's O(n^2) then you have to scale accordingly. 17:34:30 err 17:34:51 so it's really O(1) + O(2) + O(3) + ... + O(17)? 17:35:15 You can informally think of it that way, but never write it that way in your actual answer. 17:35:31 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable233.174-176-173.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Quit: foobar] 17:35:40 hehe 17:35:47 i need a way to write it formally 17:39:10 "the sum of the steps that f2 performs"? 17:39:52 Well, with a call of (f2 n), it performs n steps (where a step is a constant-time thing). 17:40:23 yeah 17:41:04 I suppose you can phrase it that way. Don't know if your marker will like it though. 17:41:13 EbiDK [~ebi@3e6b7ac3.rev.stofanet.dk] has joined #scheme 17:41:27 Again, get a second opinion. Maybe that person will work in the CS department and can have a more authoritative answer. :-P 17:41:42 ok :) 17:44:39 thanks again 17:44:47 :-) 17:45:00 *Caleb--* gives cky virtual hugs 17:45:08 Awwww.... 17:45:41 :P 17:45:44 I don't know how hug-friendly #scheme is, so don't know whether to hug back, but in my "home channel" (#stackoverflow), I'd return the hug with no hesitation. :-) 17:45:48 thanks for your wallet. 17:45:48 :P 17:45:55 Oi! 17:45:55 *offby1* backs away slowly 17:46:05 offby1: Hehehehe. 17:52:54 -!- pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 17:54:18 -!- nmg [~nick@dsl78-143-207-11.in-addr.fast.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 17:58:56 -!- EbiDK [~ebi@3e6b7ac3.rev.stofanet.dk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:02:49 mjonsson [~mjonsson@cpe-98-14-173-5.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 18:08:02 nmg [~nick@82.45.149.131] has joined #scheme 18:09:12 -!- nmg [~nick@82.45.149.131] has quit [Client Quit] 18:10:12 -!- Genosh [~Genosh@56.Red-79-155-31.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 18:15:21 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:15:26 -!- rdd [~rdd@c83-250-48-164.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:18:06 Riastradh [~riastradh@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 18:20:18 jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has joined #scheme 18:22:38 -!- wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@pool-72-70-66-31.bstnma.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 18:26:38 -!- wuj [~wuj@pool-74-101-71-212.nycmny.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 18:29:42 wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@pool-71-162-105-126.bstnma.east.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 18:39:55 -!- Blkt [~user@net-93-151-226-225.cust.dsl.teletu.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:44:07 -!- saccade [~saccade@209-6-54-113.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep] 18:51:59 femtoo [~femto@95-89-197-196-dynip.superkabel.de] has joined #scheme 18:52:35 Axsuul [~someone@97-93-99-133.static.mtpk.ca.charter.com] has joined #scheme 18:54:49 -!- Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo3.23.cust.blixtvik.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 18:56:25 Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo3.23.cust.blixtvik.net] has joined #scheme 19:00:17 mehmet [~mehmet@88.231.54.197] has joined #scheme 19:15:24 -!- mehmet [~mehmet@88.231.54.197] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 19:15:53 -!- pchrist_ is now known as pchrist 19:21:49 -!- jao [~user@229.Red-83-32-170.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:49:28 jao [~user@229.Red-83-32-170.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 19:50:08 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 19:54:48 wingo [~wingo@88.0.167.219] has joined #scheme 19:58:23 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 20:03:05 mehmet [~mehmet@88.231.67.9] has joined #scheme 20:03:17 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@91.78.229.84] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 20:06:42 Genosh [~Genosh@56.Red-79-155-31.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 20:12:17 pumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has joined #scheme 20:12:18 -!- mehmet is now known as decaf 20:12:38 -!- wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@pool-71-162-105-126.bstnma.east.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 20:17:44 rdd [~user@c83-250-48-164.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 20:19:41 -!- hiyuh [~hiyuh@KD124214245222.ppp-bb.dion.ne.jp] has quit [Quit: |_ e /\ \/ i |/| G] 20:23:23 Mmm, is there some test or suite of tests to check proper tail recursion in a given implementation? 20:24:27 I think I'm doing it right for lambda procedures but I'm not sure how to test the builtins: eval, apply or call/cc. 20:32:28 -!- gnomon [~gnomon@CPE0022158a8221-CM000f9f776f96.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: leaving] 20:33:49 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp85-141-165-20.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 20:33:53 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-215-88-59.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 20:54:35 -!- pumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 21:11:06 aisa [~aisa@c-68-35-167-179.hsd1.nm.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 21:11:55 -!- choas [~lars@p578F6B49.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:16:14 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 21:17:56 danking: ping 21:22:47 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 21:31:09 dsmith_ [~dsmith@cpe-184-56-129-232.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 21:31:58 lolcow [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 21:32:02 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:32:10 -!- lolcow is now known as leppie 21:34:49 -!- dsmith_ is now known as dsmith 21:39:55 HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-121-57.dip.osnanet.de] has joined #scheme 21:45:32 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp85-141-165-20.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 21:47:02 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:48:19 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:55:39 -!- femtoo [~femto@95-89-197-196-dynip.superkabel.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 22:02:58 -!- dfkjjkfd [~paulh@245-15-ftth.onsnetstudenten.nl] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 22:21:15 -!- mjonsson [~mjonsson@cpe-98-14-173-5.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 22:22:29 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp85-141-165-14.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 22:22:52 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-20-67.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 22:34:29 eli: pong 22:37:13 -!- wingo [~wingo@88.0.167.219] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 22:37:59 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-55-209.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 22:40:54 mjonsson [~mjonsson@cpe-98-14-173-5.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #scheme 22:46:26 danking: I asked them to add it as a new language at the time, but I don't know how they actually measure it. 22:46:54 I think that it goes by file suffixes, but possibly not done immediately with every change. 22:47:10 And finally, you could just ask someone on #github about it. 23:12:11 wisepumpkin [~pumpkin@17.101.89.205] has joined #scheme 23:14:38 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 23:18:03 -!- pavelludiq [~quassel@91.139.194.110] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:22:16 -!- wisepumpkin is now known as I 23:22:46 -!- I is now known as Guest69345 23:23:04 -!- Guest69345 is now known as copumpkin 23:23:04 -!- copumpkin [~pumpkin@17.101.89.205] has quit [Changing host] 23:23:05 copumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has joined #scheme 23:24:52 What are you doing at Apple, copumpkin? 23:24:57 lol 23:25:03 I thought I had a hostmask on 23:25:15 You did, but it showed through briefly. 23:25:16 I guess it doesn't activate quickly enough 23:25:21 (Tor works better.) 23:25:45 yeah, but too much work 23:27:55 -!- HG` [~HG@xdsl-92-252-121-57.dip.osnanet.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 23:35:04 pdelgallego [~pdelgalle@1503031474.dhcp.dbnet.dk] has joined #scheme 23:38:03 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:39:38 copumpkin, there's a trick 23:40:09 you can specify something as the server password and have that authenticate you with nickserv immediately 23:40:13 when you connect 23:40:28 although I don't remember exactly what it is that you need to set it as 23:48:19 pumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has joined #scheme 23:50:49 -!- copumpkin [~pumpkin@unaffiliated/pumpkingod] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 23:52:56 -!- mmc [~michal@cs27124157.pp.htv.fi] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 23:53:34 davazp [~user@36.Red-79-153-149.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #scheme 23:55:14 -!- davazp [~user@36.Red-79-153-149.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:56:02 dfkjjkfd [~paulh@245-15-ftth.onsnetstudenten.nl] has joined #scheme