00:00:03 no 00:00:05 ;Warning: Unhandled command line options: ("--edwin") 00:00:41 ...er, exchange `--no-init-file' and `--edwin'. 00:00:48 and (edit) didnt work 00:01:10 Huh. Can you type (debug) and lisppaste the output? 00:01:20 (at the `2 error>' prompt) 00:02:04 Riastradh: now I tried (create-editor) and something showed up 00:02:15 "scheme-terminal" 00:04:06 Alright, I'll go wander in cliki. 00:04:20 sorry Riastradh actually (edit) opened the window "scheme-terminal" 00:07:00 tcleval, can you type (debug) at the `2 error>' prompt and lisppaste the output? 00:21:19 -!- cbrannon [~cbrannon@gentoo/developer/cbrannon] has quit [Quit: leaving] 00:23:01 cbrannon [~cbrannon@gentoo/developer/cbrannon] has joined #scheme 00:26:48 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.99.147] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:27:26 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.107.148] has joined #scheme 00:31:13 -!- infid [~infid@rrcs-173-198-12-38.west.biz.rr.com] has left #scheme 00:34:31 -!- mejja [~user@c-0eb9e555.023-82-73746f38.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 4.0.1/20110413222027]] 00:55:11 -!- jrtayloriv [~jrtaylori@207-118-45-56.dyn.centurytel.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 01:04:35 -!- shardz [~samuel@ilo.staticfree.info] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:07:54 ymasory_ [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 01:10:06 Nisstyre [~nisstyre@infocalypse-net.info] has joined #scheme 01:10:32 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.107.148] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:10:50 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.107.148] has joined #scheme 01:14:18 -!- ymasory_ [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:19:53 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 01:20:33 xwl_ [~user@nat/nokia/x-xttvrkkjqbnqthyg] has joined #scheme 01:22:43 -!- lbc_ [~quassel@1908ds1-aboes.0.fullrate.dk] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:27:17 gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.110.157] has joined #scheme 01:30:58 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.107.148] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:38:00 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.102.81] has joined #scheme 01:38:35 -!- gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.110.157] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 01:52:43 -!- masm [~masm@bl15-234-183.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 01:54:13 -!- bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 01:54:42 gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.105.4] has joined #scheme 01:55:36 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.102.81] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 02:00:18 Lectus [~fred@189.104.223.17] has joined #scheme 02:02:51 -!- Nisstyre [~nisstyre@infocalypse-net.info] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:05:44 Nisstyre [~nisstyre@infocalypse-net.info] has joined #scheme 02:08:28 -!- githogori [~githogori@adsl-66-123-22-146.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 02:18:28 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable060.239-177-173.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 02:18:32 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-49-168.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:19:24 AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable060.239-177-173.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 02:19:35 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-49-168.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 02:23:30 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.105.99] has joined #scheme 02:23:47 -!- gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.105.4] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 02:39:22 -!- ijp [~user@host86-150-74-195.range86-150.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 02:46:33 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 02:47:56 -!- Jafet [~Jafet@unaffiliated/jafet] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 02:52:02 gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.113.8] has joined #scheme 02:53:45 preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme 02:55:00 -!- tcleval [~funnyguy@187.58.89.76] has quit [Quit: leaving] 02:55:23 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.105.99] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 02:57:25 -!- tauntaun [~Crumpet@ool-44c72ce0.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 02:58:46 -!- blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 02:59:05 blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has joined #scheme 03:01:28 ckrailo [~ckrailo@pool-173-71-46-119.dllstx.fios.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 03:04:41 shardz [~samuel@ilo.staticfree.info] has joined #scheme 03:09:38 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-140.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 03:14:50 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.112.55] has joined #scheme 03:15:18 -!- gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.113.8] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:31:01 rramsden [~rramsden@173.180.120.249] has joined #scheme 03:44:14 -!- rramsden [~rramsden@173.180.120.249] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:58:24 gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.120.43] has joined #scheme 03:59:56 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.112.55] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 04:12:50 leo2007 [~leo@123.114.50.27] has joined #scheme 04:24:56 Met a non-ironic COBOL programmer yesterday: relatively straight-forward cat, too. 04:25:24 -!- ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 04:30:48 klutometis: weeeird. 04:35:14 superjudge [~superjudg@c83-250-110-188.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 04:37:58 -!- superjudge [~superjudg@c83-250-110-188.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Client Quit] 04:41:25 my cat could never get past the COBOL syntax 04:41:29 it was a tough sell 04:47:09 -!- mjonsson [~mjonsson@38.109.95.149] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:12:02 elly: heh; congratulations on your amorous union, btw. 05:12:15 thanks :) 05:21:26 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 05:30:19 -!- leppie [~lolcow@196-215-49-168.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 05:30:53 -!- realitygrill [~realitygr@76.226.216.49] has quit [Quit: realitygrill] 05:31:12 -!- open [~thesk@unaffiliated/open] has quit [Quit: leaving] 05:33:57 githogori [~githogori@adsl-66-123-22-146.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net] has joined #scheme 05:35:43 -!- pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 05:47:33 Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@p5B0C69C0.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 06:02:44 -!- Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@p5B0C69C0.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 06:04:05 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 06:04:27 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@ip70-176-81-92.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #scheme 06:04:28 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@ip70-176-81-92.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Changing host] 06:04:28 kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 06:05:53 kilimanja [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 06:06:43 -!- kilimanja [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Client Quit] 06:08:13 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@jonr5.dsl.xmission.com] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 06:17:27 pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has joined #scheme 06:18:23 jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 06:24:44 -!- Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 06:25:34 Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has joined #scheme 06:31:06 -!- kilimanjaro is now known as KILIMANJARO 06:35:38 -!- leo2007 [~leo@123.114.50.27] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 23.3.50.1] 06:39:19 -!- tupi [~david@189.60.162.71] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:47:04 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-220-162.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 06:47:33 -!- pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:51:44 -!- blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:56:04 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 263 seconds] 06:56:46 -!- monqy [~chap@pool-71-102-217-117.snloca.dsl-w.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: hello] 07:05:53 hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has joined #scheme 07:07:14 -!- hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:07:15 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-220-162.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:07:58 jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 07:09:28 hkBst [~quassel@79.170.210.174] has joined #scheme 07:09:30 -!- hkBst [~quassel@79.170.210.174] has quit [Changing host] 07:09:30 hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has joined #scheme 07:11:50 -!- gremset_ [ubuntu@117.192.120.43] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:15:08 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-179-151.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 07:16:04 -!- aspect [~aspect@abstracted-spleen.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 07:17:39 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:18:19 stis [~stis@host-90-235-38-221.mobileonline.telia.com] has joined #scheme 07:29:31 bokr [~eduska@109.110.32.172] has joined #scheme 07:46:26 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-179-151.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:49:02 -!- saiko-chriskun [~chris-kun@fsf/member/saiko-chriskun] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.4] 07:49:30 -!- chemuduguntar [~ravic@smtp.touchcut.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:50:02 wingo [~wingo@90.164.198.39] has joined #scheme 07:56:54 -!- futilius [~otheruser@2001:470:d:128:216:3eff:fe86:c70e] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 07:57:00 futilius [~otheruser@2001:470:d:128:216:3eff:fe86:c70e] has joined #scheme 08:01:28 -!- alaricsp [~alaric@relief.warhead.org.uk] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 08:01:41 -!- xwl_ [~user@nat/nokia/x-xttvrkkjqbnqthyg] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:04:52 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-220-88.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 08:09:40 xwl_ [~user@nat/nokia/x-cvqmrxwaryyilrfn] has joined #scheme 08:15:57 -!- araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 08:23:16 ravi_ [~ravi@118-93-161-58.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has joined #scheme 08:32:22 -!- ckrailo [~ckrailo@pool-173-71-46-119.dllstx.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.] 08:35:02 -!- Adrinael [~adrinael@barrel.rolli.org] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 08:35:08 Adrinael [~adrinael@barrel.rolli.org] has joined #scheme 08:36:24 alaricsp [~alaric@relief.warhead.org.uk] has joined #scheme 08:37:07 EbiDK [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has joined #scheme 08:42:50 Has Python got closures or not? 08:45:34 yes but if you set a free var, you then get a local copy instead of mutating the shared copy. 08:47:45 No closures effectively then. 08:48:14 so much for nuance :) 08:50:03 Thank you for confirmation. 08:51:19 -!- EbiDK [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 08:51:59 EbiDK [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has joined #scheme 08:53:07 -!- KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 09:06:55 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-140.vinet.ba] has joined #scheme 09:12:17 EbiDK_ [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has joined #scheme 09:13:21 -!- bokr [~eduska@109.110.32.172] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 09:26:14 -!- rdd [~rdd@c83-250-52-16.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 09:26:59 aspect [~aspect@abstracted-spleen.org] has joined #scheme 09:30:49 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:34:50 -!- MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@users-146-140.vinet.ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 09:38:41 -!- futilius [~otheruser@2001:470:d:128:216:3eff:fe86:c70e] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 09:41:20 -!- ozzloy [~ozzloy@unaffiliated/ozzloy] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 09:42:47 ozzloy [~ozzloy@ozzloy.lifeafterking.org] has joined #scheme 09:42:47 -!- ozzloy [~ozzloy@ozzloy.lifeafterking.org] has quit [Changing host] 09:42:47 ozzloy [~ozzloy@unaffiliated/ozzloy] has joined #scheme 09:43:29 futilius [~otheruser@2001:470:d:128:216:3eff:fe86:c70e] has joined #scheme 09:46:58 -!- xwl_ [~user@nat/nokia/x-cvqmrxwaryyilrfn] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:47:38 rdd [~user@c83-250-52-16.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 09:47:44 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-220-88.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 09:49:09 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-217-195.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 09:54:59 -!- EbiDK [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 09:57:18 masm [~masm@bl15-234-183.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #scheme 10:03:09 -!- stis [~stis@host-90-235-38-221.mobileonline.telia.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:16:47 -!- AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable060.239-177-173.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Quit: foobar] 10:31:25 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme 10:33:11 stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has joined #scheme 11:03:38 -!- Lectus [~fred@189.104.223.17] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 11:15:31 -!- EbiDK_ [511bd602@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.27.214.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 11:18:34 read-only-closures (for want of a better name) are still better than nothing 11:18:50 although, I guess python really needs mutation 11:19:21 Read-only-closures have been around in Java since the beginning. ;-) 11:19:37 Java still lacks "full" closures, pending Java 8. :-P 11:21:21 But in Java's case, rather than what wingo described, Java simply requires you to make all free local variables "final", so that you're prohibited from setting them. (In practice, what the compiler does is copy their values into fields of the anonymous class.) 11:21:54 python's behavior is surprising, if you ever run into it in anger 11:22:07 Quite. 11:23:33 heh, makes implementation easier for sure. 11:23:45 i don't think so, actually 11:23:45 bremner_: Java's, or Python's? :-) 11:23:48 there is no difference 11:24:06 either. just copy the constants at compile time. 11:24:18 "optimize away" the closures 11:24:26 Right, that's how Java does it. 11:24:33 you can just copy the values into the closure; you have to put set! variables into boxes though 11:24:42 so you copy the boxes 11:24:51 and then referencing a set! variable unboxes 11:24:55 that's all. 11:25:07 wingo: Right, and Java's designers decided that using boxes was too confusing because it made primitives heap-allocated, etc. 11:25:08 I assume Clojure is less stupid? 11:25:44 wingo: (Not primitives per se, but the boxes, being made heap-allocated.) 11:26:08 *cky* doesn't know jack about Clojure, other than that it ought to provide real closures, as far as I know. 11:29:02 it does 11:30:13 :-) 11:31:56 Ruby provides closures but they are weird, especially before Ruby 1.9. 11:32:36 For example, consider this code: a = 0; (1..5).each {|a| puts a} 11:33:16 In Ruby 1.8, a == 5. In Ruby 1.9, a == 0 (as it rightly should be, IMO). 11:33:58 o rly. 11:34:05 yeah, ruby is braindead 11:34:06 ruby 1.8 mutates the outer a? 11:34:14 ecraven: Right. 11:38:00 soveran [~soveran@186.19.214.247] has joined #scheme 11:41:52 Yes, that's one oddity 11:44:11 zmv [~daniel@c9533906.virtua.com.br] has joined #scheme 11:52:37 cky: wow that looks horrible 11:52:43 re: mutating outer variable 11:56:05 ohwow: Uh huh. 11:58:16 -!- cafesofie [~cafesofie@ool-18b97779.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:06:08 -!- ineiros [~itniemin@james.ics.hut.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 12:12:48 tupi [~david@189.60.162.71] has joined #scheme 12:17:46 slom [~sloma@port-87-234-239-162.static.qsc.de] has joined #scheme 12:22:21 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-217-195.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 12:24:07 xwl [~user@123.108.223.27] has joined #scheme 12:26:37 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has joined #scheme 12:27:57 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-185-48.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 12:35:44 -!- zanea [~zanea@219-89-171-61.jetstart.xtra.co.nz] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:39:31 pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has joined #scheme 12:39:56 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-185-48.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 12:50:06 leo2007 [~leo@2402:f000:5:2901:225:4bff:fea9:b9e4] has joined #scheme 12:51:32 Rearden [~John@rrcs-184-74-156-189.nys.biz.rr.com] has joined #scheme 12:59:37 -!- Rearden [~John@rrcs-184-74-156-189.nys.biz.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:00:43 gr 13:06:50 -!- pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:08:05 gcartier_ [~gcartier@modemcable026.84-70-69.static.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 13:09:54 Direktor [~John@rrcs-184-74-156-189.nys.biz.rr.com] has joined #scheme 13:12:35 -!- slom [~sloma@port-87-234-239-162.static.qsc.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:12:52 ineiros [~itniemin@james.ics.hut.fi] has joined #scheme 13:21:53 -!- Direktor [~John@rrcs-184-74-156-189.nys.biz.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:27:34 dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has joined #scheme 13:28:25 pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has joined #scheme 13:30:07 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:32:54 -!- drdo [~user@91.205.108.93.rev.vodafone.pt] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:39:15 dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has joined #scheme 13:40:29 eli: Not only was the "jaguar shark" reference obviously a joke, it was ancient history, long before the R7RS WGs were even formed. 14:08:18 zanea [~zanea@219-89-168-18.jetstart.xtra.co.nz] has joined #scheme 14:19:32 leppie [~lolcow@196-215-49-168.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 14:20:32 -!- samth_away is now known as samth 14:21:11 foof, i think that sets a new record for irc conversation latency 14:21:28 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 14:21:43 :) 14:24:42 MrFahrenheit [~RageOfTho@62.101.146.140] has joined #scheme 14:34:41 aisa [~aisa@173-10-243-253-Albuquerque.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 14:45:42 Oh, actually that quote was after the formation of the WG. Wow, we've been at this a long time :/ 14:49:59 bweaver [~user@host-68-169-175-225.WISOLT2.epbfi.com] has joined #scheme 14:52:02 foof, also, to make eli's point in a slightly less inflammatory way, the r6rs was the product of a lot of effort, and ratified by the scheme community 14:52:27 the r7rs process then explicitly decided to wipe the slate clean, and start from r5rs 14:52:54 samth: Indeed, that's why we're using as much of R6RS as possible. I'm one of the strongest R6RS proponents in the group. 14:53:17 that this strikes people who were in favor of (an contributed to) r6rs as insulting to their efforts shouldn't be surprising 14:53:48 -!- hkBst [~quassel@gentoo/developer/hkbst] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 14:53:51 foof, it's pretty clearly not true that you're "using as much of R6RS as possible" 14:53:58 for example, you could have started from r6rs 14:54:13 samth: That was never an option - the SC wrote the charter. 14:54:25 -!- ravi_ [~ravi@118-93-161-58.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 14:55:35 And it's no use pretending that R6RS was perfect or universally accepted. The SC split Scheme into two languages specifically because R6RS was controversial and had fractured the community. 14:56:00 foof, you could have taken the r6rs document part 1, and removed things until you had a language that fit the SC's (silly) size requirement 14:56:05 But arguing whether I'm pro R6RS or not is meaningless. 14:56:40 and yes, R6RS was controversial, and you shouldn't be surprised when those who liked it are unhappy with the behavior of those who were against it 14:57:00 If there's any specific aspect of R6RS you want included, by all means bring it up on the list. 14:57:13 We are very open to feedback. 14:59:10 Anyway, I need to get to sleep, but I lookforward to hearing from you on the list. 14:59:49 sadly, the things i want in a programming language are the sorts of things the SC rules out in the charter 15:00:09 Well, WG2 is pretty wide open. 15:00:13 edw [~user@70-89-62-209-philadelphia-panjde.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 15:00:33 -!- xwl [~user@123.108.223.27] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:00:51 Hi guys, I've started working on my Scheme(48) web app framework. It's up on Github for anyone who's interested: . 15:04:29 it only works for scm48? 15:08:17 ravi_ [~ravi@118.93.79.33] has joined #scheme 15:09:35 ohwow, interesting scheme programs rarely work on multiple implementations ;) 15:12:12 ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 15:13:22 evhan_ [~evhan@dyn-72-33-88-141.uwnet.wisc.edu] has joined #scheme 15:13:58 realitygrill [~realitygr@adsl-76-226-123-190.dsl.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 15:15:10 -!- evhan_ is now known as evhan` 15:15:45 -!- ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit] 15:19:31 ckrailo [~ckrailo@208.86.167.249] has joined #scheme 15:19:55 -!- evhan` [~evhan@dyn-72-33-88-141.uwnet.wisc.edu] has quit [Quit: leaving] 15:29:10 ohwow: As samth said, yeah. It makes use of some POSIX stuff for networking, process handling, time, etc. And it uses threads. And even if it were completelty Scheme-agnostic, it would need to be divided into modules somehow, which tend to be implementation-specific. A lot of the code is very implementation-agnostic, however, and might be worth stealing. 15:30:02 -!- zmv [~daniel@c9533906.virtua.com.br] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 15:35:33 samth: What things do you want in a PL, out of interest? (I second foof's statement that WG2 is likely to satisfy you, BTW) 15:35:50 ...unless you want excitingly crazy stuff 15:36:00 In which case, we can have a fun conversation about why it would be useful :-D 15:36:27 -!- gcartier_ [~gcartier@modemcable026.84-70-69.static.videotron.ca] has left #scheme 15:38:21 WG2? 15:40:52 r6rs's module-macro interaction is really quite good imo 15:45:04 edw: R7RS is being done in two slices. WG1 (working group 1) make a core language, WG2 make lots of libraries to do fun things on top of it 15:45:24 So an implementation will probably implement whatever of WG1's optional bits the hardware allows, and then whatever of WG2's modules they have space for :-) 15:45:39 pdlogan [~patrick@174-25-37-137.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 15:45:49 'lo wingo! What's the haps, peep? 15:45:50 Ah. OK, familiar with that, just not the abbrevation. Came in media race. 15:45:59 'lo! 15:46:21 (I'm afraid my colleage and I who saw you in Brussels greet each other with that in the office now; and it's ALL YOUR FAULT) 15:46:21 i got a job doing some javascript compiler work. it's interesting! 15:46:26 tauntaun [~Crumpet@ool-4356673a.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #scheme 15:46:28 Yes, I saw your blog post! Good work! 15:46:30 hahaha 15:46:33 :) 15:46:54 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-182-244.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 15:47:51 sjamaan often tells me that JS is nearly as a good as Scheme! 15:48:13 My interactions with it have largely been painful, but that's due to browser APIs rather than the language itself, so I reserve judgement 15:48:46 yeah, and it's funny, the javascriptcore maintainer is a former guile maintainer, i just found something in mozilla by another former guile maintainer... 15:49:05 one of the v8 benchmarks is a scheme2js-compiled nboyer and earley benchmark 15:49:19 Assimilate! 15:49:23 hehe 15:49:56 See also: http://api.call-cc.org/doc/spock etc 15:50:14 "Moreover, the compilation strategy used stresses JavaScript implementations in unusual ways and the results indicate that many JavaScript engines seem to have quite serious limitations regarding static function nesting and closure performance." 15:50:25 See? I just sent you an EXCELLENT TEST CASE too. You can thank me later! 15:50:39 hey i was looking for one! 15:50:40 Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 15:50:57 i'll thank you now! 15:51:37 -!- pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-5f7691b9.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Disconnected by services] 15:51:49 pygospa [~TheRealPy@kiel-4dbec32f.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #scheme 15:51:51 Thank Felix, actually ;-) 15:54:39 -!- leo2007 [~leo@2402:f000:5:2901:225:4bff:fea9:b9e4] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 15:55:06 vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@122.167.76.82] has joined #scheme 15:55:14 -!- vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@122.167.76.82] has quit [Changing host] 15:55:14 vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@fsf/member/vu3rdd] has joined #scheme 15:59:18 foof: (a) I remember it being shortly after; searching the logs no, I see jcowan announcing you at 2010-01-31, and your comment at 2010-02-09. 15:59:51 (b) Yes, it's obviously a joke, I didn't expect someone who deals with any kinds of sharks to be on any scheme related role, 16:01:39 (c) But more than being a bad joke, it's a joke that you *cannot* make with your role, *unless* you're willing to take it being perceived as indication for other things. In other words, "it's only a joke" is not a way out. 16:02:18 (d) (and similarly for alaricsp's enthusiastic continuation of that joke, of course.) 16:04:07 *alaricsp* missed the original reference that foof was replying to 16:04:16 *alaricsp* looks for a chance to make a 'continuation' joke instead... 16:04:31 monqy [~chap@pool-71-102-217-117.snloca.dsl-w.verizon.net] has joined #scheme 16:05:15 homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-133-92.netcologne.de] has joined #scheme 16:05:37 I know! 16:06:41 alaricsp: http://ccl.clozure.com/irc-logs/scheme/2010-02/scheme-2010.02.09.txt 16:07:37 Ah, I see! 16:08:12 Yeah, that was a bit insensitive 16:08:28 (as was the joke I was just pondering about R7RS re-using R6RS's continuation...) 16:08:47 In all seriousness, the R6RS folks did work hard and with good intentions 16:09:02 And it's sad that the community reacted so negatively towards their work 16:09:06 But it's also telling 16:09:50 alaricsp: insensitivity is completely irrelevant here; I was complaining about the general sentiment of anti-r6rs for the sake of nothing but anti-r6rs, 16:09:59 So, yes, frustrations ran high (on all sides) about R6RS... that does result in some nasty comments, which probably shouldn't be aired in such public forums, as they'll just cause offence 16:10:22 And I'm sorry about that 16:10:27 ...and my complaint in this context is the huge disussion about a syntax system -- a subject that was already thoroughly chewed and hashed. 16:10:49 R7RS is trying to take the bits of R6RS that are good 16:11:26 The effect of the result, I predict, will be surprisingly similar, with the changes largely being in surface (and therefore important, but not quite so *deep* as you might think) details 16:11:56 I can't tell you how annoying it is for me to read something like "we need to further discuss the various syntax systems", since it is inherently assuming no prior discussion. 16:12:19 I can only assume a much higher degree of annoyance to anyone who was actually *doing* those discussions, like the r6rs people. 16:12:32 Personally, I think there's not been enough summarising of past discussions 16:12:46 And Andre was also deep in those discussions -- which is why I admire him relentlessly trying to explain things. 16:12:50 There was a lot of R7RS talk lately about else and => in cond, with ideas bouncing around all over the place 16:13:00 I had to make a wiki page and draw up a list to summarise it all before it made sense to ME 16:13:14 Yes, that was one thing that was thoroughly discussed. 16:13:22 The choice of a lowlevel system is another. 16:13:31 Now, mailing list archives and personal memories thereof capture all the knowledge, but they're a pain to extract the conclusions from in the long run 16:13:46 Absolutely right. 16:13:49 -!- githogori [~githogori@adsl-66-123-22-146.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:14:03 Which is why they are summarised in a report that was approved. 16:14:11 I think the main problem is that most of the "how to implement macros properly" knowledge is pretty much concentrated among the R6RS people 16:14:24 The report just codifies the interface, but doesn't mention much about implementation details 16:14:31 jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has joined #scheme 16:14:31 And now everyone's trying to reverse-engineer that 16:14:55 Well, the conclusions were summarised, but do we have justifications? Without justifications, we don't know if those conclusions apply globally or just to a particular set of situations the authors had thought of 16:15:02 sjamaan: That's an even better reason to avoid diverging away. 16:15:42 eli: I don't think it's good to just accept something unquestioningly 16:16:00 There's no need to reverse engineer anything, btw, the whole `syntax-case' thing was made up publicly as academic research, discussed and improved publicly, with derivative systems announced publicly. 16:16:37 sjamaan: I don't think it's a good start to reject something that was already discussed and accepted. 16:16:42 The systems that implemented syntax-case either already had it or just took psyntax (or maybe Andre's implementation) 16:16:56 sjamaan: In fact that sentence is the typical way in which the "Scheme community" is killing itself. 16:17:11 r7rs will sit and discuss and discuss, and they'll agree on some macro system. 16:17:20 Just like r6rs did 16:17:25 you are being a little dramatic eli :) 16:17:31 Then there will be an r8rs which will ... start from scratch again. 16:17:37 syntax-case also manages to hog the "bare lambda in define-syntax" spot, and triggers some people's "not jewel like" concerns due to having an entire matching system embedded in it, too 16:17:43 Now, there may be good reasons for those to both be good things 16:17:56 i almost mailed about that 16:18:02 TBH I think it's too soon to nail down hygienic macros and modules 16:18:03 And so on... But that's nothing compared to individual schemers which will -- obviously -- decide that it's stupid to just follow the standard without asking questions. 16:18:08 i think you do want a different data type for "code" that's not s-expressions 16:18:14 so you can get source information, for example 16:18:23 wingo: I'm being *absolutely* serious about it. 16:18:27 wingo: There's something to be said for that, but source information can also come from a weak hashmap from the cons cells 16:18:30 Many systems are just barely getting modules and proper low-level hygienic macro systems 16:18:34 and there's no reason that these "syntax object" can't have rename / compare procedures attached to them 16:18:44 wingo: I've not studied the implementation costs of weak hashmaps to decide if Is hould be too serious about saying that, though :-) 16:18:48 alaricsp: yes, but that's not as good, and is more difficult to propagate through the expander 16:19:01 sjamaan: No, *not* like r6rs -- there was no agreed low-level macro system in previous reports. 16:19:08 guile uses weak hashmaps from the reader, but it would be better if we had a read-syntax procedure like racket does 16:19:16 Agreed. It'd work nicely with some kind of hash consing, so that equality-preserving transformations don't lose the links, too. 16:19:54 basically i think an arity-1 solution is the right thing 16:20:06 Now, as for R8RS reinventing the wheel again... 16:20:11 note that r6rs did not specify constructors for syntax objects 16:20:18 so that is stil system-dependent 16:20:20 If R7RS fails to get popular support, then yes, it probably will; and rightly so 16:20:42 Problem #1: Macros are hard. Problem #2: Understanding why macros are hard is hard. Problem #3: All the existing APIs for writing macros suck, although some exhibit nicer properties than others. 16:20:53 Riastradh: Nice summary! 16:21:28 wingo: The thing is, the report is supposed to specify common practice. It can't just force a particular implementation style on Scheme systems 16:21:50 No, alaricsp, I left a lot out of this summary, but what I left out wouldn't be polite to state in public conversation. 16:21:59 sjamaan: true; and the r6rs was ahead of its time in many ways, imo 16:22:03 in both good and bad ways 16:22:15 wingo: Yes, and I guess that's one of the reasons there was such a backlash against it 16:22:25 however the standardization process is also a way to communicate and realize commonalities 16:22:30 As a user, I've always liked RSC (hygienic by default is good, right?) but I've not studied the precise difference between RSC and implicit renaming. It looked like it was just down to being passed some context-specific procedures as opposed to using global procedures and the context hidden in the syntax objects. Or something. 16:23:07 wingo: My understanding that it's mostly the completely non-syntax-case systems that didn't like to be told how to implement things 16:23:29 alaricsp, you need to work a lot harder to be taken seriously by people who have worked extensively with macros. 16:24:54 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 16:26:02 *alaricsp* nods, I try not to appear to be authoratative about them! 16:26:47 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 16:26:47 -!- tauntaun [~Crumpet@ool-4356673a.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat] 16:27:36 leo2007 [~leo@th041100.ip.tsinghua.edu.cn] has joined #scheme 16:27:45 So, in effect, Riastradh, I'm not working harder to be taken seriously about macros, as it'd be a lie ;-) 16:30:37 alaricsp: Saying that makes me think that you don't have practical experience with `syntax-case'; specifically, one of the things I like a lot about syntax case is that things are behaving well even when I have a very weak understanding of how it's implemented. 16:31:11 (In fact, I have a very vague understanding of the implementation details, and I am not re-reading those papers very intentionally, to keep things this way. It's just not needed.) 16:32:53 nteon [~nteon@c-98-210-195-105.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 16:33:54 eli: Indeed I don't! But these are criticisms I've heard hereabouts, and I've never heard a satisfactory justification 16:33:58 *wingo* has a painfully complete understanding of the details, but no experience with ER or syntactic closures 16:34:30 -!- Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 16:34:35 rramsden [~rramsden@s64-180-62-209.bc.hsia.telus.net] has joined #scheme 16:34:44 I once witnessed a flamewar about the lack of a wrapper macro, in which the pro-syntax-case faction stated that no other macro system claimed that spot, so where was the clash? What if another macro system took the name "syntax-rules"? etc 16:35:06 Which wasn't particularly convincing, to me 16:35:24 Now, I'm interested in finding out how tightly bound hygienic macro implementation algorithms are tied to particular interfaces 16:35:42 today's mail was the first i had heard about conflict over the lack of a wrapper macro 16:35:48 Can we implement ER and synclos in terms of one another, for instance? 16:35:51 Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has joined #scheme 16:36:25 wingo: I think it was just felt, by an already grumpy public, to be a bit... imperialist. "This is the ONE TRUE macro system, not merely one of many" - rather than a particularly technical objection 16:36:47 alaricsp, if you're interested, here's some reading material: . 16:36:48 alaricsp: I've never seen that argument made. 16:37:41 I mean, I've seen the issue leading to flamewars, but I didn't see anyone going with that particular "no other macro system claimed that spot" point. 16:37:57 Riastradh: And heavy reading it is, too ;-) 16:39:07 eli: I can't remember when this was, so I probably can't pin it down in any logs... I suspect it was in this channel, though 16:39:24 alaricsp: here's a much lighter read: http://blog.racket-lang.org/2011/04/writing-syntax-case-macros.html 16:39:41 I'm serious, alaricsp. No doubt I am biased, but frankly I think riaxpander is much easier to read and understand than psyntax. There are no stupid Greek letters or other dingbats derived from a PL theory paper obscuring the purpose, and the structure is much more clearly separated than that of psyntax, without any bootstrapping business to complicate matters. 16:40:34 psyntax is a _huge_ pile of code 16:40:46 riaxpander is more readable and chopped up into byte-sized chunks 16:41:23 psyntax also includes most of a module system 16:41:45 yes, i had to hack psyntax extensively to get it to work with guile's modules 16:41:53 and even now there are still some issues there 16:42:00 not psyntax's fault of course 16:42:15 our fork was quite old 16:42:29 Chicken doesn't have syntax-case because the only implementations are psyntax and Andre's, both of which are quite large and not easily integratable 16:42:37 that is a point in favor of psyntax, btw: it does work. but i agree that it's wrong to force people to use it 16:42:42 saiko-chriskun [~chris-kun@fsf/member/saiko-chriskun] has joined #scheme 16:42:44 Riastradh: That sounds quite true, but I bet I should read some papers and/or just work through the problem myself on paper to get an idea of architecture before I dive into some code 16:42:45 so it's good that plt has a second impl 16:42:50 ...but that might just be how my brain works 16:42:55 and andre had an impl too 16:43:04 wingo: I doubt PLT's is easy to adapt to other systems 16:43:22 sjamaan: probably easier than the other two, tbh 16:43:39 Really? That's bad news for the other two 16:43:47 (since they're aimed at being mostly standalone) 16:43:52 i mean, to a system that already has modules 16:43:58 tauntaun [~Crumpet@ool-4356673a.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #scheme 16:44:09 Last I knew, Racket's macro expander was written largely in C. 16:44:11 psytnax is easy to add to Ye Olde Home Growne R5RS Scheme 16:44:17 gack 16:44:28 Riastradh: horrors! 16:44:39 eli: say it ain't so! 16:44:41 alaricsp: Start from my blog post. You don't need anything more than a user's point of view. 16:44:53 *alaricsp* is reading eli's blog post 16:45:13 wingo: More than that -- it's likely to be more complicated, since it deals with more things like certificates etc. 16:45:21 wingo: (more than psyntax, that is.) 16:45:28 ok! 16:46:25 sjamaan: basically i think that procedures of syntax -> syntax is actually the right way to treat macro expansion, with richer syntax objects; but that i very much agree that forcing people to use e.g. psyntax's implementation of modules ain't right. 16:46:32 there! a thought! 16:46:48 someone call the fire department 16:47:00 :) 16:47:31 eli, quick question: Consider your definition (define-syntax (while stx) (define subs (syntax->list stx)) (datum->syntax (quote-syntax here) ...]. Can I write (define (frobnicate stx) (define subs (syntax->list stx)) (datum->syntax (quote-syntax here) ...] in a module M, and then do (require-for-syntax M) (define-syntax (while stx) (frobnicate stx)), with exactly the same semantics? 16:50:27 -!- dRbiG [drbig@unhallowed.pl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:51:05 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-182-244.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 16:52:41 HG` [~HG@p579F78B7.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 16:54:01 ymasory [~ymasory@frank.ldc.upenn.edu] has joined #scheme 16:54:25 KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@ip70-176-81-92.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #scheme 16:54:28 -!- KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@ip70-176-81-92.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Changing host] 16:54:28 KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 16:54:53 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 16:58:42 -!- martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 17:03:09 Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@91.12.45.130] has joined #scheme 17:03:31 gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-216-248.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has joined #scheme 17:04:30 martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme 17:05:32 jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #scheme 17:07:26 -!- ASau` [~user@95-26-159-184.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 17:09:02 Riastradh: I don't see why not... The only difference is where (quote-syntax here) appears, so it should be fine assuming that everything that the generated code refers to is kept the same in M. 17:17:03 ASau [~user@95-26-159-184.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 17:17:32 Riastradh, ive looked at your riaexpander before but never fully understood it because I get tripped up on the variable names, it would help others to read your code if you used full words, not just 'r', 'c', an things like that 17:23:59 Where don't I use full words? 17:24:29 Ok, I'd already read about syntax-case's API when I looked at all the macro systems I could lay my hands on... that doesn't tell me how it WORKS 17:24:42 I grepped for `r c' (common in explicit renaming macros: (lambda (e r c) ...)), and all that turned up was the SYNTAX-RULES implementation, which I didn't write. 17:27:28 alaricsp: did you read the beautiful code paper? 17:27:49 edw` [~user@64.197.128.210] has joined #scheme 17:27:54 fair enough, I guess I go straight to 'synrules.scm' each time 17:27:59 http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~dyb/pubs/bc-syntax-case.pdf 17:28:04 wingo: Yeah, but I've forgotten it. Perhaps it's time to reread it, thanks for reminding me 17:28:13 I have the hardcopy right here! 17:28:20 heh 17:28:48 it's funny, he gets to the end and says "well actually it's not beautiful. but it works, and things that work well are beautiful, so there you go!" 17:29:20 Ahah, my family return home 17:29:26 -!- edw [~user@70-89-62-209-philadelphia-panjde.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 17:29:27 I need to go and cook dinner! TTFN all! 17:29:35 ciao! 17:32:24 tupi__ [~david@139.82.89.24] has joined #scheme 17:34:05 -!- tupi [~david@189.60.162.71] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:39:18 alaricsp: re "does't tell me how it WORKS" -- implementation is much less important than API in general, and in particular for a standard. 17:43:40 jonrafkind, synrules.scm is essentially irrelevant... All it does is turn (syntax-rules () ((F x y z) (FOO (MUMBLE x) y z))) into (lambda (form rename compare) (let ((x (cadr form)) (y ...) (z ...)) `(,(rename 'FOO) (,(rename 'MUMBLE) ,x) ,y ,z]. 17:45:44 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:45:45 In other words, it generates code to match a pattern and construct a quasiquotation where all pattern variables are substituted and all literal names are renamed hygienically. 17:46:19 -!- lusory [~bart@bb121-6-160-243.singnet.com.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:46:23 ok, so does riaxpander support procedural macros? 17:46:37 Yes, that's how synrules.scm works. 17:47:39 ok but using explicit renaming? syntax-case doesn't require explicit renaming, so I wondered why synrules isn't implemented in terms of some API similar to syntax-case 17:48:24 lusory [~bart@bb121-6-160-243.singnet.com.sg] has joined #scheme 17:48:40 Forget SYNTAX-CASE; it is a complicated red herring. Perhaps start with Jonathan Rees's (very short) article `Implementing Lexically Scoped Macros'. 17:50:19 Explicit renaming is much simpler to understand than SYNTAX-CASE, and sufficient to implement SYNTAX-RULES. 17:51:40 thats true, but when you need procedural macros explicit renaming looks like a huge pain 17:53:57 I didn't say anything about how easy it is to write your own macros. Riaxpander is an exercise in understanding what a macro expander does. You could build SYNTAX-CASE in riaxpander if you like. 17:54:10 mmc1 [~michal@82-148-210-75.fiber.unet.nl] has joined #scheme 17:54:23 mdmkolbe [~adamsmd@2001:18e8:2:244:212:3fff:fe43:5290] has joined #scheme 17:55:00 ok 17:56:52 githogori [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has joined #scheme 17:57:27 -!- Hal9k [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has quit [] 17:58:38 -!- tauntaun [~Crumpet@ool-4356673a.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:00:46 alaricsp, you should read Jonathan Rees's article `Implementing Lexically Scoped Macros' too. 18:01:02 -!- KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 18:01:09 its funny that rees mentions the pattern matcher as being harder to implement than lexical scoping -- ive found the pattern matcher quite simple to implement 18:01:27 at least the macro by example algorithm 18:02:03 githogori_ [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has joined #scheme 18:02:26 -!- githogori_ [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:04:39 -!- lusory [~bart@bb121-6-160-243.singnet.com.sg] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 18:04:56 -!- araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 18:05:30 lusory [~bart@bb121-6-160-243.singnet.com.sg] has joined #scheme 18:06:57 djcb [~user@a88-112-253-18.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #scheme 18:07:50 -!- edw` [~user@64.197.128.210] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:14:08 edw [~user@70-89-62-209-philadelphia-panjde.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #scheme 18:16:59 -!- preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 18:19:02 -!- leo2007 [~leo@th041100.ip.tsinghua.edu.cn] has quit [Quit: rcirc on GNU Emacs 23.3.50.1] 18:22:28 preflex [~preflex@unaffiliated/mauke/bot/preflex] has joined #scheme 18:35:38 DerGuteMoritz [~syn@85.88.17.198] has joined #scheme 18:36:40 -!- vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@fsf/member/vu3rdd] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:37:04 vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@122.167.76.82] has joined #scheme 18:37:24 -!- vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@122.167.76.82] has quit [Changing host] 18:37:24 vu3rdd [~vu3rdd@fsf/member/vu3rdd] has joined #scheme 18:37:38 githogori_ [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has joined #scheme 18:37:46 -!- githogori_ [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 18:38:30 -!- githogori [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 18:38:50 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:38:55 githogori [~githogori@216.207.36.222] has joined #scheme 18:40:31 superjudge [~superjudg@c83-250-110-188.bredband.comhem.se] has joined #scheme 18:43:56 Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 18:45:55 HG`` [~HG@p579F7CBE.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 18:48:29 -!- HG` [~HG@p579F78B7.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 18:48:32 pdlogan1 [~patrick@148.sub-72-102-128.myvzw.com] has joined #scheme 18:50:02 KILIMANJARO [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has joined #scheme 18:50:40 -!- pdlogan [~patrick@174-25-37-137.ptld.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 18:52:39 -!- pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has quit [Quit: leaving] 18:53:03 -!- pdlogan1 is now known as pdlogan 18:53:47 pchrist [~spirit@gentoo/developer/pchrist] has joined #scheme 18:57:22 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has left #scheme 19:01:54 -!- pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 19:05:30 pearle [~pearle@blk-224-181-222.eastlink.ca] has joined #scheme 19:07:55 -!- ravi_ [~ravi@118.93.79.33] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] 19:11:12 blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has joined #scheme 19:11:45 dzhus [~sphinx@89-178-176-55.broadband.corbina.ru] has joined #scheme 19:13:17 -!- stis [~stis@1-1-1-39a.veo.vs.bostream.se] has left #scheme 19:16:30 -!- dzhus [~sphinx@89-178-176-55.broadband.corbina.ru] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:21:06 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has joined #scheme 19:21:44 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:22:13 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has joined #scheme 19:22:25 -!- gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:22:41 gremset [ubuntu@117.192.123.16] has joined #scheme 19:27:24 -!- HG`` [~HG@p579F7CBE.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 19:28:12 -!- KILIMANJARO is now known as kilimanjaro 19:29:15 stis [~stis@host-90-235-38-221.mobileonline.telia.com] has joined #scheme 19:34:47 Is the output of WG2 to be a working system or a specification of a system, or something in-between? 19:39:22 edw: specification, afaik 19:40:43 MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has joined #scheme 19:41:53 ravic [~ravic@smtp.touchcut.com] has joined #scheme 19:41:58 -!- ravic is now known as chemuduguntar 19:42:03 f8l [~f8l@81.219.203.149] has joined #scheme 19:43:39 -!- REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 19:46:08 Is there any other example, aside from *perhaps* C/C++, where there are multiple non-commercially viable implementations of a language, a robust set of "batteries-included" libraries, FFI facilities, etc.? I feel like the working groups are specifying the criteria for winning an X Prize, but the effort is a significant fraction of the effort that would be necessary to win the prize. 19:46:54 Consider that there are fewer web browsers than Scheme implementations... 19:47:55 SML? 19:49:25 There's O'Caml, and SML of NJ, right? 19:49:37 ocaml is not an sml 19:51:44 There are SML/NJ and MLton, at least. 19:52:01 why is Common Lisp excluded here? 19:52:07 I've also heard of MoscowML and I think a couple others. 19:52:24 because CL is commercially viable 19:52:33 what a weird game 19:52:53 ya gotta read the rules :P 19:53:02 but there must be several non-commercially viable implementations 19:53:19 it's a huge effort to implement one, so I doubt that. 19:53:45 what does "non-commercially viable" mean? 19:54:06 is JRuby, Jython, included? 19:54:13 I took it to mean experimental, but yeah, what does that mean? 19:54:17 Ah. I thought it was a super-set. I was thinking more mainstream: Python, Ruby, Perl, Java. Or, thinking more in terms of ecosystems, there's Mono, GnuStep, ...? It seems to me we need a NanoScheme, the Scheme-you-can-write-an-interpreter-for-in-a-few-days, and then TheScheme, the huge pile of mud (with gem-like crystals!) for Getting Shit Done. 19:54:19 it means "not buzzword compliant" 19:54:45 languages that aren't web 2.0 (3.0?) or that you don't usually tack on "beta" at the end of the program names 19:55:03 edw, the problem is we have had nanoscheme for many years, and TheScheme is unstandardizable 19:55:25 -!- jewel [~jewel@196-209-224-248.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:55:31 however, the scheme community wants standards, and so we keep getting them, and being sad that they don't solve this problem 19:55:58 nanoscheme = closure conversion + cps transform 19:56:32 REPLeffect [~REPLeffec@69.54.115.254] has joined #scheme 19:56:35 -!- superjudge [~superjudg@c83-250-110-188.bredband.comhem.se] has quit [Quit: superjudge] 19:56:43 What I was trying to get at is the we have MIT Scheme, Gambit, Chicken, Racket, Scheme48, Guile, (Petite) Chez Scheme, and while they're useful, they create a tragic should-would-could syndrome because by locking into any one fills you with profound regret. 19:57:06 s/because/caused by/ 19:57:24 Never mind, you know what I mean. Apologies for the grammar. 19:57:58 -!- f8l [~f8l@81.219.203.149] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.4] 19:59:19 I don't know if this is a solvable problem, because I'd love there to be a blessed Scheme, but if it turned out to be Racket or Guile or even Gambit or Chicken, I'd be fairly unhappy. 19:59:38 why? 19:59:45 And everyone has, along with an asshole, an opinion on this... 19:59:50 Common Lisp is probably excluded because the language is deeply broken. 20:00:08 that wasn't part of the rules. Is CL more broken than C++? 20:00:12 does the existence of both Python and Lua fill you with similar profound regret? 20:00:20 Lisp-2's are forbidden by the Geneva Conventions. 20:00:39 python is like a Lisp-7 then 20:00:43 Yes, bremner_. C++ doesn't have packages and interesting symbols. 20:00:53 the problem is not it being lisp-2, it's that 2 refers to functions and values 20:02:11 if it referred to functions+values and macros, for instances, it'd be ok 20:02:29 *mario-goulart* chews a bubble gum 20:03:26 Here's an example of what nearly brings me to tears: Riastradh was all gung ho about S48 until it's (in Riastradh's probably completely justified opinion) Unicode implementation shit the bed. Which meant I had to stay with S48 1.3 or give up SLIME support. 20:03:45 s/it's/its/ 20:04:36 -!- eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 20:04:44 And then there's geiser, which works nicely, but Racket seems more interested in becoming a meta-language toolkit with no particular fondness for s-expressions. 20:05:33 uhh, have you used racket? 20:05:58 or just read people's blogs 20:06:26 And documentation is strewn all about the internet. Check out the names of any implementation's modules... Some from S48: posix-files extended-ports i/o posix-i/o srfi-8. 20:07:02 eno [~eno@adsl-70-137-136-61.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net] has joined #scheme 20:07:02 -!- eno [~eno@adsl-70-137-136-61.dsl.snfc21.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Changing host] 20:07:02 eno [~eno@nslu2-linux/eno] has joined #scheme 20:07:04 bremner_: No, I've used it. I spent a day trying to figure out how to get it to let me write a one-armed IF from the racket command-line REPL. 20:07:12 And failed... 20:08:08 One-armed if is called WHEN 20:08:19 You're not supposed to use one-armed IF. There's a good justification for eschewing it. If you're worried about one-armed IF, you're focussing on window-dressing. 20:08:20 It's also called IF... 20:08:30 in R5RS maybe 20:08:32 But yeah, it sucks that normal if doesn't allow one arm, since it's allowed by the spec 20:09:37 I think if you use the right incantations you can make it behave more like RnRS Scheme and it allows proper one-armed IFs 20:09:45 yes. 20:10:08 I was in side-effect-land anyway, doing I/O under certain conditions. I don't see WHEN in the R7RS draft index... 20:10:19 But "incompatible by default" is very annoying 20:10:20 Racket is a multilingual environment. It is better at making multiple languages cooperate in a single system than any other Scheme system out there. You can build your own languages pretty easily if you want, or you can write your code in the R5RS (if you say so to Racket) and have it interact reasonably well with other programs written with Racket. 20:11:25 edw: WHEN and UNLESS are reasonably common. They also have an implicit BEGIN as an added bonus. 20:11:25 Riastradh: I don't doubt that; I was just trying to write some Scheme code. 20:11:43 `Error-prone by default' is also annoying, sjamaan. 20:11:44 (and when seeing them you immediately know there are side effects to be done) 20:11:58 Riastradh: Tell that to the RnRS committees 20:12:42 I don't have to, sjamaan, because I can fix MIT Scheme if something's broken. The Racket folks don't have to, because they can fix Racket if something is broken. 20:12:49 Riastradh, sadly they only interoperate well by default if you don't try to pass pairs back and forth 20:12:53 Nothing would ever get done if everything had to go through some committee first! 20:12:58 :) 20:14:02 The HTML(5) process seems to work well-ish: it's based on the assumption that people are going to go ahead and implement stuff as a proof of concept. Good standards come from good working implementations. Waiting for a committee to act is a recipe for standards like SOAP. 20:15:31 I guess that works because the standards committee has people from all involved parties in it 20:16:14 And it includes mostly people who get paid for it 20:16:37 Some people see it as an Evil Cabal of Web Browser Vendors, but who the hell else do you entrust such things to? Arm-chair masturbator-bloggers? 20:16:55 the reason that web standards work succeeds is that there's a clear reason to standardize things before just implementing them willy-nilly 20:16:58 For Schemers it's mostly something they do on the side, and there's no way to take back things and discuss things within the community before going on 20:17:16 samth: And there's that :) 20:17:25 and people saw the consequences when the web didn't work that way 20:17:37 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 20:17:39 and therefore, there's a clear committment to the standards process 20:18:54 I think we should listen more to Alan Kay :) 20:19:02 also, it's not true that web standards mostly implement before standardizing 20:19:26 Ah, WHEN is not in Scheme48. Of course! 20:19:54 lots of HTML5 is unimplemented, ECMAScript 5 was only implemented after standardization, JS.next is mostly unimplemented (and not yet standardized) 20:20:59 Many of the unimplemented things are at the very least based on usage (or desired usage) seen in the wild. Like WebSockets: people are dying for them. 20:21:28 edw, yes, that's definitely the case 20:21:38 (I'm on TC39, the Ecmascript cmte) 20:22:34 What's definitely the case? 20:22:53 The based-on-non-theoretical-desires statement? 20:22:54 that the various web cmtes pay attention to usage and desired usage in the wild 20:22:58 Ah. 20:24:18 however, the scheme community has roughly none of the incentives for standardization that exist for web technologies 20:27:30 Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 20:27:41 FOCUS THEFT SHOULD BE A !@*#^!$@&*@^%!^#*&^%!#^&*@(!*%^!@# FELONY. 20:28:01 Yeah, CL is disgusting in part because there'd have been no support for a standard that broke too much existing code that depended on poor or outdated implementation decisions. 20:30:07 Riastradh: punishable by xkill 20:31:33 No, it should be punishable by SLOW ROASTING and BAMBOO UNDER THE FINGERNAILS of the CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT BRAIN-DAMAGED CRETINS who perpetrate the deed. 20:31:52 (who's the guilty party?) 20:33:37 Pidgin, in this case. 20:33:41 oof 20:33:45 irssi to the rescue :) 20:34:12 edwin irc :) 20:34:45 I'm not using pidgin for IRC. I don't suppose you happen to know how to make openbox totally disable switching windows except either (a) by mouse clicks, or (b) by the window switcher, do you? 20:35:13 for IM, bitlbee 20:35:57 That doesn't solve the real problem. 20:36:10 The real problem is that FOCUS THEFT SHOULD BE A FELONY. 20:36:58 *elly* just avoids using programs that do that 20:37:57 If it worked, I'd just run every program under Xnest, but Xnest doesn't work very well. 20:38:53 In general virtualization has problems. That's unfortunate. 20:39:56 but not using pidgin solves the problem of pidgin stealing focus (as it probably can't steal focus if it isn't running) :) 20:41:47 ecraven: you underestimate the awesome powers of gnome-desktop 20:42:10 -!- ymasory [~ymasory@frank.ldc.upenn.edu] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20:44:31 -!- Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@91.12.45.130] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:45:29 Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@p5B0C2D82.dip.t-dialin.net] has joined #scheme 20:50:27 lbc_ [~quassel@1908ds1-aboes.0.fullrate.dk] has joined #scheme 20:51:32 -!- Ragnaroek [~chatzilla@p5B0C2D82.dip.t-dialin.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:52:39 Fortunately for me, I do not inflict Gnome upon myself, or KDE, or dbus, or anything of that nature. 20:59:45 Riastradh, strangely, I use Gnome, and it (or something else) causes pidgin not to steal my focus 21:00:16 I have observed focus theft by pidgin only with the pass phrase dialogue box. 21:02:02 Bahman [~Bahman@2.146.25.8] has joined #scheme 21:02:14 bgs100 [~ian@unaffiliated/bgs100] has joined #scheme 21:02:33 Gah 21:02:36 Hi all! 21:02:46 clsmith [~cls@ambrose.lubutu.com] has joined #scheme 21:02:51 That's as hateful as sites that issue redirects for 404s so you can't go and fix the typo in the URL you just put in 21:02:59 *alaricsp* feels Riastradh's pain 21:03:41 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 21:04:18 Riastradh: Focus capture for passphrase entry is actually a Feature, not a Bug. It means other programs cannot intercept the keystrokes and steal your passphrase. 21:04:31 Well, not focus capture per se, but keyboard capture. 21:04:40 Only if the passphrase dialog doesn't pop up randomly as some connection attempt fails 21:04:48 True. 21:04:53 I'd accept that if the passphrase dialog appears purely because I did something to make it appear 21:05:01 100% agree. 21:07:15 open [~thesk@unaffiliated/open] has joined #scheme 21:07:57 Riastradh: of those SML implementations only Poly/ML and MLton don't look complete non-starters. 21:08:54 cky, you're talking about something totally different. 21:09:04 Riastradh: Ah. 21:09:13 When I am typing, what I am typing at SHOULD NOT CHANGE unless I make a particular request to the window manager. 21:09:26 100% agree. 21:09:45 This is, BTW, why all modal dialogue boxes must die. 21:09:45 The problem is defining this "when". 21:09:49 It doesn't matter whether I am typing at pidgin's pass phrase prompt, into a terminal, into a web browser, into GNU Emacs, into Edwin, or into /dev/null on the root window of the window manager. 21:10:05 What `when'? 21:10:06 The computer is faster than you. 21:10:28 Now you're tying, now you're not, now you're tying, now you're not, typing, not typing. 21:10:31 I'm lost, pjb; when did `when' enter into it? 21:10:44 " When I am typing, what I am typing at SHOULD NOT CHANGE unless I make a..." 21:10:45 -!- gravicappa [~gravicapp@ppp91-77-216-248.pppoe.mtu-net.ru] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:10:48 OK, strike that part of the sentence. 21:10:50 When are you typing? 21:10:59 Ok. 21:11:03 Irrelevant. Focus should not change unless I explicitly request it to change. 21:11:25 That's a point of view. (I mostly agree with it). 21:11:45 Then there's this "explicitely"... 21:12:04 There is a bug in the design of X11 whereby when I launch a program from a shell, it is hard to correlate the window that has just opened with the process I ran from the shell. So it's hard to treat that as a request for focus change -- and sometimes it is NOT a request for focus change. 21:12:05 Does launching an application account for explicit request? 21:12:22 What if the application takes two minutes before openinig a window where your typing may focus to? 21:12:51 What if the application is launched by a background process that you started manually? How many levels of indirection are still explicit? 21:12:55 If the application takes more than a negligible amount of time to launch, then it is almost certainly wrong for it to take focus unless I make a very explicit request for it to do so. 21:13:21 Riastradh: the point is that you have to write a 500 page specifications before coming to terms with the problem. 21:13:32 Riastradh: I hate that too. Plan 9 seems to do it much better, I gather - run an app in a shell, it takes over that shell as its GUI window 21:13:52 sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has joined #scheme 21:13:52 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has quit [Changing host] 21:13:52 sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has joined #scheme 21:14:02 Riastradh: i completely agree. when i accidentally 'ok' a dialog because it happened to appear while i was typing... ugh. 21:14:03 (I totally agree, and feel the pain too). 21:14:21 AIUI, the GUI protocol just runs over what passes for stdin/stdout in plan 9 21:14:37 I'm not saying that it's easy to implement rules about what constitute focus theft. I'm saying that the cretinous nitwits who designed the system designed is so that enforcing non-theft of focus is hard and must be kludged on after the fact. 21:14:39 And the WM just takes the console stdin/stdout, puts it into graphics mode, and draws windows in it, thereby virtualising a console 21:14:51 Therefore, you can run the wm inside a terminal under the wm recursively 21:15:40 Riastradh: that said, focus is managed by the window manager, which is a user configurable component in X. Why don't you use xwem? 21:16:15 I don't know what xwem is. I use openbox because for the most part, it does what I want and doesn't do what I don't want; it generally doesn't get in my way. 21:16:22 or scwm. 21:16:37 xwem is a window manager written in emacs lisp. scwm same in guile scheme. 21:16:41 how easy is it to distinguish between human focus and focus theft, in X? 21:17:03 (This is a principle that I wish more application designers would adhere to: *don't* do what the user *didn't* want. Pleasant surprises are OK; unpleasant surprises are FAR WORSE than simply not doing something that the user wished the application could do.) 21:17:14 Yes, the problem is that there is no rule that can get it right, as the required information is missing 21:17:19 Human focus comes from keyboard or mouse events that the window manager can handle itself. 21:17:38 clsmith, here are the three instances in which it is OK to change focus: 21:17:45 1. I use the mouse to select a window. 21:17:57 2. I use the window manager's window switcher (keyboard-driven, menu-driven, whatever) to switch windows. 21:18:17 -!- dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has quit [Quit: dnolen] 21:18:29 3. I launch an application that starts instantly or that I express a desire to wait for, and I haven't switched desktops since I launched the application. 21:18:48 Riastradh: .. or started typing 21:19:04 Or started typing? 21:19:26 Riastradh: if you start an app, it's slow, and you start typing, it's impolite to steal focus 21:19:28 4. Or clicked a button otherwise performed an action that requires input. E.g. M-x. 21:19:53 -!- stis [~stis@host-90-235-38-221.mobileonline.telia.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:20:13 -!- acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-62-150.gmavt.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 21:24:15 aidalgol [~user@202.36.179.68] has joined #scheme 21:25:36 I keep on forgetting that zealots have no sense of humor. 21:26:53 -!- jonrafkind [~jon@crystalis.cs.utah.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 21:28:55 ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 21:30:19 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:30:24 -!- ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 21:30:39 sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has joined #scheme 21:30:39 -!- sjamaan [~sjamaan@frohike.xs4all.nl] has quit [Changing host] 21:30:39 sjamaan [~sjamaan@netbsd/developer/sjamaan] has joined #scheme 21:30:47 ymasory [~ymasory@c-76-99-55-224.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #scheme 21:34:03 acarrico [~acarrico@pppoe-68-142-62-150.gmavt.net] has joined #scheme 21:44:01 -!- bweaver [~user@host-68-169-175-225.WISOLT2.epbfi.com] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 21:46:59 -!- pdlogan [~patrick@148.sub-72-102-128.myvzw.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 21:47:39 -!- aidalgol [~user@202.36.179.68] has quit [Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)] 21:50:04 -!- aisa [~aisa@173-10-243-253-Albuquerque.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: aisa] 22:00:42 Sgeo [~Sgeo@ool-18bf618a.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #scheme 22:01:34 -!- djcb [~user@a88-112-253-18.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:01:48 pdlogan [~patrick@76.sub-72-102-205.myvzw.com] has joined #scheme 22:07:16 -!- Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 22:08:34 Euthydemus [~euthydemu@vaxjo4.213.cust.blixtvik.net] has joined #scheme 22:09:08 -!- pdlogan [~patrick@76.sub-72-102-205.myvzw.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 22:10:45 -!- clog [~nef@bespin.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:11:41 -!- elly [debian-tor@atheme/member/elly] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 22:11:41 -!- Intensity [kxdroiDJP5@unaffiliated/intensity] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 22:11:41 -!- foof [~user@li126-140.members.linode.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 22:11:41 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 22:11:44 -!- wingo [~wingo@90.164.198.39] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 22:11:54 elly [debian-tor@atheme/member/elly] has joined #scheme 22:17:07 Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has joined #scheme 22:22:50 pdlogan [~patrick@89.sub-72-102-214.myvzw.com] has joined #scheme 22:26:41 -!- martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 22:27:09 martinhex [~mjc@93-97-29-243.zone5.bethere.co.uk] has joined #scheme 22:28:15 -!- blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 22:28:40 blueadept [~blueadept@unaffiliated/blueadept] has joined #scheme 22:33:10 dnolen [~davidnole@184.152.69.75] has joined #scheme 22:33:20 Intensity [y3vaVL8iOs@unaffiliated/intensity] has joined #scheme 22:35:59 -!- pdlogan [~patrick@89.sub-72-102-214.myvzw.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 22:37:24 -!- homie [~levgue@xdsl-78-35-133-92.netcologne.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:47:25 clog [~nef@bespin.org] has joined #scheme 22:51:53 pdlogan [~patrick@98.sub-69-96-159.myvzw.com] has joined #scheme 23:02:48 AtnNn [~welcome@modemcable060.239-177-173.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #scheme 23:03:15 -!- rudybot [~luser@50.18.17.135] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:03:17 -!- offby1 [~user@pdpc/supporter/monthlybyte/offby1] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 23:03:18 pdlogan1 [~patrick@174-25-37-137.ptld.qwest.net] has joined #scheme 23:05:55 -!- pdlogan [~patrick@98.sub-69-96-159.myvzw.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 23:16:57 -!- Bahman [~Bahman@2.146.25.8] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 23:17:59 -!- MichaelRaskin [~MichaelRa@195.91.224.225] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 23:23:48 Hal9k [~Lernaean@unaffiliated/kusanagi] has joined #scheme 23:28:08 -!- mmc1 [~michal@82-148-210-75.fiber.unet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 23:34:09 Mimomo635 [~Mimomo635@2.146.25.8] has joined #scheme 23:35:01 -!- Riastradh [debian-tor@fsf/member/riastradh] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 23:38:03 Bahman [~Bahman@2.146.25.8] has joined #scheme 23:38:42 -!- pdlogan1 [~patrick@174-25-37-137.ptld.qwest.net] has left #scheme 23:38:57 -!- Mimomo635 [~Mimomo635@2.146.25.8] has quit [Client Quit] 23:44:30 -!- Bahman [~Bahman@2.146.25.8] has quit [Quit: Ave Atque Vale] 23:46:17 foof [~user@li126-140.members.linode.com] has joined #scheme 23:48:05 -!- rien [~rien@dyn-160-39-34-114.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Quit: leaving] 23:56:14 araujo [~araujo@gentoo/developer/araujo] has joined #scheme 23:57:41 -!- kilimanjaro [~kilimanja@unaffiliated/kilimanjaro] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]