00:04 (join) jeapostrophe_
00:31 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Quit: jeapostrophe_
00:43 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
00:49 (join) jeapostrophe_
00:49 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Client Quit
00:58 (join) jonrafkind
02:20 (quit) jonrafkind: Ping timeout: 245 seconds
03:26 (join) hanDerPeder
05:18 (quit) jao: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
06:14 (join) jao
06:39 (quit) vu3rdd: Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)
06:50 (quit) Axsuul: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
07:02 (join) Axsuul
07:36 (join) jeapostrophe_
07:49 (join) b-man_
08:07 (join) mceier
09:16 (join) danbrown
09:20 (nick) Lajla -> His_Shadow
09:23 (quit) mceier: Quit: leaving
09:26 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Quit: jeapostrophe_
09:30 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
09:38 (quit) b-man_: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
09:42 (join) helpme
09:42 helpme: hi guys
09:42 helpme: i need help..
09:42 helpme: is anyone an expert at racket here..
09:50 bremner: helpme: just ask your question, and hang around for an answer. Don't pester people with /msg, it makes them grumpy
09:50 (quit) helpme: Quit: Leaving
10:20 (join) MayDaniel
10:28 (join) sstrickl
10:35 (join) jeapostrophe_
10:54 (quit) hanDerPeder: Ping timeout: 245 seconds
10:59 (join) certainty
11:07 (join) mceier
11:12 (quit) MayDaniel: 
11:21 samth: jeapostrophe_, what's the drdr prognosis?
11:21 jeapostrophe_: Xvnc works
11:21 samth: great
11:21 (join) danbrown
11:22 jeapostrophe: i must sort out a few things and then it will just run
11:22 samth: it's confusing having two of you :)
11:23 jeapostrophe: i need to upgrade to racket-5.0.1 at least from the current plt-4.2.1 that it runs to get process group support
11:23 jeapostrophe: heh, ya my laptop
11:23 jeapostrophe: it used to be that my laptop was this and my office machine was jay-mccarthy
11:23 jeapostrophe: but somehow that disappeared
11:24 jeapostrophe: i use some weird os x irc client
11:24 samth: silly apple
11:24 jeapostrophe: :)
11:25 jeapostrophe: i decided if i could replace iphoto, itunes, mobileme, and omnifocus, i would use linux
11:25 jeapostrophe: oh and ical
11:26 samth: what's omnifocus?
11:26 jeapostrophe: i don't really use other os x apps
11:26 jeapostrophe: a todo list thing... gtd style... awesome
11:26 samth: ah
11:26 samth: so, i've replaced itunes with pandora, ical w/ google calendar
11:27 jeapostrophe: i mainly use itunes for podcasts, but i do have a big library
11:27 samth: i don't have a need for mobileme, i think
11:27 jeapostrophe: is there anything like wine for os x?
11:27 samth: i don't think so
11:50 (join) anRch
11:52 (join) jonrafkind
11:52 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
12:06 (join) MayDaniel
12:09 (join) hanDerPeder
12:14 (quit) jao: Ping timeout: 276 seconds
12:26 (quit) jonrafkind: Quit: Ex-Chat
12:27 (join) jonrafkind
12:28 (join) Bilbao
12:28 jeapostrophe: It seems like Xvnc doesn't work with my window manager
12:29 jeapostrophe: :(
12:29 Bilbao: hi guys
12:29 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Quit: jeapostrophe_
12:29 Bilbao: could some one pls explain me why drracket starting on a mac is 10x slower than on ubuntu or on windows
12:30 Bilbao: on the same system...
12:30 Bilbao: ?
12:30 (join) vu3rdd
12:32 (quit) Bilbao: Client Quit
12:37 (join) fjl
12:55 (quit) anRch: Quit: anRch
13:03 (quit) hanDerPeder: Quit: hanDerPeder
13:07 samth: Bilbao, it shouldn't be
13:09 (join) Yann1
13:42 (join) hanDerPeder
13:45 (join) martinhex
13:52 (quit) vu3rdd: Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)
14:08 (join) danbrown
14:08 (quit) hanDerPeder: Quit: hanDerPeder
14:09 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
14:12 samth: jeapostrophe, is the current drdr running on xvnc?
14:17 (join) jao
14:18 (join) b-man_
14:18 (quit) b-man_: Remote host closed the connection
14:20 (join) carleastlund
14:23 (join) danbrown
14:40 (join) vincent_
14:46 (join) _mo_
14:56 (quit) vincent_: Ping timeout: 265 seconds
14:56 jeapostrophe: samth: yes
15:15 (join) anRch
15:16 samth: jeapostrophe, so the things that timeout are just really slow now?
15:16 jeapostrophe: no, for some reason fluxbox is not providing the wm features to gracket inside xvnc
15:17 jeapostrophe: i don't know which of those three parties is to blame though
15:17 jeapostrophe: alot of gracket tests require "click to focus" which comes from the wm
15:19 (quit) sstrickl: Quit: sstrickl
15:20 jeapostrophe: btw samth, drdr would run faster if tr was higher in the alphabet
15:21 jeapostrophe: it runs for about 2 or 3 minutes by itself at the end of every run
15:21 jeapostrophe: funny huh?
15:21 samth: yeah
15:21 samth: you should provide a prop that i can change that with
15:21 clklein: Or I could just make the Redex tests slower
15:21 clklein: I can probably manage.
15:22 _mo_: hey all, newbie to lisp in general, i'm going through the SICP book using racket and just wanted to know what the main differences are between racket and common lisp?  is it just libraries?
15:24 jonrafkind: well for one thing racket has one namespace for functions and values, lisp has two separate namespaces
15:25 jonrafkind: im not sure what the state of hygenic macros in lisp are (non-existant?) but they are prevalent in racket
15:26 _mo_: jonrafkind, you mean built-in macros?
15:26 jonrafkind: well they both have build-in macros
15:26 jonrafkind: do you know what hygiene is?
15:27 _mo_: nope sorry... i'm assuming you don't hygiene in the personal hygiene sense...
15:27 _mo_: clean coded macros?
15:27 jonrafkind: ha no
15:28 jonrafkind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygienic_macro
15:28 _mo_: ok i'll give it a read and be right back
15:37 _mo_: jonrafkind, i didn't really understand some of it, because my exposure to macros has only been in the ruby chapter i read of a certain book, but i take it that unhygienic macros collide with existing bindings of variables?
15:37 jonrafkind: ruby doesnt have macros
15:37 _mo_: so namespaces that are already taken up?
15:37 jonrafkind: oh ruby has eval.. i forgot
15:38 jonrafkind: but yea, basically unhygenic macros can cause issues with existing bindings
15:38 jonrafkind: ruby has the same problems with eval
15:38 _mo_: i'm not really familiar with ruby as well... just read enough and tried enough of it to appreciate the metaprogramming that's possible
15:38 _mo_: hence my interest in lisp
15:40 jonrafkind: hygiene prevenst your macros from screwing up, but if you just want to play around probably you can use either racket or common lisp
15:42 samth: _mo_, if you're interested in metaprogramming, Racket is the language with probably the most extensive metaprogramming facilities
15:42 _mo_: jonrafkind, i'm actually looking into doing both app development and research into things like machine learning, a.i., etc...
15:43 _mo_: lisp in general seems to be what i'm looking for, i really like how you can express your thoughts concisely
15:44 _mo_: samth, i'm actually not sure what i'm going to be doing, i took up com sci at uni but dropped out, and didn't do any coding until last year when i started looking into python and trying it out.
15:44 _mo_: samth, but my short exposure to ruby and io has made me appreciate metaprogramming a lot
15:46 _mo_: how hard is it to get a racket web app running in a hosted environment?
15:46 samth: what sort of hosted env?
15:46 samth: jeapostrophe might know more about that
15:46 (quit) MayDaniel: 
15:46 _mo_: shared-hosting instead of dedicated server
15:47 samth: it depends on the hosting company
15:47 _mo_: so i probably won't have access to the apache conf file
15:47 _mo_: can it be done through cgi?
15:47 samth: yes
15:47 _mo_: ah that's great!
15:47 samth: although you lose many of the advantages that the web framework can provide
15:47 samth: since they require the Racket web server
15:48 samth: but if you just want to write racket programs that generate web pages, CGI will work fine
15:48 _mo_: so the ideal case would be to use the racket server instead of apache?
15:48 samth: well, it depends on what your workload is, and on other things
15:49 samth: some of the other people on this channel know more than me about Racket web development
15:49 _mo_: how about racket's libraries? i'd heard that the problem of lisp in general was library support...
15:50 samth: Racket has extensive standard libraries: see http://docs.racket-lang.org/
15:50 (join) b-man_
15:51 jonrafkind: i heard common lisp has tons of libraries
15:51 _mo_: jonrafkind, that's what i heard, but also heard that documentation is almost nil
15:51 samth: jonrafkind, it's unfortunately hard to get many CL libraries, since there's no good distribution/packaging system
15:52 _mo_: i personally can't understand why lisp hasn't taken off like other mainstream languages, after trying racket i don't think i could go back to a non-lisp language
15:53 carleastlund: There's a lot of history behind that issue, _mo_.  :)
15:53 _mo_: but the library argument is important i guess
15:53 samth: _mo_, we're glad to have you
15:54 _mo_: carleastlund, yeah?  i though it was just a support thing, no support, libraries, etc..
15:54 carleastlund: Even if there were comparable libraries, Racket / Lisp / whatever wouldn't take off tomorrow.  Companies don't want to retrain people.  They don't want to port their legacy products to new langauges.  Etc.
15:55 _mo_: samth, haha thanks, learning is a bit of a challenge, primarily because my math background isn't up to date, but it's great
15:55 carleastlund: Think of the metric system.  Why don't we use it?  It's simpler than pounds and inches and yards in a lot of ways.  But it's hard to switch away from a widely used system, even if the replacement is simpler.
15:55 _mo_: yeah but how does that compare to the newer languages like python, ruby, etc?
15:56 _mo_: i mean, those languages have taken off in a large way, and they're quite new compared to lisp
15:56 _mo_: way of thinking?
15:56 _mo_: like imperative/procedural programming vs functional?
15:57 jonrafkind: those languages are mostly incremental changes to existing languages (C/C++/Java)
15:57 carleastlund: Those languages were by and large developed to write small components quickly and easily, not to rewrite fundamental systems.  Ruby and Python and Perl are used for glue code in between Java, C, and C++ applications.  Whereas Racket, ML, Haskell, and Lisp are designed for building large, complicated systems.  They have modules and type systems and so forth; we didn't build them around regular expressions, Unix scripts, and Apache plugins.
15:57 jonrafkind: whereas lisp/racket are almost entirely different
15:59 _mo_: ah
15:59 _mo_: well it
16:00 _mo_: it's a bit of a shame
16:01 carleastlund: On the other hand, these new languages have more functional programming tools in them every time someone makes a new one.  Mainstream languages are catching up.  It shouldn't be surprising that research is ahead in concepts but industry is ahead in immediate practicality.  Pretty much every discipline works that way.
16:01 carleastlund: Or at least I think they do.  :)
16:02 _mo_: that's true, though i think quite a few people have shown that functional tools are much better for certain kinds of tasks and yet people still refuse to change, social inertia i guess
16:03 _mo_: so anyway, after SICP, which is a great book even though i constantly have to look up the math, is it advisable to go through the tutorial in the racket site or are there any other good resources on racket?
16:04 carleastlund: Have you gone through HtDP?
16:04 carleastlund: I would start with that before SICP, it's got a lot less math-y stuff for instance.
16:04 carleastlund: www.htdp.org if you are unfamiliar (it stands for How to Design Programs)
16:04 askhader: _mo_: It may be your adventage to read Teach Yourself Scheme in Fixnum Days after you are done HTDP and SICP
16:05 askhader: It's by the same publisher.
16:05 _mo_: i was actually debating on whether to start on HTDP or SICP, but the response i got at the forums was SICP so i started with that
16:06 _mo_: askhader, thanks will defiinitely check it out
16:06 carleastlund: HtDP first, definitely.  You can always get to SICP after, and will probably get a lot more out of SICP after HtDP.
16:06 askhader: Well if you find SICP to be a bit thick and math-y, check out HTDP first.
16:07 _mo_: they cover the same concepts though right?
16:07 askhader: They are on two seperate subjects.
16:07 carleastlund: No.
16:07 askhader: Although they do overlap in some areas.
16:08 askhader: Or mention the same things.
16:08 askhader: HTDP definitely contains the prerequisite (at least some of it) knowledge for SICP
16:08 _mo_: i think if i went through SICP right after high school it wouldn't have been such a big deal, i used to know a lot of the mat that's found in SICP
16:08 _mo_: that settles it then
16:09 askhader: None of the mathiness from SICP is covered in HTDP =P
16:09 askhader: Or, maybe two's compliment type stuff.
16:09 carleastlund: They're both about a similar style of programming in a similar language, so certainly there's some necessary overlap.  But the actual thrust of what they're teaching *about* that kind of programming is different.
16:11 _mo_: thanks for the help, it's really appreciated
16:11 _mo_: one last thing, how's the emacs support for racket?
16:11 samth: _mo_, check out Geiser: http://www.nongnu.org/geiser/geiser_4.html
16:11 _mo_: i'm currently coding in vim, but have been looking into emacs
16:12 _mo_: samth, thanks for the link!
16:13 askhader uses vim to write racket.
16:13 _mo_: thanks for all the help!  it's really great
16:14 askhader: Although geiser mode does look promising.
16:14 askhader: I don't suppose any of you use a lispy/schemy/rackety shell?
16:14 samth: by shell, you mean what xterm runs?
16:15 askhader: Er, I suppose.
16:16 samth: i don't know of anyone who uses a parentheized shell in that sense
16:16 samth: even Olin (author of Scsh)
16:16 askhader: I didn't mean parentheized necessarily
16:16 _mo_: i've heard that people are looking into replacing the OS with the programming language
16:17 askhader: _mo_: Like a Lisp machine?
16:17 _mo_: askhader, i think so, let me find the link...
16:17 _mo_: i saw it on HN maybe yesterday
16:23 _mo_: can't find the link to the article, but this is the link to the system
16:23 _mo_: http://www.openmirage.org/
16:24 jeapostrophe: it's cool
16:25 _mo_: i'm going to check-out, have to get to bed for work tomorrow
16:25 _mo_: thanks again!
16:28 (quit) _mo_: Quit: Leaving
16:34 (quit) anRch: Quit: anRch
16:57 (join) MayDaniel
17:12 stamourv: eli: ping
17:16 (quit) MayDaniel: 
17:20 (quit) jonrafkind: Ping timeout: 245 seconds
17:22 (join) jeapostrophe_
17:23 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Client Quit
17:28 (quit) fjl: Quit: Leaving.
17:47 (quit) mceier: Quit: leaving
17:55 (join) jonrafkind
18:07 (join) jeapostrophe_
18:11 samth: jeapostrophe_, i want drdr to skip ahead to the good parts
18:11 jeapostrophe: i like completeness. drdr2 will be more flexible in this way i think
18:11 samth: oh, i like completeness too
18:12 samth: i'm just impatient :)
18:12 jeapostrophe: :)
18:12 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Quit: jeapostrophe_
18:35 (quit) Yann1: Ping timeout: 255 seconds
18:35 (join) Yann1
18:54 eli: stamourv: late pong
18:55 stamourv: eli: why is scribble.tex requiring the skull tex package?
18:55 eli sighs
18:55 stamourv: can scribble generate tex that uses it?
18:55 eli: (a) Yes, it can produce a skull glyph, and IIRC it uses the skull package
18:56 eli: (b) The whole scribble system has several parts -- the reader is mine, and there's the text language and the new html language,
18:56 stamourv: the weird tex distribution I have has a broken skull package, so I have to get rid of that require
18:56 eli: the rest is not mine.
18:56 eli: So I know very little about it.
18:56 stamourv: oh, sorry about the noise then
18:56 eli: Well, that's what I remember from someone who asked about it at some point.
18:56 carleastlund: jeapostrophe, I think a good default behavior for DrDr would be to run the latest revision, and go back to the rest when it's up to date.
18:56 eli: But really I don't know more than that vague memory.
18:57 stamourv: eli: I was just curious. I can deal with it
18:57 stamourv: I just sed that line away in my makefile
18:58 eli: stamourv: I think that you can supply a custom .tex file, but I'm not sure, since I never used it, and it might not help.
18:59 stamourv: eli: thanks, I'll look into that
18:59 stamourv: but that machine (and thus that weird tex install) is on its way out anyway
18:59 samth: stamourv, look at the --prefix argument to scribble
18:59 samth: and/or the --style argument
19:00 samth: jeapostrophe, the problem is that 'tests' is late in the alphabet - 'typed' + 'typed-scheme' have a total time of 2 min
19:00 stamourv: samth: thanks, I'll try that
19:03 samth: clklein, it seem like redex/tests/run-tests runs some of the same code as running the tests in redex/examples
19:05 (quit) jonrafkind: Ping timeout: 255 seconds
19:06 stamourv: samth: neither --prefix nor --style worked
19:06 stamourv: but I can live with it
19:09 (join) jeapostrophe_
19:10 samth: jeapostrophe_, the problem is that 'tests' is late in the alphabet - 'typed' + 'typed-scheme' have a total time of 2 min
19:10 jeapostrophe_: yes, that's really what i mean and tests/typed-scheme is very late
19:10 samth: i think you should just special-case 'tests' and put it first
19:12 jeapostrophe_: i could do that easily
19:12 jeapostrophe_: i think i will
19:14 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
19:25 (quit) jeapostrophe_: Quit: jeapostrophe_
19:50 (join) danbrown
20:10 (quit) b-man_: Ping timeout: 276 seconds
20:39 (nick) samth -> samth_awa
20:39 (nick) samth_awa -> samth_away
20:42 (quit) emma: Ping timeout: 272 seconds
20:45 (quit) danbrown: Remote host closed the connection
21:00 (join) neilv
21:26 Axsuul: What does #0= mean?
21:43 eli: It's an indicator of sharing.
21:45 Axsuul: eli: hmm what does that mean?
21:46 eli: Axsuul: When there's a cyclic structure.
21:46 eli: rudybot: (define-struct foo (x y) #:mutable)
21:46 rudybot: eli: your sandbox is ready
21:46 rudybot: eli: Done.
21:46 eli: rudybot: (define x (make-foo 1 2))
21:46 rudybot: eli: Done.
21:46 eli: rudybot: x
21:46 rudybot: eli: ; Value: #(struct:foo 1 2)
21:47 eli: rudybot: (set-foo-y! x x)
21:47 rudybot: eli: Done.
21:47 eli: rudybot: x
21:47 rudybot: eli: ; Value: #0=#(struct:foo 1 #0#)
21:47 eli: Axsuul: Trace that...
21:48 (join) emma
21:48 eli: Axsuul: `#0=' is kind of like calling the thing that follows by a name,
21:48 eli: and `#0#' is using that name.
21:48 eli: Without that notation, the printout would have been infinite.
21:49 Axsuul: eli: ah, ok. what is this notation called exactly? i can't seem to find it in Dibvig's book
21:50 eli: It's not standard.
21:50 eli: In racket, it's controlled by the `print-graph' parameter.
21:50 eli: It's also part of common lisp.
21:50 eli: Some schemes implement it, and some don't.
21:52 Axsuul: Ah ok thnaks
22:02 (quit) emma: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
22:35 (quit) carleastlund: Quit: carleastlund
22:37 (join) JCMartinez
22:38 JCMartinez: hi
22:39 (quit) neilv: Quit: Leaving
22:39 JCMartinez: I'm working in Racket but I have a problem, I don't know how to get the library or something that let me use de accumulate function
22:41 (quit) JCMartinez: Client Quit
22:44 (join) danbrown
22:58 His_Shadow: eli, how are cycles printed in Scheme's that do not implement it?
23:00 eli: His_Shadow: I don't know, the obvious thing would be to run into an infinite loop.
23:00 eli: But I think that all serious ones do that.
23:00 His_Shadow: Ahh
23:00 His_Shadow: Kind of weird.
23:01 His_Shadow waits for someone to give the obligatory notice that infinite loops cannot be decided at compile time.
23:05 Axsuul: Ah, the halting problem
23:06 eli: No, that's not really related to the halting problem.
23:06 eli: The issue is rendering a value that has a cycle, and that's quite possible.
23:08 His_Shadow: eli, but that they cannot be decided at compile time is related to the halting problem.
23:08 His_Shadow: I just found that the moment infinite loops are mentioned some one needs to mention that.
23:09 (quit) Yann1: Ping timeout: 240 seconds
23:10 eli: His_Shadow: Yes, you cannot decide at compile time whether a value will end up having a self refential pointer.
23:10 eli: But that's not saying much, since there's very little that you can decide at compile time.
23:10 His_Shadow: I maybe can, but a turing machine cannot.
23:11 eli: No, neither of you can.
23:11 His_Shadow: Now now, the church-turing thesis is still an hypothesis.
23:11 His_Shadow: Maybe the human mind is more powerful than a turing machine, who knows.
23:11 His_Shadow: But anyway, that wasn't my point.
23:11 His_Shadow: I was just being sarcastic to that people always need to mention that for some reason.
23:16 eli: His_Shadow: See Rice's theorem, which is what I was indirectly referring to; but if you really want to get philosophical, then you can look at things like Tarski's undefinability of truth of a logical system inside it.
23:17 His_Shadow: Yeah, I know rice's theorem. But I was more pointing out that many people forget that all it says that a turing machine or something aequivalent can't decide it. It's very hard to proof the aequivalence of the human mind to a turing machine seeing that the later is not formalized.
23:19 His_Shadow: eli, but the idea is that in some schemes. Calling print on a #0=#(1 . #0#) will result into an infinite loop?
23:19 His_Shadow: That will just keep printing out (1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ... and never get tot the ) ?
23:19 eli: I'd guess that in such schemes you won't have that input syntax,
23:19 eli: so you'd really need something like (let ((x (cons 1 1))) (set-cdr! x x) x)
23:20 eli: And yes, I won't be surprised if they'd (try to) print an inifite list.
23:21 His_Shadow: Well, I just needed a way to write down the datum shortly, I didn't even know the reader accepted it in racket.
23:22 His_Shadow: For things like: (let ((x (cons 1 1))) (set-cdr! x x) x), it's always a bit vague in most contexts if it revers to that list starting with 'let, or what it evaluates to.