2025/03/18

2025-03-18 00:00:19 +0100euleritian(~euleritia@ip5f5ad695.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de)
2025-03-18 00:03:22 +0100simplystuart(~simplystu@c-75-75-152-164.hsd1.pa.comcast.net) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:03:29 +0100__monty__(~toonn@user/toonn) (Quit: leaving)
2025-03-18 00:03:37 +0100simplystuart(~simplystu@c-75-75-152-164.hsd1.pa.comcast.net)
2025-03-18 00:04:18 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:04:36 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-03-18 00:08:45 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:14:56 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 00:15:13 +0100 <jle`> yeah, my point is that 'until' isn't really analogous to "until loops", so a corresponding "while" wouldn't be analogous to "while loops" either, which is potentially confusing
2025-03-18 00:15:28 +0100 <jle`> since people see 'while' and usually think of while loops
2025-03-18 00:16:30 +0100 <EvanR> :t until -- what are we talking about again
2025-03-18 00:16:31 +0100 <lambdabot> (a -> Bool) -> (a -> a) -> a -> a
2025-03-18 00:16:36 +0100 <EvanR> what the heck
2025-03-18 00:16:52 +0100 <jle`> my same reaction lol
2025-03-18 00:17:32 +0100 <jle`> i'm not super thrilled with it but it's at least not as bad as a hypothetical 'while'
2025-03-18 00:18:55 +0100robobub(uid248673@id-248673.uxbridge.irccloud.com) robobub
2025-03-18 00:19:24 +0100 <EvanR> I totally forgot about this function
2025-03-18 00:19:27 +0100 <enikar> when i used until i use a pair (a, b) for a, and fst or snd to get the result (or something like it).
2025-03-18 00:19:27 +0100 <EvanR> it's cool
2025-03-18 00:19:36 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:19:45 +0100euleritian(~euleritia@ip5f5ad695.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:19:48 +0100 <EvanR> keep microwaving the value until it's heating to sufficient temperature
2025-03-18 00:19:59 +0100 <EvanR> then let sit for 1 minute before serving
2025-03-18 00:21:52 +0100euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-006-132-052.176.6.pool.telefonica.de)
2025-03-18 00:25:20 +0100Sgeo(~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo
2025-03-18 00:25:34 +0100ljdarj1(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) ljdarj
2025-03-18 00:29:33 +0100ljdarj(~Thunderbi@user/ljdarj) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:29:33 +0100ljdarj1ljdarj
2025-03-18 00:35:31 +0100synchromesh(~john@116.251.144.215) synchromesh
2025-03-18 00:40:40 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 00:45:39 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:47:57 +0100mange(~user@user/mange) mange
2025-03-18 00:50:00 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-03-18 00:52:45 +0100kh0d(~kh0d@212.200.181.159) (Remote host closed the connection)
2025-03-18 00:52:59 +0100 <monochrom> This is what's wrong with taking "meaningful names" seriously.
2025-03-18 00:53:26 +0100kh0d(~kh0d@212.200.181.159) kh0d
2025-03-18 00:54:09 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:54:12 +0100 <monochrom> Today you have learned: "data" does not mean data, it means type; "type" does not mean type, it means alias; "newtype" does not mean new type, it means old type but not alias.
2025-03-18 00:56:11 +0100 <int-e> . o O ( tomorrow you'll unlearn all of these )
2025-03-18 00:56:26 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 00:59:14 +0100kh0d(~kh0d@212.200.181.159) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-18 00:59:15 +0100 <EvanR> at least new type does create a new type
2025-03-18 00:59:22 +0100 <EvanR> unlike typedef
2025-03-18 01:01:23 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:04:07 +0100hgolden_(~hgolden@2603:8000:9d00:3ed1:6ff3:8389:b901:6363) (Remote host closed the connection)
2025-03-18 01:08:18 +0100tccq(~user@user/tccq) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:11:45 +0100plitter(~plitter@user/plitter) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:12:13 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 01:13:44 +0100kh0d(~kh0d@212.200.181.159) kh0d
2025-03-18 01:14:30 +0100xff0x(~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:9913:8179:fb69:5ee5) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:17:03 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:18:34 +0100_d0t(~{-d0t-}@user/-d0t-/x-7915216) (Remote host closed the connection)
2025-03-18 01:19:45 +0100xff0x(~xff0x@2405:6580:b080:900:9913:8179:fb69:5ee5)
2025-03-18 01:27:00 +0100_d0t(~{-d0t-}@user/-d0t-/x-7915216) {-d0t-}
2025-03-18 01:28:00 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 01:32:58 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:33:00 +0100Tuplanolla(~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-59.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.)
2025-03-18 01:34:51 +0100 <mauke> #define DEFSTRUCT(X) typedef struct X X; struct X
2025-03-18 01:35:25 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-03-18 01:37:03 +0100 <monochrom> I have trouble telling that apart from DESTRUCT :)
2025-03-18 01:40:07 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:40:57 +0100tabaqui(~tabaqui@167.71.80.236) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-03-18 01:41:04 +0100euleritian(~euleritia@dynamic-176-006-132-052.176.6.pool.telefonica.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-03-18 01:41:22 +0100euleritian(~euleritia@ip5f5ad695.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de)
2025-03-18 01:43:47 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-03-18 01:48:37 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)