Newest at the top
| 2024-12-22 07:27:55 +0100 | agent314 | (~quassel@149.40.50.111) agent314 |
| 2024-12-22 07:27:25 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 07:16:39 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 07:15:24 +0100 | tnt2 | tnt1 |
| 2024-12-22 07:15:24 +0100 | tnt1 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 07:14:22 +0100 | tnt2 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) tnt1 |
| 2024-12-22 07:12:03 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 07:03:30 +0100 | tnt2 | tnt1 |
| 2024-12-22 07:03:30 +0100 | tnt1 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 07:03:21 +0100 | housemate_ | (~housemate@124.187.109.206) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-12-22 07:02:50 +0100 | housemate | (~housemate@124.187.109.206) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 07:01:56 +0100 | tnt2 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) tnt1 |
| 2024-12-22 07:01:23 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 07:00:22 +0100 | housemate_ | (~housemate@124.187.109.206) housemate |
| 2024-12-22 06:56:40 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 06:50:45 +0100 | alecs | (~alecs@61.pool85-58-154.dynamic.orange.es) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:47:00 +0100 | CrunchyFlakes | (~CrunchyFl@31.19.233.78) |
| 2024-12-22 06:46:21 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:46:10 +0100 | alecs | (~alecs@61.pool85-58-154.dynamic.orange.es) alecs |
| 2024-12-22 06:44:30 +0100 | CrunchyFlakes | (~CrunchyFl@ip1f13e94e.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2024-12-22 06:41:18 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 06:39:28 +0100 | tnt1 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) tnt1 |
| 2024-12-22 06:33:05 +0100 | tnt1 | (~Thunderbi@user/tnt1) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:30:30 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:25:54 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 06:25:14 +0100 | ryanbooker | (uid4340@id-4340.hampstead.irccloud.com) (Quit: Connection closed for inactivity) |
| 2024-12-22 06:23:54 +0100 | <monochrom> | Having said that, if you say you are only using GHC, then you know it almost sticks to "use lazy for non-strict, use eager for strict". But there are occasional deviations when the code optimizer thinks it's more efficient to do it some other way. |
| 2024-12-22 06:21:38 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> I see, yeah Haskell can be hard to understand sometimes lol |
| 2024-12-22 06:17:53 +0100 | poscat0x04 | (~poscat@user/poscat) poscat |
| 2024-12-22 06:17:42 +0100 | poscat | (~poscat@user/poscat) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2024-12-22 06:17:32 +0100 | <monochrom> | Denotational semantics strives to (even prides in) avoid talking about them. |
| 2024-12-22 06:16:58 +0100 | <monochrom> | Yes absolutely. If you want to predict how much time and how much space are spent, they emphatically require knowing the evaluation strategy, i.e., operational. |
| 2024-12-22 06:15:40 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> So the duplication is operational right? |
| 2024-12-22 06:14:59 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:13:46 +0100 | <monochrom> | So even the "eager : lazy :: strict : non-strict" "correspondence" is easily broken. |
| 2024-12-22 06:13:16 +0100 | <monochrom> | there is also speculative evaluation, it can result in non-strict while being even more eager than eager. |
| 2024-12-22 06:13:16 +0100 | chexum | (~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/chexum) chexum |
| 2024-12-22 06:12:44 +0100 | chexum | (~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/chexum) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-12-22 06:12:34 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Oh there we go |
| 2024-12-22 06:12:19 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> That's why I prefer working with total languages lol |
| 2024-12-22 06:12:09 +0100 | <monochrom> | eager and lazy |
| 2024-12-22 06:12:02 +0100 | <monochrom> | denotational means you only talk about whether you get an answer and what answer if yes, it deliberately avoids how the computer manages to do it. |
| 2024-12-22 06:11:46 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> So what do you call the operational notion? |
| 2024-12-22 06:10:45 +0100 | <monochrom> | Ugh no, strictness is a denotational notion, not an operational (evaluation) notion. A strict function means f bottom = bottom. |
| 2024-12-22 06:10:45 +0100 | Guest78 | (~Guest78@213.233.155.134) |
| 2024-12-22 06:10:10 +0100 | Guest78 | (~Guest78@37.228.252.73) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2024-12-22 06:09:37 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Strict evaluation would evaluate the value once and possibly duplicate other computations inside that value |
| 2024-12-22 06:08:37 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Space leaks are caused by duplication of code, code is duplicated wherever variables are duplicated in lazy evaluation |
| 2024-12-22 06:07:52 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@128-137-045-062.dynamic.caiway.nl) merijn |
| 2024-12-22 06:07:30 +0100 | <orangeflu> | and why is the laziness causing me space leaks while strictness wouldn't? |