Newest at the top
| 2025-11-11 04:54:56 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@172.222.148.214) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2025-11-11 04:54:50 +0100 | bitdex | (~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex) bitdex |
| 2025-11-11 04:46:23 +0100 | deptype | (~deptype@2406:b400:3a:73c2:87a5:b5f2:d68c:7c8) |
| 2025-11-11 04:45:49 +0100 | bionade24 | (~quassel@server2.oscloud.info) bionade24 |
| 2025-11-11 04:45:38 +0100 | bionade24 | (~quassel@server2.oscloud.info) (Quit: Apocalypse Incoming!) |
| 2025-11-11 04:40:44 +0100 | Googulator68 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-0180-8127-ba79-55a7-6f29.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-11-11 04:40:43 +0100 | Googulator96 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-0180-8127-ba79-55a7-6f29.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-11-11 04:36:08 +0100 | qqe | (~qqq@185.54.21.203) |
| 2025-11-11 04:33:12 +0100 | td_ | (~td@i53870938.versanet.de) |
| 2025-11-11 04:31:25 +0100 | td_ | (~td@i5387093B.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 250 seconds) |
| 2025-11-11 04:13:10 +0100 | <EvanR> | A = Stream Bool would satisfy this using diagonalization to prove the existence part, if you could somehow get the "does not equal" to make sense |
| 2025-11-11 04:11:51 +0100 | Square3 | (~Square@user/square) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2025-11-11 04:10:28 +0100 | bggd | (~bgg@2a01:e0a:819:1510:c077:be4f:997f:e54a) |
| 2025-11-11 04:09:55 +0100 | <EvanR> | then A is sequence avoiding |
| 2025-11-11 04:08:30 +0100 | Square2 | (~Square4@user/square) Square |
| 2025-11-11 04:08:04 +0100 | <EvanR> | for all streams of A, say xs, there exists an x such that for all i, x "does not equal" xs !! i |
| 2025-11-11 04:07:41 +0100 | <jreicher> | It can be countable but still not recursive. That's the really surprising case IMO. |
| 2025-11-11 04:06:48 +0100 | <EvanR> | I saw a constructive notion of "uncountable" floating around called "sequence avoiding" set, maybe could be repurposed for types |
| 2025-11-11 04:06:19 +0100 | <jreicher> | That's why I was asking about what haskell is representing with these "infinite sets". |
| 2025-11-11 04:05:42 +0100 | Googulator68 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-0180-8127-ba79-55a7-6f29.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-11-11 04:05:37 +0100 | Googulator92 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-0180-8127-ba79-55a7-6f29.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-11-11 04:05:32 +0100 | <EvanR> | I meant Stream of Bool |
| 2025-11-11 04:05:08 +0100 | <EvanR> | diagonalization could be used to construct a missed sequence |
| 2025-11-11 04:04:18 +0100 | <EvanR> | if you tried to form a list of all Sequence of Bool, you'd fail to list them all |
| 2025-11-11 04:03:12 +0100 | <EvanR> | depends on your metatheory? |
| 2025-11-11 04:02:47 +0100 | <jreicher> | Are they only denumerable? |
| 2025-11-11 04:02:30 +0100 | <EvanR> | also haskell has "infinite sets" (types with infinite inhabitants) so that's not a deal breaker |
| 2025-11-11 04:02:09 +0100 | Sidney | (~Sidney@2600:4040:2678:9600:b1c4:ced3:242d:1252) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-11-11 04:01:25 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds) |
| 2025-11-11 03:56:56 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-11-11 03:50:21 +0100 | <geekosaur> | typeclasses |
| 2025-11-11 03:50:18 +0100 | <jreicher> | Took me ages to unlearn that expectation |
| 2025-11-11 03:50:14 +0100 | <geekosaur> | and patsyns |
| 2025-11-11 03:50:11 +0100 | <jreicher> | The thing that really broke my brain when I looked at Lisp (after doing functional) is that there isn't an implicit eval of an expression in head possition. |
| 2025-11-11 03:49:46 +0100 | <EvanR> | up to three |
| 2025-11-11 03:49:33 +0100 | <EvanR> | shoot |
| 2025-11-11 03:49:32 +0100 | <geekosaur> | module name/qualifier |
| 2025-11-11 03:49:14 +0100 | <EvanR> | every [capitalized] name has two independent bindings, type and constructor |
| 2025-11-11 03:48:50 +0100 | <monochrom> | Criminals. |
| 2025-11-11 03:48:17 +0100 | <jreicher> | That's Lisp-2. Lisp-1 is not like that |
| 2025-11-11 03:48:16 +0100 | <monochrom> | BASIC: Every name has two independent bindings: number and string. |
| 2025-11-11 03:48:03 +0100 | <monochrom> | Lisp: Every name has two independent bindings: value and function. |
| 2025-11-11 03:47:39 +0100 | <monochrom> | No no no, the original sin belonged to BASIC and Lisp. Yes I'm putting them on the same line. |
| 2025-11-11 03:47:37 +0100 | <geekosaur> | awk doesn't have arrays/lists, so you use its "associative arrays" as if they were |
| 2025-11-11 03:47:19 +0100 | <jreicher> | Personally I'm a fan of that bad boy. |
| 2025-11-11 03:47:07 +0100 | <geekosaur> | yes |
| 2025-11-11 03:47:00 +0100 | <jreicher> | I thought the original sin belonged to awk? |
| 2025-11-11 03:46:11 +0100 | <geekosaur> | you would not normally use a hash as a list unless it's sparse |
| 2025-11-11 03:45:15 +0100 | <geekosaur> | there are three types: scalar, list, hash |
| 2025-11-11 03:45:13 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |