00:00:00 --- log: started forth/13.01.01 00:27:23 anyone doing anything interestin? 00:27:39 s/?/g?/ 01:46:05 --- join: anannie (~anannie@95.211.99.11) joined #forth 01:46:05 --- mode: ChanServ set +v anannie 03:31:41 --- quit: obobo (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 03:31:54 --- join: obobo (~chatzilla@dyn-dsl-mb-98-124-28-49.nexicom.net) joined #forth 03:31:54 --- mode: ChanServ set +v obobo 03:32:26 Hey obobo 03:55:35 anannie: do you mean protist? :P 03:55:54 protist: Hey there, how are you doing? 03:56:41 I am doing well, and you? :) 03:56:45 I am tired though :/ 03:57:54 as am I 03:58:36 we should sleep together :3 03:59:15 Errr? 04:00:49 I've been BSing too much in another channel, sorry :) 04:00:52 what are you up to? 04:01:16 I'm talking to someone who is quite close to me... 04:18:01 --- join: MayDaniel (~MayDaniel@unaffiliated/maydaniel) joined #forth 04:18:02 --- mode: ChanServ set +v MayDaniel 04:45:43 anannie: how is Ruby? 04:46:19 anannie: i really was surprised when i saw your Ruby code...I heard Ruby was similar to Perl in some ways...so I expected similar syntax 04:46:25 I'm reading the pragmatic programmers guide on ruby 04:47:06 Well I don't know if my ruby code is supposed to be the way ruby is implemented, but ruby people do pride themselves on clarity and readability 04:48:12 anannie: the "messyness of Perl" (the sigils and choice) actually add to the power of the language...but it was interesting to see how ruby looks more like Python 04:48:42 anannie: in Ruby...can you use regexes without importing them? 04:48:58 yes protist 04:49:01 anannie: i assume so because i saw Ruby has special forms for regex binding 04:49:09 anannie: good :) 04:49:18 protist: You can use regexes directly 04:49:37 anannie: that is something that bothers me about Python....Python imports regexes then uses these messy function wrappers that make it feel like C 04:50:18 well in ruby you can directly do a reg ex search 04:50:25 lemme show you some code which has that 04:52:45 anannie: in perl you can do stuff like if ($thing=~m/PaTtErN/){code} or for a find and substitute $thing=~s/pattern/replacement/; 04:53:04 yes you can do just that in ruby 04:53:13 https://www.dropbox.com/s/dugdirgo2h5mvlz/ex36b.rb 04:53:13 ah nice :) 04:53:22 That's very early code of mine 04:53:27 and it features an input parser of sorts 04:54:50 ah interesting 04:55:11 looks a little too OO for my taste, but a definite step up from Python regex handling 04:55:34 I made a text based adventure game in ruby 04:57:22 nice :) 04:57:43 here is a compiler i started and abandoned in Perl: http://ideone.com/amWeKR 04:58:20 there is a lot of assembly mised into the text, especially the parts in red 04:58:55 mixed* 04:59:14 but it does demonstrate the full extent of how weird Perl "regexes" can be 05:01:54 """my $balanced = qr/($(?:[^()]++|(?-1))*+$)/;""" 05:01:58 * anannie faints. 05:02:05 That's like greek to me 05:02:24 haha 05:02:50 that is a demonstration of something Perl can do, that even many perlmonks may not know how to do 05:03:22 that is a recursive regex that finds a section of text with matching parenthesis 05:03:44 A recursive regex 05:03:46 Wow. 05:03:52 so it is like a parsing expression grammar 05:03:52 I don't even know how to begin reading it 05:03:59 it does recursive descent parsing 05:04:03 I would love to learn though 05:04:06 anannie: haha :D 05:04:32 * anannie is kinda dumb... :p 05:04:33 anannie: that is the power of Perl....other languages claim to have "Perl 5 regexes"....They don't. 05:05:35 anannie: you seem intelligent to me...I think you can handle those weird things if you take the time 05:05:54 anannie: and after you learn the syntax and particulars of Perl regexes 05:06:14 anannie: note: I am sexist, it is quite rare I suspect a girl of being intelligent 05:06:20 ;) 05:06:34 lol 05:07:15 It's just that this stuff is incomprehensible to me right now and there are people my age starting up companies and doing stuff like this 05:07:21 it's very, very embarrassing 05:07:39 they likely are not writing regular expressions like that 05:07:50 most people tell me I am crazy for not using modules for stuff like that 05:09:06 Meh I'll just work until I get there. 05:09:35 how old are you? 05:09:41 you said "people my age" 05:10:04 20 05:10:10 me too 05:10:11 :D 05:10:24 until the 7th haha 05:10:39 You're 20? 05:10:44 yes ma'am 05:11:03 Wow. 05:11:09 I thought you must be 26 or something 05:11:14 There I'm ashamed of you. 05:11:25 i just took a douchey picture because we were having a beard contest in ##programming: http://imgur.com/wyuAL 05:11:32 * of myself not you 05:11:36 sorry had a brain parse error 05:11:42 why ashamed? lol 05:12:57 i figured you were probably late 20's, as well...because you had a job and your boss gave you a laptop 05:13:20 Well I know nothing compared to you 05:14:07 I've had 5 months of living and breathing nothing but programming 05:15:00 I got to New Zealand and my visa was messed up...i couldn't do uni or work here...I eventually got tired of playing games online, wiped off windows, installed linux, and started programming all day 05:16:38 Wow you did this within 5 months? 05:17:03 yes :) ...i did have two Java courses that taught me nothing like 2 years ago, though 05:17:28 i have a rule....20 pages a day minimum 05:17:40 if you do that, you cover 600 pages a month, minimum 05:18:10 Yes. 05:18:47 Do you make notes about the pages you read? 05:18:58 no 05:19:10 I practice things as I feel a need, though 05:19:11 How do you ensure retention? 05:19:33 practice...but generally, if I am interested, I retain 05:19:58 I am passionate about CS now :) 05:20:21 ah I'm different. I get very nervous about retaining things 05:20:36 if I don't know if I'm about to retain something then I get tied up in knots about it 05:20:49 I'm trying to set up spaced repetition around concepts to do that 05:22:29 one thing I think I do without thinking about it now is the following....if you read something and you are worried about retaining it, then look away and see if you can repeat it to yourself, mentally (especially syntax and code)....if you can't, then read that part again....repeat until you feel comfortable 05:23:08 and if you still don't feel comfortable....write programs that use the concept, and try not to copy from the book....make sure you hold it in your head then type it, peice by peice if you have to 05:24:37 Thanks that sounds perfect. I'll use that trick 05:25:44 good :) ... you sound like a capable person, from what I have seen of you 05:26:21 I try to be. I try to be. Fake it until you make it ;) 05:27:13 haha :) 05:27:55 ah damn I have to take the trash out 05:40:59 anannie: back 05:41:05 Welcome back 05:41:13 anannie: thank you :) 05:41:21 Did you solve PE problem #6 btw? 05:42:27 i have solved it...but i haven't went through your method :) 05:42:54 your method is more interesting than the problem 05:43:47 Sorry I meant problem #5 05:43:52 ah! 05:43:53 sec 05:44:00 I'm currently solving it and it's giving me a headache 05:44:08 I can't see an efficient solution over here 05:44:24 and I just know that the project euler fellows will come back with a simple linear solution 05:44:31 my internet is so slow right now 05:45:20 2520 is the smallest number that can be divided by each of the numbers from 1 to 10 without any remainder. What is the smallest positive number that is evenly divisible by all of the numbers from 1 to 20? 05:46:00 ah 05:46:05 i think I did that one in assembly 05:46:14 but i also probably did it in other languages 05:46:38 i didn't do anything magical...i didn't even optimize 05:46:59 you just kept on looping until you got it? 05:47:32 i might have skipped checking 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9 or something ....but it isn't needed 05:47:47 yeah the first few problems will solve fast without optimizations 05:48:20 depends on what you find fun, but there are plenty of problems that really will take a month or longer if you don't optimize 05:49:23 oh....you could also start your check at 11 * 17 * 7 * 5 * 3 * 19 or something 05:49:42 because the number must be a multiple of those primes 05:50:43 I'm actually doing a rather simple algorithm 05:51:23 instead of looping from 1 and then dividing each of these numbers to see if it's the minimum number and then hitting stop when I arrive at one 05:52:17 what I'm doing is that I'm working through the maximum number of factors for each of the numbers and then I'm inserting them into an array and then I'm multiplying them to get my result 05:52:51 for example 20 has 2 two times, clearly the number will have the factor of two occurring at least two times for it to be evenly divisible by 20 05:53:08 therefore we're searching for a number which has 4 as a factor and so on 05:53:16 but then we have 8 that means it must be at least 3 05:53:28 exactly...why i was saying skip 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, , and 9 05:53:28 and so we revise the estimate and we keep on going until we do it 05:53:48 16 is divisible by 8,4,2 05:54:01 18 is divisible by 9, 2 05:54:04 yes but what I'm doing is inverse of a search through numbers 05:54:10 and 6 05:54:13 I'm focussing on the list itself to get the minimum number 05:54:21 it's harder to code 05:54:22 and 3 lol...ill stop listing 05:54:29 hmmm 06:05:30 ha! 06:05:34 i figured out some tricks 06:09:39 anannie: *SPOILER ALERT* 06:09:47 NOOOO!!! 06:09:48 :p 06:09:51 ok 06:09:52 i wont 06:09:59 I'm solving it 06:10:03 I have a partial solution down 06:10:19 I'm using a hash based solution to do it 06:10:28 ah :) 06:16:11 I am lambdanu on pe....you can see my solution in the forum for the problem after you have solved it to your satisfaction :) 06:25:12 Hrm apparently my approach is conceptually wrong, because I find the LCM not the least evenly divisble number 06:26:28 what is LCM? 06:27:32 least common multiple 06:28:00 ah 06:28:24 you don't actually have to use it for this problem...but you do know the modulo operator, right? 06:28:27 % 06:31:40 That's what I'm doing 06:31:50 and I checked the definition I'm conceptually right 06:31:56 I don't know where I'm going wrong though 06:32:05 may i see your code? 06:42:29 https://www.dropbox.com/s/lrxxpnv5qszci8k/pe5.rb 06:42:38 ^ protist 06:42:43 Sorry it took me that long to upload 06:43:39 sec 06:45:05 i think your approach may be incorrect...but it will take me a bit to fully comprehend whether it /is/ wrong 06:46:25 that code really looks like python :P 06:46:32 i was just writing a prime routine for python 06:47:43 anannie: i think you are overthinking this problem 06:48:12 the story of my life 06:48:14 anannie: you do not need to find factors of each number you encounter....only check for divisibility 06:48:29 I'm not finding factors for each number I encounter 06:48:36 instead I'm not searching through numbers at all 06:48:44 I'm doing something different 06:49:02 anannie: ah!...i think i know what you are trying to do 06:49:06 I'm going through the list from 2 to 20 and then for each one of them I'm figuring out the factors 06:49:22 if the number of factors is larger than what is stored in the hash 06:49:37 then the factors get stored into a hash 06:49:55 so what I'm doing is that I'm creating a list of the maximum number of times each factor occurs 06:50:04 and then I'm multiplying them to arrive at a number 06:50:47 which should be theoretically the least number which is evenly divisible by the set 06:51:08 anannie: what is the << operator in Ruby? 06:51:23 bitshift?! 06:51:39 no it's insert number into the array 06:51:45 ah good 06:53:38 This should be a simple, elegant recourse to the problem 06:53:41 and damn it isn't 06:54:46 what you are doing in factorisation is what i did by progressively rewriting my program 06:55:12 this is interesting...i am going to stare at it more 06:55:36 Oh god I figured out what I'm doing wrong 06:55:38 YAY! 06:56:12 ah 06:56:19 you need to restart index at 0 i think 06:56:29 otherwise the while exits early? 06:56:52 maybe you found something else, or i have it wrong :) 07:02:22 Nah 07:02:31 I was taking a multiple when I should have been doing an exponential 07:02:37 it was as easy as that 07:04:09 is it closer to working :) 07:04:10 ? 07:06:26 it works 07:06:32 :D 07:06:34 refresh the screen for the latest version 07:06:47 and run it in the ruby that came with your machine 07:07:24 ah your changes must be farther down than I read :) 07:07:49 I'll teach you ruby if you teach me Forth :p 07:07:53 i actually don't have ruby 07:07:58 sec i'll install 07:08:21 this could take a while :) 07:08:32 look on the last page of the forum for that question 07:08:38 I am lambdanu on PE 07:09:46 Yes I saw your solution 07:09:48 it was cheating 07:09:50 :p 07:09:52 :D 07:10:08 the Forth one? 07:10:23 i actually wrote it out in assembly...but i brute forced 07:10:29 that was a month or two ago 07:10:34 1 prob 07:13:03 Yes the forth one 07:13:59 :) 07:15:01 I love trolling people's brains 07:16:19 how so? 07:16:49 i like what you did with your solution, it is really is interesting logic 07:16:51 protist: Offering to teach Ruby is a programming skill attenuator. ;) 07:17:54 ttmrichter: i had to look up attenuator haha 07:18:18 * ttmrichter was riffing off Forth being a programming skill amplifier. 07:18:23 ttmrichter: I am supposing you are saying that it would attenuate my programming skills to be taught Ruby? 07:18:29 Yes. 07:18:33 ah haha 07:19:08 sadly i wasn't quick enough to get the reference :P 07:19:21 lol ttmrichter 07:19:27 You really hate Ruby don't you? 07:19:33 Actually I like Ruby. 07:19:36 As a SCRIPTING language. 07:19:49 It's the first language I learned and well I'm still learning it... 07:20:22 It's when it gets distorted into something it was never intended to that it bugs me. 07:20:41 And it's when Rubyists invade other language zones and start insisting that everybody turn their language into Ruby that it pisses me off actively. 07:21:13 For some reason Erlang is a major target of this. 07:21:40 There's been not one, not two but THREE attempts to basically build Ruby atop the Erlang VM (named BEAM). 07:21:52 And each one followed the same pattern. 07:22:07 ewww....leave Erlang alone! 07:22:07 ttmrichter: I'm guessing that's a bad thing? 07:22:22 Erland never hurt nobody...unless they were hurt by stability 07:22:26 Erlang* 07:22:27 "Hey guys! I just found Erlang and really like it. But I don't like and I think it would be better if it worked like ." 07:22:47 hehe 07:23:00 "Guys, since nobody's doing what I want with Erlang, I've decided to make myself a language that looks the way I want." 07:23:08 anannie: Ruby looks solid....more so that Python from what I see 07:23:11 "WHY ARE YOU GUYS SO MEAN AND NOT FLOCKING TO MY OBVIOUSLY FAR SUPERIOR LANGUAGE?!" 07:23:15 anannie: more so than* 07:23:32 protist: Ruby *is* solid. As a scripting language. Provided you don't use the dangerous bits. 07:23:34 But ... 07:23:40 Rubyists use it for more than scripting. 07:23:48 And they LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE them the dangerous bits. 07:23:50 what exactly is scripting btw? 07:24:04 anannie: Typically task automation. 07:24:33 For example if I want to analyze my HTTP server log files I might write a quick program (called a "script") in Awk or Perl or Ruby or the like. 07:25:10 Or if I want to add programmability to some code I've written I might embed a Lua or Python or Tcl or even Ruby interpreter in my program. 07:25:29 So the bulk of the work is done in my program, but users can automate things with, again, scripts. 07:25:38 In this role, Ruby is actually very pleasant. 07:25:49 But then what are core programming languages? 07:25:51 anannie: scripting is basically anything other than making a commercial product or systems-level (low level) programming 07:26:06 * ttmrichter isn't familiar with the term "core programming language". 07:26:39 A good (if ill-defined) set of terms to use is "systems", "application" and "script" programming. 07:27:00 C, for example, is pretty good (not ideal!) for systems programming. It's pretty lousy for applications and unusable for scripting. 07:27:36 Erlang is pretty good for certain classes of application programming, OK for scripting (via escript) and unusable for systems programming. 07:27:57 Ruby is good for scripting, useless for systems and terrible for application programming. 07:28:12 Anyway, bedtime. 07:28:14 Chat later. 07:28:17 goodnight 07:28:22 thank you for teaching me ttmrichter 07:28:38 anannie: goodnight :) 07:28:50 anannie: btw Python and Perl are scripting as well 07:28:51 You're going to bed as wel? 07:29:05 anannie: no...i just say goodnight when people say it to me 07:29:18 oh 07:29:28 you aren't the one leaving lol 07:29:35 ttmrichter: goodnight 07:33:31 anannie: i know what problem 10 wants me to do...but i am stubborn so I am giving it 10 minutes 07:33:53 anannie: i guess i might as well do what it wants :/ 07:34:38 works for me 07:34:48 oops. 07:34:53 I can whip up the prime number problem in a few minutes 07:35:06 anannie: number 10? 07:35:13 I was caught in backscroll, nevermind. That was wrt to "see dup" locking up in gforth 0.7.0 07:35:35 anannie: it is not difficult at face-value...it is a question of efficiency 07:36:11 anannie: even rudimentary optimizations don't solve it well enough...i am about to switch algorithms 07:36:14 protist: Finally you're getting into my mode :) 07:36:38 --- quit: proteusguy (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 07:36:45 anannie: PE will force it after a certain point :D 07:37:16 Here's one... the sieve of Eratosthenes 07:37:28 anannie: i'm going to be practicing Python for now...i coudl whip this up in Scheme very quickly 07:37:38 anannie: I already wrote the sieve 07:37:47 anannie: sieve isn't good enough for #10 07:37:49 okay then here's another 07:37:58 anannie: Fermat test is needed 07:38:08 do root(num) and then use a prime list less than that 07:38:25 anannie: you do that then...i will do Fermat :D 07:40:23 anannie: hmmm...fermat could actually overflow the space of a variable 07:40:45 Fermat is basically random sampling... 07:42:05 --- quit: obobo (Ping timeout: 255 seconds) 07:42:25 it still has good complexity 07:42:27 btw, ^D broke out of a lockup of see 07:43:03 PoppaVic: what? 07:43:11 oh 07:43:14 :) 07:43:23 was it see dup again? 07:43:26 or was that someone else? 07:44:29 I was tinkering last night and the ^D cut me loose - it triggered a short hexdump and all was well 07:53:20 --- join: proteusguy (~proteusgu@ppp-115-87-214-214.revip4.asianet.co.th) joined #forth 07:53:20 --- mode: ChanServ set +v proteusguy 07:55:58 --- join: obobo (~chatzilla@dyn-dsl-mb-216-168-124-204.nexicom.net) joined #forth 07:55:59 --- mode: ChanServ set +v obobo 07:56:24 anannie: are you sure about that root rule...it seems odd here 07:56:49 A numbers prime factors are a always less than root(num) 07:57:17 anannie: kk....if my print doesn't fail i should have it soon :) 07:57:35 err how have you implemented it? 07:57:43 I'll write a solution and I'll show it to you 07:58:12 anannie: i got it wrong :( 07:58:23 that's okay 07:58:43 anannie: i have a working seive i wrote...and i threw in the root rule 07:58:56 anannie: i could just have written my python incorrectly...i am just learning python 08:01:00 Well you'll get there 08:01:35 anannie: oh...they didn't count 1 as prime 08:01:45 anannie: i added one to my answer xD 08:01:49 anannie: i got it now :) 08:01:50 1 isn't a prime 08:01:51 Ouch 08:01:54 Yay!!!!! 08:02:22 :D 08:02:28 your turn >:) 08:03:17 That's evil 08:03:33 hence the evil smiley >:) 08:03:34 but you know I shall pick you up on that one 08:04:38 --- quit: protist (Read error: Connection reset by peer) 08:06:05 --- join: protist (~protist@125-237-130-19.jetstream.xtra.co.nz) joined #forth 08:06:05 --- mode: ChanServ set +v protist 08:06:16 anannie: my netbook didn't like me Eulering over and over 08:06:26 anannie: it restarted to teach me a lesson 08:06:27 protist: :-/ 08:06:32 haha 08:06:35 Can I reuse old code? 08:06:42 no :( 08:06:42 I've already solved this problem before 08:06:45 oh 08:06:50 if you wrote it then go ahead 08:07:56 --- join: ncv (~quassel@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 08:07:56 --- mode: ChanServ set +v ncv 08:09:57 My old code is dizzying 08:10:41 --- join: I440r (~zhiming@230.sub-70-194-73.myvzw.com) joined #forth 08:10:41 --- mode: ChanServ set +o I440r 08:11:24 I have no clue what this does https://www.dropbox.com/s/zqysmyvhjgjrxsq/pe3.rb protist 08:11:35 and I wrote it! 08:12:13 haha 08:12:14 sec 08:12:20 /me looks !!! 08:13:10 anannie: you should probably have implemented seive to call another function...then you would have less trouble reading your code :) 08:13:39 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieve_of_Eratosthenes 08:14:26 Yup 08:14:30 That's what I'm trying to do 08:14:37 anannie: if y!=prime (y%prime)==0 end ....that seems really fishy 08:14:51 everyone rewriting those things always seems like a waste of time. 08:15:00 anannie: a boolean that then says do a boolean?...i guess i just don't know Ruby? 08:15:04 not a waste of time 08:15:08 its good practice 08:15:35 never bothered with sieve & primes or whatever in my life. 08:16:36 i prefer fibonacci to primes 08:16:49 : fib 0 1 rot 1+ 1 do tuck + loop nip ; 08:16:53 40 fib . 08:17:17 : nextfib tuck + ; 08:17:31 someone showed me that...i can't take credit 08:17:38 but doing a sieve is good practice for working with arrays 08:18:07 they based it on my code above which is a method for doing fibs that i implemented years ago 08:18:16 everyone else uses recursion 08:18:23 doing a seive is good practice for control flow or learning a new language 08:18:42 to calculate the 40th fib usinga recursive technique your code will recurse on itself ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTEEN MILLION TIMES 08:18:57 Whoa 08:19:21 I440r: my return stack is whimpering PLEASE DON'T!!! 08:19:22 i put a incr> counter at the top of a recursive implementation 08:19:51 protist, simple. for any given algorithm that uses recursion there is always a much better itterative method 08:19:57 except for ackerman functions 08:20:17 i.e. you go ahead and use "quick sort" and you will be eating the dust of my radix counting sort 08:21:16 I440r: there is a difference between a recursive process and a recursive routine.....a recursive routine can be an iterative process (might require tail call optimization to fully-realize it, though?) 08:22:15 yer all makin' my eyes bleed ;-) 08:22:19 protist, a tail optimization is just where when you do a call followed by a ret you just JUMP. recursion is just a means of doing loops tho wieth recursion thers usually 2 loops, a wind up loop and a wind down loop 08:22:28 smelly computer *scientists* ;-> 08:22:30 most wind down loops are just successive rets 08:23:14 recusion is BAD. instead of doing : foo ......... recurse ; and hoping the optimizer optimizes that recurse just fucking do : foo begin ....... again ; or whatever 08:23:36 any kind of recusion is automatically a CLUSTER FUCK. it makes the code way more difficult to read 08:23:55 I440r: doesn't colorforth ONLY offer recursion or something? 08:24:02 I find recursion to be elegant though... 08:24:05 my comment on isforths recurse definition is "foot in self shoot" 08:24:09 I440r: Chuck Moore prefers recursion for simplicity 08:24:37 I440r: or so he seems to say in a large speech of his I read 08:25:01 anannie, yes. quick sort is "elecant" when done recursivly, one look at the gny itterative quick sort code shows that 08:25:11 but thers better, faster, simpler ITTERATIVE methods 08:25:41 protist, instead of do loops he uses for loops 08:26:16 but do loops can still be a better choice sometimes. like counting backwards from X to Y where y is non 0 or even negative 08:26:50 I'md too used to C looping - I need to re examine the forth constructs,, I always found do-loops clunky 08:27:06 do loops are very powerful... and klunky 08:27:26 as long as we intersect on Clunky ;-) 08:28:09 would be funny if Forth offered DO ..... JNE/JNZ/JNA or some such 08:28:37 i suppose we do have BEGIN UNTIL 08:28:52 they are more difficult to set up. the start of a for loop is takes 2 parameters off the stack PLUS a compiled inline literal address of the exit of the loop.. the start and end indicies are "fudged". the exit point is pushed onto the return stack then the 2 fudged indicies 08:29:12 thefudging makes loop increment the top of return stack which will cause an overflow on completion of the loop 08:29:29 to get the unfudged index of the loop you add the 2 fudged values. 08:29:46 to exit from a loop you literally only need to do 2r> 2drop exit 08:30:17