<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: put a lot of work today into figuring out dV and shit
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
using Engineer heavily now
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but that thing you linked me, with dV's for each place? is WILDLY innacurate for anything in the real-world.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
perhaps it works if you use MechaJeb, or have a PERFECT hand-eye coördination *and* a complete an thorough understanding of fake-orbital-mechanics,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but for a real person like me, even after something like ten orbital shots to the moon (more than enough time to learn the basics and not make huge-ass, costly, mistakes), it's still usually at least twice in dV cost what that chart claims ddis
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
anyway. finally made a successful landing,
<devyn>
by the way, can anyone explain to me why the forums at bodybuilding.com are so relevant to internet culture and seemingly unrelated to bodybuilding at all?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
and then hit the goddamn spacebar to take off instead of throttling up. because that's what I'm used to doing.
<devyn>
what the fuck?
<devyn>
I mean it's basically somethingawful
<devyn>
what the
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: yes, that thing describes minimal Δv you need
<whitequark>
2x sounds like quite a bit of excess though
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
which ejected my top capsule from my lander, and left it engine-less, but completely intact.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
so now I have the lander, engines, landing-gear, and all my batteries …
<purr>
<alexgordon> is that when the asians arrive?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
… and sitting perfectly upright next to it, the capsule, all the science gear, my Kerbal, and a dead battery and useless antenna.
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: I think there was some kind of a lock
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but most importantly, I'm having a *hell* of a time
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
building a “lander” with remotely enough dV to get home.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
christ fucking almighty, this is supposed to be easy.
<yorick>
yorickpeterse: or they haven't logged in for months
<yorick>
yorickpeterse: beautiful singles are probably waiting for you but not on okcupid
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: meh
* whitequark
finds most people beautiful
<whitequark>
I mean you're probably not looking like a model, but mostly because that photo is shopped to death
<whitequark>
*shrug*
<purr>
¯\(º_o)/¯
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I oscillate between seeing true beauty in almost everyone,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
and seeing the horrid ugliness we all share.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I have trouble with scale.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
>.>
<yorickpeterse>
whitequark: you just have low standards :P
* ELLIOTTCABLE
goes back to reading the newest Charlie Stross novel
<whitequark>
yorickpeterse: you will just die a 80-year-old virgin
<yorickpeterse>
except I'm not a virgin
<yorickpeterse>
joke's on you
<yorick>
yorickpeterse: yes you've had gay sex many times?
<yorickpeterse>
well my ex is now a dude so....I guess?
<yorickpeterse>
balls don't touch == not gay
<yorick>
there's a new one? damn I'm not even done with accelerando
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
FUCK ME
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
THAT SUDDEN REALIZATION,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
THAT THE NOVEL YOU ARE READING,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
is about bitcoin.
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: well, almost :P
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
yorick: you've read it?
<yorick>
but it came 50 years too soon
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I'm reading the pages right now that are talking about the cryptographically-signed slow-money system
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
huh?
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: oh the new one :P
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: accelerando has some new money systems too :)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
oh, ew, nah
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I'm hugely not a fan of accelerando.
<yorickpeterse>
ELLIOTTCABLE: are you sure you're not reading Bitcoin weekly?
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: what's it called?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
it's the sequel to saturn's children
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
accelerando was just too … continuity-broken for me.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
there was no continuous *narrative* that claimed attention. I disliked reading it, and it took several sittings seperated by months for me to claw through it.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
It's his worst, or second-worst, work.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Which is really disappointing, because everything else from him is *absolutely top-rate* fiction.
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: I can live with continuity-broken works :)
<yorick>
it's just very very long
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
There're authors who can do hard-science, deep-future fiction. he's not one of them.
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: are those authors mainly Greg Egan?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Most of his books do an excellent job, an *unparalleled* job, of near-future scifi
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but whenever he dips into deep-future his work goes to shit. /=
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
If you want deep-future skillzrzrz, fuckin' read Alastair Reynolds. So much love.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Greg Egan? no idea, never heard of him. Worth my time?
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: the near-future part actually required some effort because I had to turn back the time 10 years and then forward 30
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(Also, I'm currently working through your Goodreads history :P)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Redshirts is up next, I'm excited
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: yes, you should read Greg Egan
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: okay so that's not my goodreads history :D
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
wat
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
aren't you the one who was doing the Hugo winners?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
or, Nebula, errrr, whatever
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whichever one I forget
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: I don't *think* so
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
oh. was it hat guy?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
gkatsev?
<yorick>
probably.
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: and yes, Greg Egan is def worth your time
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
send it to me on goodreads
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
conversely, you go read *all* of Stross's works.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Trust me.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
There's a couple genres, but they're all extremely attractive, even the shit that I wouldn't normally care about.
<alexgordon>
classes, objects, interfaces, traits, categories, class methods, instance methods, inheritance, instance variables, class variables...
<alexgordon>
what a mess
<yorick>
alexgordon: yeah, go with prototypical OOP it's a whole lot easier
<alexgordon>
yorick: nah
<yorick>
or functional, but then you'd have monads :D
<alexgordon>
yorick: because static typing is the only thing that keeps me sane
<alexgordon>
JS is even more of a mess
<yorick>
alexgordon: Self?
<alexgordon>
nobody uses it :P
<yorick>
lua?
<yorickpeterse>
prototypical oo is fucking terrible
<alexgordon>
yorick: better than JS, I'll give you that
<joelteon>
lua is crippled
<alexgordon>
the yoricks are in disagreement!
<yorick>
yorickpeterse: ur mom is fucking terrible!
<yorickpeterse>
OO in itself is pretty easy, you don't need interfaces/traits/categories//etc for it
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: but what do you replace them with?
<yorickpeterse>
nothing
<yorickpeterse>
they are not strictly related to OO
<alexgordon>
:|
<alexgordon>
they exist for a reason
<yorick>
alexgordon: yeah nobody uses those things except java has to because it doesn't do multiple inheritance
<yorickpeterse>
Them existing doesn't mean it's a fundamental part of OO
<yorickpeterse>
or even an important part
<yorick>
alexgordon: they exist because java is stubborn
<yorickpeterse>
You're mistaking OO with Java's fucked up OO system
<alexgordon>
yorick: pretty sure most OOP languages have something equivalent to interfaces these days
<alexgordon>
hell, they want to add them to C++
<joelteon>
i thought java was the de facto OO implementation
<yorickpeterse>
alexgordon: actually no
<whitequark>
joelteon: smalltalk is proper OO
<yorickpeterse>
interfaces are a big fucking joke if you'd ask me
<joelteon>
oh, ok
<whitequark>
java and C++ have something that people tend to call OO but it is not
<joelteon>
well i can agree with smalltalk being the bee's knees
<yorick>
joelteon: smalltalk is the best OO
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: I dunno, the idea is useful. The implementation is poor
<alexgordon>
anyway I didn't want to have a flame war
<yorickpeterse>
alexgordon: the idea is broken by design
<whitequark>
ruby, python ~ smalltalk
<joelteon>
alexgordon: you're fat
<alexgordon>
I was trying to figure out what overarching thing could replace all of these things
<yorick>
alexgordon: prototypes could :D
<yorickpeterse>
interfaces are replaced by traits/mixins basically
<whitequark>
alexgordon: smalltalk's semantics can fit on a business card
<alexgordon>
whitequark: ok but I don't care, I'm talking about java-style OO
<whitequark>
alexgordon: who the fuck needs java-style oo
<alexgordon>
whitequark: everybody, apparently
<whitequark>
we need less of it, not more
<alexgordon>
awjdoiawjd
<alexgordon>
ASSUMING THE EXISTENCE of all these things, how can you simplify it
<yorickpeterse>
have you been reading Java again?
<whitequark>
get rid of those things.
<yorickpeterse>
HAVE YOU?!?!?!1
* yorickpeterse
slaps alexgordon around a bit with a large trout
<whitequark>
alexgordon: take a look at rust
<alexgordon>
whitequark: yeah I have... I don't like what I see in that department IMO
<whitequark>
it wants to solve same class of problems as C++ without its braindeadness
<alexgordon>
rust's OO is pretty bad
<joelteon>
hey guys, so how do you do CSS sprites with high-DPI displays
<whitequark>
alexgordon: what about rust's OO?
<joelteon>
use percentages for the sizes?
<alexgordon>
for one, it's nothing like smalltalk :P
<alexgordon>
java is more like smalltalk than rust
<whitequark>
it's quite similar actually
<whitequark>
both employ structural typing to a certain degree
<yorickpeterse>
hahaha java like smalltalk
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: what? of course java is like smalltalk. It's based on objc
<whitequark>
alexgordon: you don't have to "own" a data type to implement a method for it, that's one important point
<yorickpeterse>
alexgordon: are you high?
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: read about java's history
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: java has message sending, introspection... don't think it has metaclasses but it's halfway there
<whitequark>
alexgordon: go read it yourself. when java was designed, it was done as a C++ ripoff, essentially
<yorickpeterse>
That doesn't make it similar to Smalltalk in terms of OO
<whitequark>
metaclasses were added in java 4... I think
<yorickpeterse>
or at least not more than Rust
<alexgordon>
whitequark: C++ doesn't have message sending
<whitequark>
definitely not 1
<whitequark>
alexgordon: if you look at java without its introspection, it's just like C++ with rtti
<joelteon>
ALSO, i need an image editor that can just put four images in the same file
<alexgordon>
message sending is the most important feature of smalltalk, and it's what separates "smalltalk-like" languages from "algol/C++-like languages"
<joelteon>
i don't have photoshop here
<joelteon>
and i don't think preview can do that
<whitequark>
alexgordon: most method calls are simple virtual calls, and the rest are dynamic_casts and virtual calls
<yorick>
joelteon: gimp
<joelteon>
gimp
<joelteon>
gimp
<joelteon>
ok
<whitequark>
besides, reflection in java is rather obscure and inconvenient to use
<whitequark>
not a first-class feature by any means
<yorickpeterse>
Whoever started teaching Java as being a good OO language needs to be banned from computers for the next 100 years
<gkatsev>
ELLIOTTCABLE: yes? I mentioned nebula.
<alexgordon>
anyway I know I'm right so there's no need to argue this. read a book, lol
<purr>
lol
<yorickpeterse>
I think alex just surpassed Dijkstra in arrogance
<alexgordon>
:D
<whitequark>
no, Dijkstra was extremely clever for that
<alexgordon>
Humility Considered Harmful
<yorickpeterse>
well yeah, Dijkstra at least made sense
<whitequark>
alexgordon just spews loads of crap. *shrug*
<purr>
¯\(º_o)/¯
<yorickpeterse>
ヽ( ﾟヮ・)ノ
<whitequark>
anyway if you're going to continue this "java OO is good" angle I'll just /ignore you
<alexgordon>
whitequark: not spewing crap, I'm spewing facts
<alexgordon>
whitequark: and I never said it was good
<yorickpeterse>
you can stop trolling now
<alexgordon>
?
<whitequark>
alexgordon: I've commented on those facts
<yorickpeterse>
whitequark: yeah but he's right
<yorickpeterse>
he read a book!
<alexgordon>
I said that java is more like smalltalk's OO than rust's is
<alexgordon>
if you disagree, then fine. it's an opinion. But I can't how anybody could disagree
<alexgordon>
if they understand how the languages work
<yorick>
yorickpeterse: we need to figure out who it was and show up at his bedroom window at night
<whitequark>
well, neither of those features message sends as first-class feature
<whitequark>
both of those can feature message sends as library feature
<alexgordon>
java is built around message sends, however much they disguise it
<yorickpeterse>
alexgordon: I'm willing to bet my cat whitequark has more understanding of this stuff than you do
<alexgordon>
rust is not
<whitequark>
alexgordon: define "message sends"
<whitequark>
how exactly is java built around them?
<joelteon>
glad to see GIMP is just as fucking crap as ever
<whitequark>
java is built around virtual method calls
<joelteon>
i guess that's as much as i can expect from an organization that provides a TLS library that accepts any certificate
<alexgordon>
yorickpeterse: this isn't a pissing match
<whitequark>
alexgordon: write me a method_missing in java
<whitequark>
I state that method_missing is a required feature for a language to be considered built around message sends
<alexgordon>
whitequark: a message send is an invocation of a method based on its name
<alexgordon>
whitequark: as opposed to a vtable call where the method is not invoked by name
<yorick>
joelteon: great unit tests they had there :P
<alexgordon>
like in objc you have objc_msgSend(theobject, "theMethodName");
<yorick>
joelteon: yeah gimp is pretty powerful on the inside but it's all in plugins or something
<whitequark>
yes, exactly java has vtable calls. you cannot dispatch messages based on their name!
<alexgordon>
yes you can!
<whitequark>
how?
<whitequark>
write me ruby's method_missing or smalltalk's doesNotUnderstand
<whitequark>
or python's __get__ or whatever the fuck they have
<alexgordon>
that's not what I'm talking about?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
wut
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
u talkin bt
<alexgordon>
I'm talking about invoking a method based on its name, at runtime
<alexgordon>
you're talking about doing something if the method doesn't exist. difference concepts
<whitequark>
that's a required part of smalltalk-style OO though, hiding of local state and implementation
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: help
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
?
<whitequark>
alexgordon: in java you must introspect the object to send it a method
<whitequark>
alexgordon: in proper smalltalk-style OO you just send it a message and then it does whatever it likes
<whitequark>
forward it with a proxy, or even emulate something based on name
<alexgordon>
whitequark: yeah that's not what I'm talking about...
<whitequark>
what you're describing is just a runtime feature that allows you to introspect vtables
<alexgordon>
I dunno, I'm an objc programmer and this shit is really important in objc
<alexgordon>
it makes the whole KVO/KVC thing work
<alexgordon>
whitequark: like in ObjC you can do [foo valueForKey:@"foo"] and it will call the method named "foo" and return the result
<whitequark>
I'm aware
<alexgordon>
can't do that in C++
<alexgordon>
and it really suffers
<whitequark>
yeah, introspection is important, but introspection ≠ smalltalk-style OO
<alexgordon>
it is for me
<whitequark>
then you are wrong.
<alexgordon>
I hardly ever use method_missing in objc (forwardInvocation:)
<alexgordon>
so if that's what's required for smalltalk-OO, then there's not much difference is there?
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: how are your dogs? (do you still have dogs?)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
wat
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
fuzz
<whitequark>
it's like saying "tg is pretty much defined on (-∞;+∞), there's not much difference between its real range and that"
<alexgordon>
whitequark: you know that I only care about practicalities. if a feature never gets used in a language, then it's irrelevant to discussion
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(dog ∞, cat ∞)
<whitequark>
I will 100% agree that your opinion that C++ OO + introspection gives you almost everything smalltalk-style OO does
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
dogs are negative like electrons, defined to be inverted
<whitequark>
but that doesn't make them the same.
<alexgordon>
does to me.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
cats are considered as positive even thhough they suck the love-energy out of a system
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
we need a cryptoproglang, distributed and anonymous. MAY THE BEST SYNTAX WIN
<joelteon>
GIMP is pap
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
GIMP smear
<joelteon>
i selected all, copied, pasted
<joelteon>
and the resulting image is different
<whitequark>
either properly use terms, or go discuss it with someone else.
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: are you drunk?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
nope on cheerios
<alexgordon>
whitequark: I never wanted to discuss it in the first place. the yoricks brought it on :|
<whitequark>
lol.
<purr>
lol
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
fuck the yoricks
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
rage against the yoricks
<alexgordon>
I wanted to discuss replacements for java-style interfaces and classes and all that shit
<yorickpeterse>
alexgordon: then don't bring it up
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
stick it to the yoricks
<alexgordon>
I DIDN"T
<alexgordon>
-_-
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: we need an #adultcable
<yorickpeterse>
<alex> HAI GAIS I DON'T GET OO WHAT ARE REPLACEMENTS FOR THIS CRAP
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
oopie poopie poopie
<alexgordon>
I miss micah :(
<whitequark>
alexgordon: but you're 12
<yorickpeterse>
<alex> PLZ DON DISCUSS ANYTHING
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
oh shush you guys
<alexgordon>
whitequark: old enough to be responsible for my crimes
<whitequark>
not old enough to discuss proglangs!
<alexgordon>
HA
<whitequark>
you need to be like
<alexgordon>
<+ELLIOTTCABLE> rage against the yoricks
<whitequark>
35
<whitequark>
yes, about right
<yorick>
I've done nothing!
<yorick>
but I still support yorickpeterse
<yorick>
and also whitequark
<alexgordon>
whitequark: how old was guido when he invented python?
<alexgordon>
hell, matz is still about 14 or so
<whitequark>
lol what
<yorick>
alexgordon: 35
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
35?
<whitequark>
guido was about 36
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
45, and living in basement
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
durr
<whitequark>
matz was 28
<alexgordon>
matz like proglangs, micah likes proglangs... matz is mormon. micah is mormon... HOLY SHIT MATZ == MICAH
<yorick>
checks out
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
alexgordon: lol, you hadn't figured that out yet?
<purr>
lol
<yorickpeterse>
whitequark: ah so that's why you chickened out on Foundry
<alexgordon>
we actually have fewer pictures of matz than we do of snowden
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
haven't you noticed his hatred for anything Ruby-style-dynamic? he's clearly a repentant ex-proglang-creator, crushed by his failures and fixated on making up for his mistakes
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: plus he started mtgox
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
what, no
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: does he really?
<alexgordon>
so that's why he's missing this week: bankruptcy proceedings
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
that dude's a different dude, all pasty and weird and fat and as unto like a ghost
<whitequark>
I think only alexgordon loved C++ bureaucracy here
<alexgordon>
whitequark: micah likes haskell except for the monads which he hates
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
alexgordon's got an attachment to C++ he can't let go of, but he's of sound mind otherwise
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
disagrees with me on damned near everything one can disagree, but still *sane*
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
he's my favourite foil.
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: it's not C++ I love, it's clang
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I stab people in the crotch with him.
<alexgordon>
I hated C++ with a passion in the GCC era
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
punny pun puns
<alexgordon>
it's only since clang became c++11 feature complete that I like it
<whitequark>
well clang is cool
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
dogs are furry, and smelly, and excellent
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: he's not sane I think
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
there's one on my feet
<alexgordon>
seriously, fuck this shit:
<whitequark>
but loving clang is like, loving MAD because it prevents a fullscale nuclear war
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
no don't
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: fuck dogs they suck and bite people
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
noooooo
<whitequark>
dogs are too high-maintenance
<alexgordon>
for (std::vector<Foo>::iterator it = vec.begin(), et = vec.end(); it != et; ++it) { }
<alexgordon>
FUCK IT
* alexgordon
hugs C++11
yorick was kicked from #elliottcable by ELLIOTTCABLE [BLASPHMENEY]
yorick has joined #elliottcable
<yorick>
but it's true!
yorick was kicked from #elliottcable by ELLIOTTCABLE [BLASPERHERMERSERY]
yorick has joined #elliottcable
<whitequark>
lol
<purr>
lol
yorick was kicked from #elliottcable by ELLIOTTCABLE [BLASPHMIVERSARY]
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: best pet ever
<alexgordon>
yorick: if your dog is sucking you, you're doing it wrong. Or right.
yorick has joined #elliottcable
<whitequark>
fluorescent bacteria in a petri dish
<alexgordon>
yorick: if your dog is sucking you, you're doing it wrong. Or right.
<yorick>
dogs suck lol
<yorickpeterse>
wat
<whitequark>
just toss them sugar
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
fluorescent DOGS in a petri dish!
<alexgordon>
whitequark: like a horse?
<yorick>
alexgordon: I think peanut butter works
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
brb fluorescent dogs
<yorickpeterse>
yorick: you're not supposed to put peanut butter there
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
new plan new plan
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: you can actually do that
<whitequark>
like, you'd need about $10k of used equipment on ebay
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
“DON'T PUT PEANUT BUTTER THERE”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
my kink-life in a nutshell
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
well done
<whitequark>
lol
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but really fluorescent sheltie
<whitequark>
there are fluorescent pigs
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
if I ever go quietly insane and actually buy a water-going craft, it's going to be named that
<whitequark>
for reals
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
or the Peanut Butter Sub.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(Play on words. ;)
<whitequark>
cats or dogs with GFP isn't really that hard
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
yes it is, it'd have to be the fur, not the skin
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
way more difficult
<whitequark>
hm
<whitequark>
think you'd could tie its expression to hair follicles
<whitequark>
a bit more difficult, yes
<yorick>
ELLIOTTCABLE: but still cats are way more predictable