<incomprehensibly>
whitequark: i really like the idea of languages/computing models like that, where you throw a bunch of things in a pot and then they interact and don't have to be built to interact with each other
<incomprehensibly>
whitequark: seems very very hard to design it in a way that scales to any degree but i like it a lot
eligrey has quit [Quit: Leaving]
sharkbot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sharkbot has joined #elliottcable
<whitequark>
don't think it can be possible at all
<whitequark>
like, at best you can put a lot of effort into making them SEEM that way
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
anybody aware of any CS concept named ‘intent’ or ‘intents?’ I'm about to apply meaning to that word, and I don't want to overload it
<whitequark>
eDSL invented by enterprise programers
<whitequark>
*mm
<whitequark>
you can ignore that
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
the fuck is an eDSL
<whitequark>
actually, no, not an eDSL, just a DSL
<whitequark>
domain-specific language.
<whitequark>
(eDSL means "embedded DSL", like all the Ruby's things that look like "route do root '/' path '/x' => Y end")
<whitequark>
basically a language that's developed specifically for your task at hand.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
very familiar with DSLs, just never seen the e taggedo n.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I grew up in ruby, yo :P
oldskirt_ has joined #elliottcable
oldskirt_ has joined #elliottcable
oldskirt_ has quit [Excess Flood]
oldskirt_ has joined #elliottcable
oldskirt_ has quit [Excess Flood]
oldskirt_ has joined #elliottcable
oldskirt has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: it shows
eligrey has joined #elliottcable
<inimino>
an eDSL is a DSL that's actually a subset of or a creative application of an existing language
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
inimino: … then I misunderstand what a DSL is.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Because I thought that was literally what a DSL is: a non-language, but almost-a-language by dint of the flexibility of the *actual* language being worked in
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
if it's *not* an eDSL … i.e. it's self-hosted … then isn't it basically just “a language,” instead of a DSL?
<inimino>
ELLIOTTCABLE: A DSL is just a domain-specific language, such as SQL. It could be embedded or it could be something you have to write an interpreter for.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
*SQL's* a DSL? Yeah, I take back everything I said, I have no idea what a DSL is, then.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I think DSL, I think “creatively applying syntactic sugar.”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
lolruby.
<inimino>
SQL isn't the canonical example of a DSL, but I'd say it clearly qualifies.
* ELLIOTTCABLE
nods
<inimino>
or something like ANTLR
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: no, eDSL is creatively applying syntactic sugar
<whitequark>
DSL, however, is just a language that's less general than anything general-purpose
<whitequark>
eDSLs are evil and we need less of them, tbh
<inimino>
languages like lisp encourage them
<whitequark>
lisp is sort of "special" with its syntax
<whitequark>
you could say that lisp is a eDSL of itself :p
<whitequark>
what's harmful is trying to creatively abuse Ruby
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: I just can't understand how the silicon-sphere approach is viable
<whitequark>
why not?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
is the density of a silicone lattice so constant that it's as reliable as the aforementioned speed of light in a vaccuum?
<whitequark>
absolutely
<whitequark>
silicon*
<whitequark>
not silicone
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Maybe I'm just not a fan of chemistry, but it seems so wishy-washy compared to basis physical constants
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
typo*
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
IKLBIKT
<whitequark>
it's not much of chemistry. it's crystallography and metallurgy
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I Know Little, But I Know That
<whitequark>
but the thing is
<whitequark>
it's incredibly reliable
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: harmful, how?
<whitequark>
if you actually grow a monocrystal of silicon, and due to people being obsessed with shiny rectangles we are incredibly fucking good at growing really pure monocrystals of silicon
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
it's my highest goal in life to make a ‘better ruby’ / ‘better lisp.’
<whitequark>
then it's as good standard as any
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
a language in which customizing the language is as trivial as working in the language is one of the few things I actually *care* much about, in programming
<whitequark>
but you don't customize ruby
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Lisp is beautiful, but not far enough; Ruby is far enough, but not as beautiful (conceptually, not practically)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
yeah, exactly.
<whitequark>
not far enough?
<inimino>
why are you talking about silicon spheres?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
inimino: twitter link
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
1:03 PM <inimino> why are you talking about silicon spheres?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I miss purr >:
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
“if you actually grow a monocrystal of silicon, and due to people being obsessed with shiny rectangles we are incredibly fucking good at growing really pure monocrystals of silicon”
<whitequark>
inimino: i tweeted about project avogadro which retrofitted russian uranium enrichment centrifuges to enrich silicon
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
lmao
<inimino>
oh
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
from shiny rectangles to fundamental constants
<whitequark>
on topic of crystallic lattice.
<whitequark>
how do you actually figure out how a lattice looks like? using X-ray crystallography
<whitequark>
so... you know all that thing about light behaving like a wave? diffraction, interference, etc
<whitequark>
if you shine X-rays on something crystallic
<whitequark>
might be a piece of silicon, or metal, or DNA, or a protein--the last one is one of the main methods of determining structure today--it will produce an interference picture on a screen
<whitequark>
a series of white and black blobs
<whitequark>
by applying FFT to the picture, you can get the 3D structure back.
<whitequark>
imagine this: there's a truly mindboggling amount of atoms in a silicon sphere
<inimino>
is that how that works?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
oh god bash.org; I forgot completely about this
<whitequark>
and they all contrive to place light rays falling an an appropriate angle into one particular area on a screen
<whitequark>
inimino: which part?
<inimino>
whitequark: actually the whole thing, I never had any idea how X-ray crystallography worked
<whitequark>
well yeah, that should be a decent overview
<inimino>
I just knew Watson and Crick benefited from it
<whitequark>
with simple crystals you can literally look at the picture and think about it and figure it out
<whitequark>
bcc fcc this kind of stuff
<whitequark>
with proteins it's a fairly massive computational job
<whitequark>
I'll do some crystallography someday
<whitequark>
you can get CMOS dental x-ray sensors for relatively cheap
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark's apartment: the safest place in Russia.
<whitequark>
and with those, the energies are fairly minor, though you still should get proper shielding and such
<inimino>
I also don't get how you can x-ray image a single molecule like DNA
<whitequark>
youcan't
<whitequark>
you need to crystallize it
<whitequark>
a few micrograms at /least/
<whitequark>
that's one of the major issues with x-ray crystallography in life sciences
<whitequark>
some proteins just /refuse/ to crystallize
<whitequark>
some of the key proteins I must say. iirc transmembrane proteins are particularly prone
<whitequark>
so we have no clue how they look
<whitequark>
or how they work
<whitequark>
you can try to fold them in silico but a) our supercomputers are not even close to doing it in reasonable time
<whitequark>
b) often you can do several alternative foldings, some of which are even lower-energy than the actual one
<whitequark>
i.e. kinetically, not thermodynamically stable
<whitequark>
so you have something like chaperone-assisted folding in a real cell
<whitequark>
"fold it by this template"
<inimino>
yeah, actually the idea that you could just randomly crystallize arbitrary biological molecules isn't something I would have expected to work
<whitequark>
semi-related, did you know that membranes are technically classified as liquid crystals?
<inimino>
I did not
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I have a vial of my favourite scotch. I keep it at my desk, and when I get sad, I rip it open and take a big sniff. http://i.ell.io/10inG
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Does this make me an addict?
<inimino>
what has to happen for you to drink it?
<inimino>
is Hedonism a scotch or a perfume?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Oh, I have bottles of the stuff. This is just small, and unobtrusive, and modern-looking, and funnily enough I rarely actually **drink** anything, so I don't open my scotch-cabinet.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
But nonetheless, I thoroughly enjoy the smell; it brings back all sorts of happy memories, and just plain makes me happy.
<whitequark>
a scotch collection is /so much/ of a status symbol
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
what, really? everybody I know hates the stuff.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
chellio and I are the only people I know who'll touch it.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
unfortunately.
<whitequark>
not mutually exclusive
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
status symbol, to me, is like, audio gear. or a 3d printer.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
maybe I have weird friends.
<whitequark>
I mean, you aren't required to enjoy a status symbol. more like, many status symbols are absolutely intolerable if not for their social consequences
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
hahahaha
<whitequark>
alcohol IS a status symbol, by and large
<whitequark>
a few people genuinely enjoy it
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
subtext: “Scotch whiskey is absolutely intolerable.”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
love it. :P
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
wat
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
man, russians are weird
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
yeah, the majority of people I know seriously, seriously enjoy drinking. Way more than I do.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
*Different* alcohols, but still
<whitequark>
exact opposite for me
<whitequark>
I think I know, like, three people who actually enjoy alcohol?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
wow
<whitequark>
I mean, I can force myself to drink it if I can't just stand up and leave
<whitequark>
shrug
<vigs>
make friends with college students, that number will shoot up so fast
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I'm pretty sure it's specific to my social circle; but there's very little (unusually little) pressure to drink. There's several (but a very small number) who don't drink at all; and the ones who do, all enjoy it and drink quite a bit (too much?) when they're not alone, too.
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: lemme rephrase to be more correct in general
<whitequark>
alcohol widely appears as a status symbol in our society
<whitequark>
it's especially apparent if you look at the higher-en
<whitequark>
d
<whitequark>
the wine reviews are pretty much the same thing as audiophiles write
<whitequark>
and for same reason
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
hahahaha YEP THAT
<whitequark>
it's grape water. done, over, next
<whitequark>
which is to say, you can objectively enjoy expensive grape water more than cheap but exact same grape water. well-known effect
<whitequark>
or expensive grape water with a good review, possibly generated by a markov bot, as opposed to expensive grape water without one
<whitequark>
doesn't have to do anything with the actual properties of it; still has social impact
<whitequark>
which is pretty much a definition of a status symbol
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(using the share pane in iOS; didn't notice there was an IRCcloud plugin)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
k, I'm off bbl
<vigs>
Maybe one day I'll grow out of the college thing and actually have high-end stuff in my apartment (that lasts past the weekend following the purchase date)