j_bravo has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)]
j_bravo has joined #ocaml
<j_bravo>
anyone home?
docelic has joined #ocaml
<SoreEel>
j_bravo: We're just the silent introverted types.
lament has quit ["mental mantle"]
docelic has quit ["Client Exiting"]
sfogarty has quit ["User disconnected"]
mellum has quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)]
mrvn has joined #ocaml
mellum has joined #ocaml
j_bravo has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
mrvn_ has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
lament has joined #ocaml
j_bravo has joined #ocaml
j_bravo has quit [Client Quit]
graydon has left #ocaml []
graydon has joined #ocaml
jemfinch has joined #ocaml
<jemfinch>
I'm having a problem with some code that should compile but doesn't.
<jemfinch>
Anyone here want to try to compile it (it's just a single function) and tell me if it compiles/why it doesn't compile?
skylan has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)]
skylan has joined #ocaml
lyn has joined #ocaml
jemfinch has quit []
lyn has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
lament has quit ["mental mantle"]
gl has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)]
gl has joined #ocaml
mattam has joined #ocaml
graydon has quit ["xchat exiting.."]
docelic has joined #ocaml
yangsx has joined #ocaml
yangsx has quit ["Client Exiting"]
docelic has quit ["Client Exiting"]
karryall has joined #ocaml
dmolina has joined #ocaml
dmolina has quit [Client Quit]
j_bravo has joined #ocaml
gl has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)]
gl has joined #ocaml
<j_bravo>
hello people...can anyone tell me where I can find that standard.ml file exactly?
MegaWatS has joined #ocaml
karryall has quit [forward.freenode.net irc.freenode.net]
karryall has joined #ocaml
MegaWatS has quit ["Don't you hate it when chicks get mad at you for staring at their asses? It's not my fault that they have stuff written there]
MegaWatS has joined #ocaml
Yurik has joined #ocaml
<Yurik>
re
gl has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)]
gl has joined #ocaml
Yurik has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)]
gl has quit [Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)]
gl has joined #ocaml
karryall has quit []
graydon has joined #ocaml
Dalroth has joined #ocaml
engstad has joined #ocaml
lament has joined #ocaml
mattam_ has joined #ocaml
mattam has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)]
Dalroth has quit []
graydon has quit ["xchat exiting.."]
graydon has joined #ocaml
Yurik has joined #ocaml
<Yurik>
re
<Yurik>
how are you, guys?
<MegaWatS>
is that a trick question?
<Yurik>
?
<MegaWatS>
:p
* Yurik
is swearing
<whee>
heh
<whee>
I'm confusing the hell out of myself with parsers again
<whee>
can't even get a simple brainfuck yacc parser going :|
<Yurik>
:)
* Yurik
don't swear about ocaml :)))
<whee>
baha
<whee>
yes I am getting dumber here
<lament>
whee: that's disgusting
<MegaWatS>
why would you want to write a parser for brainfuck in yacc?
<lament>
exactly
<MegaWatS>
i mean
<MegaWatS>
there isn`t even anything to parse :/
<whee>
I'm asking myself the same question right now
<whee>
but I really want to lift loops out into another substructure
<lament>
why.
<whee>
because they're little bf programs :)
<whee>
loops are commonly used to do things like multiplication and zeroing and such in bf, and I'd like to easily optimize the code before interpretation
<lament>
oh.
<lament>
you still don't need yacc.
<whee>
yeah I'm thinking of writing a couple recursive functions to do this already
<whee>
heh
<lament>
it will be much saner.
<lament>
and why yacc? Are you writing the thing in C?
<whee>
just thought the yacc one would be shorter
<whee>
no, haskell :)
<whee>
everything has a yacc equiv these days so heh
* lament
likes bigloo with its built-in parser
<whee>
haskell has some sort of parser built-in, but I've used yacc/lex before in ocaml so I figured I would try that first
Yurik_ has joined #ocaml
<lament>
whee: write an optimizing brainfuck compiler in brainfuck
<lament>
then you will be able to bootstrap it
<whee>
hell no :p
Yurik has quit [Read error: 113 (No route to host)]
<lament>
there already exists a brainfuck brainfuck compiler, just not an optimizing one
<whee>
I don't know of an existing optimizing brainfuck compiler period
<MegaWatS>
a primitive bf compiler is so primitive to write that you could even write it sensibly in bf
<lament>
whee: there is one
<MegaWatS>
but an OPTIMIZING one :/
<whee>
I've seen a couple that say they do it, but it doesn't look like they really do anything
<lament>
whee: or two
<MegaWatS>
lol
<Yurik_>
re
<MegaWatS>
i guess there are lots
<MegaWatS>
even i wrote one once
<lament>
they optimize loops such as [->>+<<]
<whee>
I can't find one that's going after the same goal I am
<whee>
heh
<lament>
and i guess sequences such as ++++++++
<MegaWatS>
you can easily write bf compilers that optimize lots of stuff
<MegaWatS>
and accesses to cells
<whee>
as much optimization as humanly possible, debugger, and the ability to export as source in an arbitrary language
<lament>
debugger???!?
<lament>
that would be brutal.
<MegaWatS>
the compiler I wrote would compile sequences like +++>>---<<+ into *p += 4; *(p+2) -= 3; and the lige
<MegaWatS>
hehe
<lament>
"export as source in an arbitraly language" is commonly called "compile"
<whee>
heh
<MegaWatS>
debugging bf code
<whee>
lament: right, but this is better :)
<MegaWatS>
I don`t think anyone would ever wat to do that
<whee>
sure they would :P
<MegaWatS>
why don`t you go write an unlambda compiler?
<MegaWatS>
there isnt one so far I know of :)
<whee>
that's hard :p
<MegaWatS>
well it should be relatively straighforward EXCEPT for the d primitive, and first-class continuations
<lament>
well
<whee>
I thought there was an unlambda compiler written in scheme or something
<lament>
the easy way out would be to compile it TO scheme
<lament>
which then can be compiled to C with bigloo or something
<MegaWatS>
compilation to a higher-level language with the same features is a cop-out
<MegaWatS>
write one that spits out assembly right away, or forget it :)
<lament>
MegaWatS: no, it's just avoiding reinventing the wheel
<MegaWatS>
i mean, it`s not like what we`re doing is of any use anyway
<MegaWatS>
if one only does it for the challenge anyway -then do it RIGHT >]
<whee>
assembly is bad :|
<whee>
output to C is easier
<MegaWatS>
what`s bad about assembly?
<MegaWatS>
you would have absolute control
<whee>
it's too restrictivee
<MegaWatS>
and use your own GC scheme^^
<whee>
I mean I'd have to write it for PPC so that I could actually use it, then x86 so most of the cheap bastards could
<whee>
then of course there's the alpha and spark people who would then bug me
<whee>
sparc
<whee>
heh
<whee>
it's easier to just do it with C at that point , C compilers know more about some architecture than anyone doing this as a hobby would :P
<lament>
yes
<lament>
and since you're using a higher-level language already
<lament>
then why not scheme? :)
<MegaWatS>
well except output to C makes GC harder
<MegaWatS>
because when you compile to scheme, the whole fun is taken outo f it?
<MegaWatS>
at some point it just becomes too easy
<Yurik_>
later
Yurik_ has quit ["÷ÙÛÅÌ ÉÚ XChat"]
<whee>
MegaWatS: write me an unlambda compiler in bf :)
<MegaWatS>
nope
<MegaWatS>
sry
<MegaWatS>
youll have to do it yourself^^
<whee>
I'll pay you $10
<whee>
:)
<lament>
um
<lament>
i can write an unlambda compiler (to scheme) in BF
<lament>
sounds easy enough
<whee>
pfft
<whee>
how about an interpreteer then
<lament>
mmmmm
<whee>
:|
<MegaWatS>
in bf >]]
<lament>
that would be rather hard.
<whee>
also you will be blindfolded and must communicate with your computer via a drumstick and a piece of tape.
<lament>
I wrote a SKI interpreter in Basic once, but that didn't have continuations or promises...