<tankf33der>
5764607531624169472 not valid pointer then
<Regenaxer>
yes, so wrong alignment
<Regenaxer>
tankf33der, sorry, must go
<Regenaxer>
bbl
shpx has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
shpx has joined #picolisp
shpx has quit [Client Quit]
<Regenaxer>
ret
<Regenaxer>
Sorry, had to run
<Regenaxer>
tankf33der, again: Alignment is a compile-time option
<Regenaxer>
So it depends on the OS, the library build etc.
<Regenaxer>
In vim it runs another version of libc probably
<Regenaxer>
You need (I I I I I N N N N) or (I I I I I I N N N N) depending on the version
<tankf33der>
:/
<Regenaxer>
not nice, yes ;)
<tankf33der>
tears.
<Regenaxer>
The question is: How to find it out at runtime?
<Regenaxer>
An then pass (I I I I I I N N N N) or (cdr (I I I I I I N N N N))
<tankf33der>
both doesnt work on centos7
<tankf33der>
even without vim
<tankf33der>
'(R1 (8 . N) (0 . 8)))
<tankf33der>
why 8 . N ?
<tankf33der>
just large enough space for data ?
<freemint>
I want that a +Listmember maintains a List of the +Liste he is a member of. And i want each +List to maintain a tree of all members in the list as well as the first and last time the +Listmember wrote to the list
<freemint>
(class +ListMember +Account)
<freemint>
(rel members (+Hook +Joint) (+ListMember) Liste)
<freemint>
(rel homepage (+String))
<freemint>
(class +Liste +Entity)
<freemint>
(rel Liste (+List +Joint +Liste) )
<freemint>
(rel since (+Ref +Date) members)
<freemint>
(rel last_seen (+Ref +Date) members)
<freemint>
<freemint>
Is that archived by the code?
<Regenaxer>
tankf33der: ☆ a cons pair for the size and result specification in the CADR
<Regenaxer>
(rel members (+Hook +Joint) (+ListMember) Liste) is not correc
<Regenaxer>
+Joint needs the other relation
<Regenaxer>
and (rel Liste is in another class, and not a single object
<Regenaxer>
(rel foo (+Hook +Joint) bar (+Cls))
<Regenaxer>
then you can define relations in the same class or subclass using 'foo' as hook
<Regenaxer>
you mean something like this?
<Regenaxer>
(rel lst (+List +Bag)
<Regenaxer>
((+Ref +Date))
<Regenaxer>
((+Link) (+ListMember)) )
<Regenaxer>
(rel lst (+List +Bag)
<Regenaxer>
((+String)) # Home page
<Regenaxer>
((+Ref +Date)) # since
<Regenaxer>
((+Ref +Date)) # last seen
<Regenaxer>
((+Link) (+ListMember)) ) # Some object
<Regenaxer>
A +Joint does not work here
<Regenaxer>
Another way is to have objects in between
<Regenaxer>
like the +Pos objects between +Ord and +Item in app/er.l
<Regenaxer>
this is most general
<freemint>
I do not get the idea to what class the rel's are bound to
<Regenaxer>
Always to the current class
<freemint>
But you did not give any and defined to rel's
<freemint>
with same name
<freemint>
Also i want +Liste as standalone class i can search and index for
<freemint>
... but i go with an object in between now
<freemint>
thanks
<Regenaxer>
ah, these were two examples
<Regenaxer>
the second extended the first
<Regenaxer>
So +ListMember could be all you need
<Regenaxer>
(rel mem (+List +Joint) list (+ListMember))
<Regenaxer>
and in the other
<Regenaxer>
(rel list (+Joint) mem (+Liste))
<Regenaxer>
+ListMember has attributes since, last seen etc.
<Regenaxer>
So actually no object in between necessary it seems
<freemint>
mhh so i go for +bag
<freemint>
That is actually good
<Regenaxer>
But no +Joint in bag
<freemint>
ok ... i know why
<Regenaxer>
ok
<Regenaxer>
((+Ref +Link) (+ListMember)) then to go back from +ListMember
<freemint>
+Ref2 is really cool .. but i see no use yet
<Regenaxer>
it lets you search efficiently either in the current class or in the superclass
<freemint>
After how many objects would you go for +Hook instead of a +List
<Regenaxer>
+Hook is no alternative to +List
<Regenaxer>
+Hook is a local root object for indexes
<Regenaxer>
(+Ref +Link) is an alternative for (+Joint)
<freemint>
+Hook maintains a local database in the object ...
<Regenaxer>
exactly
<freemint>
(===)
<freemint>
Each +Liste will "somehow" "contain" all emails in that mailing list. I imagine that storing a few ten thousands email in a list and filter them to get what you need does not work great
<Regenaxer>
I see
<freemint>
You could use +Hook so the +Liste will "somehow" "contain" emails
<Regenaxer>
then no +List, it will be too long
<Regenaxer>
yes, the mails are in an index or indices
<Regenaxer>
you can keep them local to some other object which is its hook
Regenaxer has left #picolisp [#picolisp]
Regenaxer has joined #picolisp
Regenaxer has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Regenaxer has joined #picolisp
<Regenaxer>
You would index the mails by address, timestamp, content etc
<Regenaxer>
brb
Regenaxer has left #picolisp [#picolisp]
Regenaxer has joined #picolisp
<freemint>
I want to have basic queries (title, data sent, sender, interval sent, (maybe full text)) on global and per mailing +Liste basis
<freemint>
Unrelated but still related, can i index objects by (static) properties which are stored in objects "connected" to them
<freemint>
example: each +Mail has an +Author and the other has an email +String. Can i index +Mail by the email +String of the +Author object(s?) "connected" to it?
<freemint>
*the +Author has an email +String
<Regenaxer>
You can query fine for those
<Regenaxer>
Like you search for orders +Ord by supplier, item, customer
<freemint>
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0.i for Windows 95 sub 23
<freemint>
oder schreiben wir:
<freemint>
Hilfe es wird dunkel...
<freemint>
ist dies nur bei mir
<freemint>
der Fall?....
<freemint>
oder
<freemint>
auch bei andern so?
<freemint>
Hilfe, gibt's noch
<freemint>
<freemint>
Andere.................
<freemint>
<freemint>
hier in diesem All?
<freemint>
<freemint>
(foreign mobx file)
<freemint>
It is the paper trail of delivery
<Regenaxer>
ok ;)
<freemint>
(just kicked out the time zone ... it help with very dumb paper trail faking but having a reversible mapping between my db and mbox is not my goal
<freemint>
Should i put mail-content in a different class?
<Regenaxer>
Perhaps like the +Mup in the wiki?
<Regenaxer>
perhaps not
<Regenaxer>
it is just the text?
<Regenaxer>
may be different parts
<Regenaxer>
mimetypes, attachments
<freemint>
Oh ... good point ... have forgot something
<freemint>
Is that good?
<freemint>
(rel other_header (+List +Bag)
<freemint>
((+Any)) ) #Value
<freemint>
((+String)) #Key
<Regenaxer>
syntactically yes
<freemint>
and otherwise?
<Regenaxer>
Depends on the use case
<freemint>
Is there a problem with +Any?
<Regenaxer>
no, fine
<freemint>
How does +Any look from a size point of view?
<Regenaxer>
Can be anything
<Regenaxer>
Why size?
<freemint>
hard drive size
<freemint>
Is a +Any that is a +String in the end bigger than a +String?
<Regenaxer>
ah, no. No problem
<Regenaxer>
+Any is just not checked or further handled
<freemint>
I guess i go change value to +String too
<Regenaxer>
you could make it all +Any
<Regenaxer>
ok
<freemint>
Why do'nt we make it all +Any?
<freemint>
so gui can check?
<Regenaxer>
yes, for example
<Regenaxer>
for atoms it is not much different
<Regenaxer>
but if it has internal structure like +List or +Bag the DB must know it
<freemint>
I know this a stupid question but does the database does any magic with the type info under the hood?
<Regenaxer>
yes, sure, just not much with +String or +Number
<Regenaxer>
but it does a lot with symbols +Link, +Joint
<Regenaxer>
and +List and +Bag
<freemint>
this supprises me
<freemint>
i thought you were of the type "type specific optimization?" let the run time handle that
<Regenaxer>
most importantly the 'rel>' methods
<Regenaxer>
it *is* all runtime
<Regenaxer>
There is nothing static
<freemint>
What is 'rel> ?
<freemint>
nothing in the 'doc
<Regenaxer>
'rel>' looks at the involved objects and decides how to handle them
<freemint>
ahh
<Regenaxer>
Search for (dm rel> ... in @lib/db.l
<Regenaxer>
or just for rel>
<freemint>
This leads me to another question why @lib.db.l not in assembly?
<Regenaxer>
rel> is the core function of E/R
<Regenaxer>
haha, assembly makes no sense here
<Regenaxer>
It is all method lookup
<Regenaxer>
and I/O
<Regenaxer>
It is *very* hard to write Lisp code in asm
<Regenaxer>
asm is the VM
<Regenaxer>
But the E/R stuff is on the Lisp level
<freemint>
(dm rel> (Obj Old New))
<freemint>
T )
<freemint>
(dm rel?> (Obj Val)
<freemint>
quiet empty :D
<Regenaxer>
The default
<Regenaxer>
like for +Any
<Regenaxer>
does nothing
<Regenaxer>
(class +Any +relation)
<Regenaxer>
: (dep '+relation)
<Regenaxer>
+Blob
<Regenaxer>
+Any
<Regenaxer>
+Bag
<Regenaxer>
+relation
<Regenaxer>
+Joint
<Regenaxer>
+Link
<Regenaxer>
+Bool
<Regenaxer>
+Symbol
<Regenaxer>
+String
<Regenaxer>
+Number
<Regenaxer>
+Time
<Regenaxer>
ok, I need time now
<Regenaxer>
Study it! :)
karswell has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<freemint>
Regenaxer, my girl friend enjoys Penti.
<freemint>
afk
<Regenaxer>
good to hear! :)
<Regenaxer>
See you
<freemint>
any tipps for getting the chords in to your head?
<freemint>
ok bye
<Regenaxer>
hehe, just typing all day
<Regenaxer>
ok :)
C-Keen has quit [Quit: meltdown fixes]
yumaikas is now known as Church-
<cess11_>
The Penti cheat sheet chord is a good start.
Church- is now known as yumaikas
<cess11_>
F arpeggio then 1-2-5, 'h'.
<Regenaxer>
cess11_, is starting with 1 for the thumb better? I thought zero
<Regenaxer>
(did not use it so far)
<Regenaxer>
I was thinking of a numeric notation
<Regenaxer>
F arpeggio would be 0-1, the '-' meaning arpeggio
<Regenaxer>
'h' would be 014
yumaikas is now known as Church--
<Regenaxer>
or is 1-2 125 better?
<Regenaxer>
Seems like starting with 1 for the thumb in more intuitive