2023-08-30 09:45:58 <zelgomer    > hi. i enjoy losing myself in forth because it's so simple to bootstrap from assembly, which makes it fun for tinkering with radical ideas. i've been thinking of diving in again lately, but are there any other clever languages that exhibit this property which i might learn about for inspiration?
2023-08-30 10:28:31 <gordonjcp   > zelgomer: apparently there's a "boot sector lisp" but I've never really played with Lisp
2023-08-30 10:42:22 <zelgomer    > gordonjcp: i actually just started playing with scheme for the first time last year. thanks, i will check it out!
2023-08-30 11:20:25 <DKordic     > zelgomer: https://pharo.org/
2023-08-30 11:23:54 <DKordic     > I don't like SmallTalk... at all.  IMHO it is different but not interesting enough.  Same for Prolog.
2023-08-30 11:25:13 <DKordic     > https://fexpr.blogspot.com/2011/04/fexpr.html
2023-08-30 11:25:51 <Zarutian_iPad> DKordic: the language or the concepts?
2023-08-30 11:28:06 <DKordic     > Zarutian_iPad: Excellent question!  Concepts are interesting.  Their concrete syntax is very distracting, and IIRC there is exposition without that punishment!!
2023-08-30 11:28:40 <DKordic     > s/there is /there is no/
2023-08-30 11:29:16 <zelgomer    > DKordic: interesting, thanks
2023-08-30 11:43:26 <DKordic     > zelgomer: How is Forth and Lisp related to ""Lambda Calculus""?!
2023-08-30 11:46:08 <zelgomer    > why are you asking me that?
2023-08-30 11:48:05 <DKordic     > IMHO it is a very interesting question.  I was afraid You do not deserve it.
2023-08-30 12:21:14 <MrMobius    > zelgomer: not easy to bootstrap but APL is one to check out if you're exploring labguages
2023-08-30 12:22:35 <zelgomer    > MrMobius: thanks
2023-08-30 12:55:07 <KipIngram   > I was thinking of suggesting Lisp as well.
2023-08-30 12:56:13 <KipIngram   > I think it would be similarly easy to implement as Forth.
2023-08-30 12:56:24 <KipIngram   > I don't know if APL would be, though.
2023-08-30 13:01:13 <KipIngram   > Some interesting sensors here:
2023-08-30 13:01:15 <KipIngram   > https://www.electronicdesign.com/technologies/test-measurement/media-gallery/21271908/electronic-design-5-standouts-in-sensor-technology?o_eid=2379F0905723A3W&rdx.ident[pull]=omeda|2379F0905723A3W
2023-08-30 13:01:38 <KipIngram   > There's a distance sensor in there that would probably work well in robotic applications.
2023-08-30 13:01:52 <KipIngram   > Like something along the lines of a Roomba.
2023-08-30 13:02:57 <KipIngram   > I find the way those things "learn your house" pretty interesting.
2023-08-30 13:03:57 <KipIngram   > It would be fun to put a few of those on a drone and give it a recharging station - it could learn to fly around your house.
2023-08-30 14:37:16 <veltas      > zelgomer: BCPL maybe? Bootstrapping language that inspired B (and C)
2023-08-30 14:37:36 <veltas      > Or just B really
2023-08-30 14:37:44 <veltas      > Old school B is immense
2023-08-30 16:30:13 <KipIngram   > Numbers are so weird sometimes.  Turns out that 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 .... is pi/4.
2023-08-30 16:30:24 <KipIngram   > What the hell do the odd integers have to do with circles?
2023-08-30 16:44:03 <KipIngram   > I want to know WHY that's pi/4, and for that matter how they proved that it was EXACTLY.
2023-08-30 16:46:21 <Zarutian_iPad> I am sorry, I just rejoined. What is one fourth of pie?
2023-08-30 16:50:35 <KipIngram   > 0.785398...
2023-08-30 16:50:45 <KipIngram   > It seems to be discussed well here:
2023-08-30 16:50:47 <KipIngram   > https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/14815/why-does-this-converge-to-pi-4
2023-08-30 16:50:59 <KipIngram   > Has to do with the Taylor series for arctan(x).
2023-08-30 16:51:18 <KipIngram   > So there's how a circle gets into it.
2023-08-30 16:53:35 <Zarutian_iPad> right
2023-08-30 16:56:55 <Zarutian_iPad> not sure how to explain this in English
2023-08-30 16:58:13 <Zarutian_iPad> so pi is the ratio between a circles radius and its circumference, right?
2023-08-30 16:59:30 <Zarutian_iPad> but that ratio isnt per se a constant ratio-nal, right?
2023-08-30 17:01:30 <Zarutian_iPad> so if you draw a series of circles where the radius changes you get a ratio that, when expressed as a decimal fraction gets longer and longer
2023-08-30 17:02:25 <Zarutian_iPad> now you have an infinite series of these drawn circles
2023-08-30 17:04:42 <Zarutian_iPad> is it now so stranges that there is a infinite series of 'corrections' that results in the same infinte after the point decimal?
2023-08-30 17:05:36 <Zarutian_iPad> decimal fraction was it supposed to be
2023-08-30 17:28:47 <KipIngram   > It's not a rational number, no.  Yes, it's circumference / diameter.
2023-08-30 17:29:01 <KipIngram   > An irrational number, and in fact I believe it's a transcendental number.
2023-08-30 17:29:24 <KipIngram   > Which means it's not the root of any polynomial with rational coefficients.
2023-08-30 17:31:15 <Zarutian_iPad> I never said that it was a rational number, only that it was a ratio that is not exactly the same between two diffrently sized circles
2023-08-30 17:32:28 <Zarutian_iPad> but 3.1415 is good enough, as they say, for govermental work
2023-08-30 17:32:55 <KipIngram   > Oh - no, the ratio circumference/diameter is the same for all circles of any size.
2023-08-30 17:33:49 <KipIngram   > 3.1416 would be better - that next digit is a 9.
2023-08-30 17:35:28 <Zarutian_iPad> I mean in the sense of actually measuring it with a measurement tape. The inprecision of measurement swamps the rest of the digits
2023-08-30 17:35:50 <KipIngram   > Quite a few years ago when they were in their early teens, two of my daughters got on a pi binge and tried to one-up one another on how many digits they new.  It got rather ridiculous, and by the time it was over I had 3.14159265359 burned into my head.  They got a lot further than that - that's just the part that stuck in my head.
2023-08-30 17:36:14 <Zarutian_iPad> 
ACTION had wierd math teachers in elementary school

2023-08-30 17:36:21 <KipIngram   > Oh sure - any measurement operation will have error, and the bigger the circle is the better you'll be able to measure it, percentage wise.