<joelteon>
why do they want to get worse sounding equipment for 3x as much
<joelteon>
guess i'm gonna build a gaming pc now
<joelteon>
RIP apple had a good run
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
lol
<purr>
lol
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: it's not that I'm *uninterested* in your opinions on PL. in fact, your opinions, per se, are not something I have commented on;
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
was talking to chellio about this the other day
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Jobs died, and *everything* changed.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
noticed how many leaks are coming out, nowadays?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
seen the iPhone 6 leaks? /-
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
iOS7!
<joelteon>
i havent seen the iphone 6 leaks
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
they look like slightly-Apple-ified Androids.
<joelteon>
oh, cool
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
cross the S5 with the black iPhone 5c, and you've got the general idea.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
not cool, ew.
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: what I have commented on, what pissed me off, and upon further analysis of that conversation, what pisses me off *even more*, is how fucking arrogant you are, sincerely believing that several decades worth of information are worthless simply because you kinda don't like it.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I don't *want* a humogoid phone /=
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: *shrugs*
<purr>
¯\(º_o)/¯
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
“uninterested” or “hate”, my comments apply either way.
<whitequark>
let me say it another way
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
also, all I recall from that conversation, is you disliking that I put the ‘feel’ of a product before anything else. No?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
been a while, so, idk.
<whitequark>
it is not the opinions, it is the way you have acquired, persisted, and are distributing that knowledge
<whitequark>
no, not really
<whitequark>
it is the fact that you consider yourself capable of creating a great product while completely disregarding the history of your field
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I do.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Not a *great* product, but a good one, yes.
<whitequark>
you'de delusional.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Minimum viable product, and all that: being informed by history is only *one thing* that improves a product.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
And that one thing, like any other ‘feature’ you could apply to the product, costs time.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Sure, I'll give you that it's a *relatively important* thing. But prioritizing *other* positive things over that one in particular? Doesn't make me goddamn delusional.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
It may mean *I have different priorities* than you; but that's all.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
another way to put it, by flipping that entire argument on its' head:
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
There's a *lot* of things that may make Paws crappy. Lack of historical foresight is far from the biggest one; and it's not the one I'm going to tackle first.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Getting code down, and figuring out whether I have *any* capability of designing a system that's fun to use, is priority one; and nothing is going to change that. After that, learning how to write a good specification, and discovering how difficult my design is to specify, is the next really important thing.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Sure, I have a lot to learn. A lot I *want* to learn.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
But I'm not going to stop EVERYTHING I'M DOING, spend ten years reading computer-science history (when I barely care about *current* computer-science!), before I write another line of code.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
And to seriously suggest that I do that, makes *you* delusional, not me. Don't you see? /=
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
It's just not a reasonable position that every developer … or even, let's be generous, and reduce your argument to ‘every aspiring programming-language developer’ … should dive into history *before* they dive into code.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Build things. Make mistakes. Learn things the hard way, and repeat the past.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
That's how greatness is made.
<whitequark>
apply that sentence to *any other* engineering (or even not necessarily engineering) field except of the one you're talking about, and it'll become clear
<whitequark>
"hey, I don't give a fuck about whatever people invented for UI design, but I'll totally make something better than iPhone."
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Where did I once say I don't give a fuck?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I said one shouldn't *waste their time* studying the history, before diving in and learning the more important things.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
You're treating me as if I'm some experience PLT academic with no history. I'm not. I'm a noob. I have a lot of other things to get under my belt before I start worrying about Plan 9 and COBOL.
<whitequark>
the history is not some irrelevant trivia; the history is a list of the most expensive mistakes you don't have to repeat
<whitequark>
fwiw, it's not possible to be an academic while being unaware of the history of your field, and for this exact reason. the notion is absurd.
<alexgordon>
welcome back whitequark
<alexgordon>
ELLIOTTCABLE: shut the fuck up whitequark's back
<whitequark>
you may also keep in mind that it took me two years of reeeeally part-time work (fulltime? at most 6 months) to get from literally 0 in PL design to the point where I don't have much problems hacking on OCaml's typechecker and, importantly for this conversation, have a pretty good understanding of why Foundry was a horrible idea
<whitequark>
or, for that matter, spending a week discussing the ML typesystem with some australian guy advanced me more in implementation than the previous year of work, *because I didn't have to try all the damn bad ideas*
<whitequark>
ELLIOTTCABLE: he asked me to go back
<whitequark>
(and immediately shoved his enormous ego in my face. well, not like I didn't know it was going to happen)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: … I didn't shove it in your face.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: I replied to your comments about me. o_O
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: me talking about my beliefs to you, unasked, would be me “shoving it in your face.” /=
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(yet again, I wouldn't be saying *this*, if you hadn't said something about me shoving things in your face.)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(I have zero desire to argue with you. /= )
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
on the topic of your learning about foundry: Foundry is more-covered-ground than what I'm working on.
<whitequark>
for a person who doesn't want to argue with me, you do it really often
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
*Every time* I try to explain Paws to someone, I get the same damn responses: “Wow, that's … actually not like anything else I know about.”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
so forgive me if I have this idea in my head that history has little to teach me about the parts of Paws that currently need work.
<whitequark>
oh lol, how can you even make a statement on what's covered if you have never actually looked at what *is* covered?
<purr>
lol
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
For me, the “studying the history and learning from others' work” part gets to the parts that *have* previous work.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
distribution and error-handling.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
both of those have been deferred, *specifically because* I have several books I want to read, and specific peoples' brains I want to pick (not to mention code-bases I want to spelunk), before I start making any decisions there.
<whitequark>
so far, no parts of Paws are fundamentally new, as far as I can tell. it may or may not be a useful rearrangement of existing concepts.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
whitequark: I didn't say it *wasn't* covered, just that other people keep telling me it's not.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
different things.
* ELLIOTTCABLE
shrugs
<purr>
¯\(º_o)/¯
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
well, I'll stay out of it, then. Say what you like about me.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
katlogic: look who's here :D
<whitequark>
anyway, not knowing that something is already explored is just fine. Explicitly discarding entire subfields simply because you kinda don't like them is what caused this whole thing
<whitequark>
(and the reference to enormous ego was also referring to that habit.)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
… if I'm not planning to work in a particular field, because I don't like that field, then that *makes* it something I can disregard, no?
<whitequark>
you do, though.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
i.e. if I dislike functional programming, then why do I need to know about it?
<whitequark>
because it is a part of the PL field.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(not to say I don't, in that particular case. I have every intention of learning more, when I have time.)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Saying it's *absolutely imperative* that I learn a ton about functional-programming before I design a very-non-functional programming-language seems a little odd …
<whitequark>
if you want to design languages, you better be ready to study every single one of them (not saying you *should* study every existing language before you attempt your own. am saying that you should be prepared.)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
or maybe that's not what you were saying. I can't remember.
<whitequark>
before you design *any* language.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
yeah, no, absolutely disagreed.
<whitequark>
if you want it to be practical / useful / etc.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I got asked to speak about PLT to a room of beginner Ruby / JS programmers. And I *absolutely* would preach that every single one of them should go home, sit down, and try and design a programming language.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Probably won't come out *well*, but that's not the point.
<whitequark>
see my remark.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Do before asking, and make before learning. /=
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
ah, yeah.
<whitequark>
do you want to make a practical language or a toy language?
<whitequark>
if latter, sure, do absolutely whatever you want. I say nothing here and just encourage.
<prophile>
making and learning aren't necessarily separate concepts
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
as for that: I've said, over and over, that Paws is something I *believe* will be a useless toy, but which I am *building* as if it wasn't.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I **know** that I don't have the academic background to make a great language. “something practical / useful / etc.”
<whitequark>
you don't need academic background.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but there's absolutely no reason, when you're undertaking something in life, to undertake it with anything less than absolute and complete fervor.
<whitequark>
"academic background" is just an euphemism for "wasted eight years of their life in a dusty building".
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Just because I know this is my first-pass effort, and that I will learn much more, and make much better things in the future, does *not* prevent me from treating Paws as a purposeful project, and working hard at it.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but. yeah. This conversation is neither building-something-great *nor* learning-things, so it's even more wasteful than either the thing you're arguing that I should do, or the thing I *am* doing.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
off to go spend time with the friend who's just showed up. /=
whitequark has left #elliottcable [#elliottcable]
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
ugh.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
sorry, alexgordon.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I don't know how to respond to all that.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
woke up a little late. Rolled like a goddamn boss, got my shit packed and rolled out.
<vigs>
ELLIOTTCABLE: holy shit :/
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
(I'm the experienced-traveler type; I can handle up to around seven days on a single carry-on. I generally pack the morning-of, because I know my shit.)
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
ughsiakbtwauoroawur
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
cab driver didn't even TRY to hurry, despite me asking.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
and then we hit the traffic.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
apparently a semi-truck had crashed and caught fire. idk. was an hour longer drive than expected.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
so, expensive-ass cab-ride, to reach the airport for my expensive-ass bought-last-minute flight,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I get there with approximately twenty-five minutes to spare. @elliepritts is there texting me, they're already boarding her.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I try to check-in on my phone on the way, WestJet is a cunt, and says “cannot generate boarding pass online, please go to the help desk when you arrive”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I ONLY HAVE A CARRY-ON
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
ANY OTHER AIRLINE, I'D HAVE A PASSBOOK QR CODE BY NOW
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I'D ROLL THROUGH SECURITY AND BOARD.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but no. Even though it's twenty minutes until departure (again, I've been through this waaaaaaay too many times; I'm very good at providing exactly as much leeway as I need), and I could fucking make it if they'd just give me a goddam boarding pass …
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
… the lady at the “help desk”, the SINGLE LADY, with NO LINE (fucking ghost town because it's shitty WestJet), barely speaks my language,
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
and all I can get from her is “I sorry sir. The system say no.”
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
I'M. ALREADY. CHECKED. IN.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
JUST. PRINT. MY. BOARDING. PASS.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
FUUUUUCCCCCKKK.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
And now they want to charge me more, to board me at 3PM instead.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
</rant>
<glowcoil>
ELLIOTTCABLE: sucks
<glowcoil>
i'm sorry
<glowcoil>
where you headed?
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
Vancouver with @elliepritts, to meet @bradyv & devyn
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
ironically, I wouldn't be as pissed, if it were less frivolous.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
but I'm pretty sure I just can't justify paying *even more*, because I already waaaaay overpaid for how important this is.
<ELLIOTTCABLE>
so I'm pissed because I probably won't go at all, now, and I was excited to.