ELLIOTTCABLE changed the topic of #elliottcable to: a _better_ cult
gozala has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<ELLIOTTCABLE> omfg othermill <3
<ELLIOTTCABLE> idk might be terrible, don't have the knowledge yet
<ELLIOTTCABLE> but it's all really cleanly set-up, and easy to use, so far.
<ELLIOTTCABLE> very happy with it.
alexgordon has quit [Quit: My iMac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<ELLIOTTCABLE> this is fun
<ELLIOTTCABLE> oh, side-note: anybody got a snapchat username? I've been dragged into using it occasionally.
<ELLIOTTCABLE> I have glowcoil's … devyn? whitequark? joelteon? audy? gkatsev? nicksergeant? SwooshyCueb? vigs / vil?
<ELLIOTTCABLE> (yes, you're the same person, vigsvil)
Determinist has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Determinist has joined #elliottcable
<gkatsev> what's a snapchat? :P
<ELLIOTTCABLE> lol
<purr> lol
<ELLIOTTCABLE> this is such fun
<ELLIOTTCABLE> gkatsev: do you have an iPhone? I'll iMessage you the videos. (=
<gkatsev> I dont have an iphone
<ELLIOTTCABLE> actually fuckit I'll upload here
<ELLIOTTCABLE> Yay, my first board: http://ell.io/ik4CR
<joelteon> hey guys, any idea why gnupg has its own stdint.h?
<joelteon> might be a long shot
Determinist has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
<vigs> ELLIOTTCABLE: sarcasticsimba :P
<vigs> I use it sparingly
manveru has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
manveru has joined #elliottcable
mcc has joined #elliottcable
<whitequark> ELLIOTTCABLE: snapchat? I don't have a smartphone
eligrey has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<devyn> ELLIOTTCABLE: yeah I have a snapchat. devynci
<whitequark> so will devyn and elliott now exchange dick pics
<whitequark> because that is what snapchat is for amirite
<devyn> yes, absolutely ;)
<devyn> I'm getting hard just thinking about it ʘ‿ʘ
<whitequark> LOL
<purr> LOL
<ELLIOTTCABLE> bro.
<ELLIOTTCABLE> my penis, it's so ready for you, devyn (=
<whitequark> ELLIOTTCABLE: wat.
<purr> beep.
<devyn> hgahahahahjhaha
<ELLIOTTCABLE> whitequark: well-played.
<devyn> I can't *wait* for that to come up again
* whitequark bows
<ELLIOTTCABLE> -what
<purr> <prophile> nrocinu a m'I <elbacttoille>
<ELLIOTTCABLE> well, one could hope
<devyn> nah it's funnier if it just randomly comes up while we're in the middle of an important programming things discussion
<devyn> …or if we have a noob in here
<ELLIOTTCABLE> lololololololol
<ELLIOTTCABLE> well.
<ELLIOTTCABLE> i'm just saying.
<devyn> oh absolutely
<devyn> you know it ;)
<ELLIOTTCABLE> so srsly CNC IS SO COOL
<devyn> CNC?
<ELLIOTTCABLE> whitequark: I understand you so much better, right now.
<devyn> oh that kind of CNC?
<ELLIOTTCABLE> devyn: http://ell.io/ik4CR
<devyn> yes. that kind
<devyn> yes it is
<devyn> why is the water necessary
<whitequark> cooling, chip removal
<whitequark> mainly cooling
<devyn> neat
<whitequark> oh god dir /p
<whitequark> is a thing
<whitequark> which I subconsciously remember
<devyn> I don't even remember that flag
<devyn> what's that do
<whitequark> pause after printing a screenful of text
<devyn> hmm, must be really old because I always remember DOS having 'more'
<devyn> dir | more
<whitequark> what
<whitequark> dos doesn't have pipes
<devyn> er
<devyn> pretty sure it does
<whitequark> no
<whitequark> never had
<whitequark> it can't even launch two regular processes in parallel
<devyn> oh good point
<devyn> hmm
<devyn> whitequark: "Because DOS is a single-tasking operating system, piping is achieved by running commands sequentially, redirecting to and from a temporary file. COMMAND.COM makes no provision for redirecting the standard error channel."
<devyn> so uh
<devyn> yeah
<whitequark> I wonder if that's post-6.22
<devyn> I searched and it is in an old MS-DOS 6.22 book
<devyn> let me go earlier
<whitequark> eh don't bother, I'm wrong then
<devyn> ok
<devyn> well, it's a pretty dumb way to do pipes anyway
<devyn> but it does work in the case of 'dir | more' haha
mcc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
prophile has joined #elliottcable
alexgordon has joined #elliottcable
Sgeo has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
yorick has joined #elliottcable
<vil> ELLIOTTCABLE: I do not partake in the snapping of chats
sharkbot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sharkbot has joined #elliottcable
prophile has quit [Quit: The Game]
eligrey has joined #elliottcable
Sorella_ has joined #elliottcable
gozala has joined #elliottcable
prophile has joined #elliottcable
Sorella_ is now known as Sorella
Sorella has quit [Changing host]
Sorella has joined #elliottcable
<alexgordon> glowcoil: swift has no \v muahaha
<alexgordon> someone was listening
<whitequark> Chris Lattner, duh
<whitequark> if my life was hinging on that guy's software design skills, I'd live to 150
<alexgordon> haha
<prophile> Lattner afraids of very few things
<joelteon> who's good at python here
<nicksergeant> joelteon: i know me some python
<nicksergeant> i wouldn't consider myself an expert though
<nicksergeant> just enough to know that i'm a shitty python person
<joelteon> the fuck is it complaining about https://gist.github.com/joelteon/75a81aaee25e8b5a485a
<nicksergeant> oh pylint
<nicksergeant> jesus
<nicksergeant> it's not actually invalid
<nicksergeant> it's totally valid
<nicksergeant> but it wants you to stick the url thing where the '' is
<nicksergeant> like this:
<nicksergeant> which is dumb
<nicksergeant> you can probably turn that madness off in pylint someohw
<nicksergeant> somehow*
<joelteon> ok
<joelteon> so you can suppress warnings from pylint with pragmas
<joelteon> but it warns you that you're suppressing warnings
<nicksergeant> yeah
<nicksergeant> lol
<purr> lol
<joelteon> i don't know if the disgust i feel is toward python or just toward pylint
<nicksergeant> put it toward pylint
<nicksergeant> python says your shit is totally valid
<nicksergeant> pylint is an opinionated piece of software
<joelteon> ok
<nicksergeant> granted, pylint is backed by pep8, which is the python community's styleguide
<joelteon> i think python is pretty cool so far
<joelteon> i wish it had lambdas
<joelteon> proper lambdas
<joelteon> also, i wish self wasn't explicit
<nicksergeant> well now you've lost me, i'm just a dumb front-end developer
<joelteon> i think alexgordon or someone is gay for python
<joelteon> i also wish it had string interpolation
<alexgordon> joelteon: yah
<alexgordon> joelteon: yeah those things are major weaknesses (well the lambdas at least)
<alexgordon> joelteon: python doesn't have multiline lambdas because guido doesn't like them
<alexgordon> which is dumb
<alexgordon> joelteon: when it gets to the weekend I'm going to implement all of haskell's stdlib in swift :P
<alexgordon> to learn it
<nicksergeant> python has string interpolation, but not standalone
<alexgordon> or when I fix this bug, whichever is sooner
<nicksergeant> "whatever %(something)" % locals()
<alexgordon> I hate swift's function declaration style though
<joelteon> this weekend, i'm going to figure out why git depends on libX11
<alexgordon> [attributes] func name<type constraints>(globalName localName x: type) -> returnType
<alexgordon> it's cluttered as hell
<alexgordon> they should have split it on to two lines
<alexgordon> it reminds me of scala actually
<alexgordon> I think I'm going to make my own, lol
<purr> lol
<joelteon> scala sucks cocks
<joelteon> oh it's cause git depends on tk lol
<joelteon> fun fact x11 will not compile with clang
<alexgordon> it really does
<joelteon> which is good because i fucking hate x11 and wish things would stop depending on it
<alexgordon> tell you, nice thing about swift is that it already has a really rich stdlib
<alexgordon> like http clients and everything
<joelteon> yeah that's cause they just borrowed the old one
<alexgordon> :P
<joelteon> coffeescript has a really rich stdlib too
<joelteon> ok i'm just joshing you
<joelteon> trying to build everything with clang instead of gcc is really an experience
<glowcoil> alexgordon: hahaha yes
audy has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net]
prophile has quit [Quit: The Game]
<katlogic> Trivia: Is there OSI compatible license which would demand deterministic builds when binaries are redistributed?
<joelteon> more importantly, would it be worth it?
<joelteon> oh, well wait
<joelteon> for security software, it's possible that it would be
<katlogic> joelteon: That's exactly the idea. Prevent forks from distributing unverifiable binaries.
<devyn> hmm
<devyn> what do you mean by deterministic builds
<katlogic> Exactly what it sounds like. If 20 people can download source, build it, and post gpg signed sha sum
<alexgordon> well they can't post the gpg signed sha sum because they'd need the private key ;)
<katlogic> It somewhat proves that the binary corresponds to the source (as long you trust at least one of the signers)
<katlogic> Huh?
<katlogic> This is just about proof-by-numbers.
<alexgordon> surely the point of a gpg signed sha some is that everybody can verify, but only the owners can generate
<katlogic> Owners?
<alexgordon> so if everybody can post the gpg signed sha sum, that means everybody has the private key, which is not what you want :P
<katlogic> Anyone can post the proof
<katlogic> what private key?
<alexgordon> the signing key
<katlogic> they sign using their key
<alexgordon> then it won't be the same!
<katlogic> which is listed in gpg.mit.edu
<katlogic> sure, thats kinda the idea
<katlogic> sha is same, signed by N keys where N is number of people :)
<katlogic> anyway, try http://gitian.org/
<katlogic> its how bitcoin and tor win32 binaries are proven that they are not backdoored
<katlogic> if 50 respectable people attach their gpg saying this is sha sum indeed corresponds to this git head, it is hard to dispute that
<devyn> well, unless someone comes along and manages to pay them all off, but it's unlikely
<devyn> :p
<devyn> kidding. seems really neat
<katlogic> Yeah, it's dangerous if all are not anonymous
<katlogic> They can be NSL'd all at the same time, though there is usually predetermined signal to tell others they've been NSLd
<devyn> well, I think ideally don't even worry if they're all "reputable" — just allow people to sign up anonymously to do it
<devyn> just anyone
<katlogic> mixed bag of anon + non-anon works best
<devyn> yeah I suppose
<katlogic> if non-anons are NSLd, anons will can freely speak up
<devyn> how flexible is that toolchain? can you choose to use clang?
<joelteon> with what
<devyn> and how about building for Windows; how does that work
<devyn> gitian
<joelteon> i'll tell you this
<katlogic> devyn: It's pretty crappy actually :/
<joelteon> you can't use clang with nix
<katlogic> just a vm with preinstalled ubuntu
<katlogic> usually the point is to do binaries for win32, which is ok, its just default ubuntu mingw cross compiling
<devyn> hmm ok
<devyn> is it possible to cross compile for OS X? probably not, because any of the headers past plain Darwin are copyrighted right
<katlogic> Indeed cross compiling for os x sucks hard
<katlogic> would need hackintosh vm
<devyn> yeah
<katlogic> On the up side, the architecture is stable
<katlogic> which means one would not actually even need a VM
<katlogic> just that all signers would need mac
<katlogic> (afaik clang does not do silly things like include timestamps in binaries)
<joelteon> so the binaries would have to be the same
<devyn> I can test that right now
<joelteon> identical
<joelteon> i don't know if that's reliable
<katlogic> if there are two people in channel with osx lion
<katlogic> just compile printf("hello world") and compare sha sums
<katlogic> chances are high that sums will match
<joelteon> afaik gcc uses hardware sampling when it bootstraps itself so even two gccs built from identical source trees with identical libcs might be different
<devyn> I'm on 10.9.3
<devyn> how about you joelteon
<joelteon> 10.10
<devyn> ah damn
<katlogic> ah, far from stable :/
<joelteon> neigh
<katlogic> i thought mac is rolling-version or something
<devyn> no, they have big-ish releases
<devyn> current stable is Mavericks (10.9)
<devyn> next is Yosemite (10.10)
<katlogic> joelteon: Indeed. That is why the VM don't actually build gcc. The gcc is simply pulled from debian / ubuntu repo.
<devyn> [devyn@DevBook ~]$ clang test.c -o test
<devyn> [devyn@DevBook ~]$ shasum -a 256 test
<devyn> [devyn@DevBook ~]$ clang test.c -o test
<devyn> [devyn@DevBook ~]$ shasum -a 256 test
<devyn> 4f31a4572b96ed9d6b2ae67f74fb13cf3100e09ae102b6548693bf9cd2935e53 test
<devyn> 4f31a4572b96ed9d6b2ae67f74fb13cf3100e09ae102b6548693bf9cd2935e53 test
Sgeo has joined #elliottcable
<devyn> interestingly because there's no vectorization to be done, clang -O2 and clang -O3 provide identical binaries on that little program
<devyn> but -O1 and no flag produce different binaries
<devyn> and -Os is different, too, of course
<katlogic> hmm, what differs with O1/Os ?
<katlogic> You mean same program, each time with O1 is different?
<katlogic> (difference between O1 and O2 is obvious ..)
<devyn> no, I mean there's a difference between nothing, -O1, -O2, and -Os
<devyn> but -O2 and -O3 produce identical binaries
<devyn> in this case
<katlogic> thats pretty normal :)
<devyn> no, the interesting part is that -O2 and -O3 were identical
<devyn> meaning that there's no storage of flags or anything in the binary
<devyn> no hints
<joelteon> is O3 an optimization level?
<joelteon> oh, jeez
<joelteon> O4 is