@retoor each browser is free to implement it's own parser.

@retoor malformed XML.

librefox port of devrant quiz when?

need more b2plane shit bricks golem brought to life by babylonian magicks

ok heres ai thread summary~

rust bad

not rust at fault

programmer bad

germany is country (apparently)

premature ejaculation

memory safety is communist plot

python is html

[inserts clip of uncle linus flipping the bird (you know the one)]

@whimsical the eff in effort is for ffffffffffffffUUUUUUUll exertion of course. also 3839 uuh thats magic number for fornication expletive

@retoor ostream tried to warn us they are coming for the digital proletariat~

uuh quiz i take maybe

*sees first question*

> what is the number of rants in the provided export?

ok nope abort quiz

^i unironically agree with the output stream man on this one

ai companies go bankrupt en-masse and the space is dominated by the myriad lobotomized distillations of their now dead abominations running on cursed ex-mining racks on life support with hosting payed for in hourly redditor blood sacrifice as an alternative to water cooling.

there is a satirical crossbreed of lovecraft and cyperpunk somewhere in there i think.

anyway training is kind of a prohibitively expensive bottleneck, maybe we should've figured that one out first. backup the shitty results you got cuz you aint getting many more out in this fucking economy. i remember back in forever ago there was this talk among techy fuckbois, that big leaps in hardware that would make running massive neural nets cheap, viable, sus tain(t)able, all that snake-oil peddling clown jizz was right around the corner. well who's laughing now josh, you're asscrack deep in the red.

tl;dr it's collapsing on itself, the saviour isn't second coming to rescue your gooning machines. god bless.

@AlgoRythm that is a superb example of why functional languages are both good and bad: syntax designed for brevity, but you have to do weird things like recursing when you actually mean to loop -- it's not as much succinct as it is obscuring the very semantics from which you could better infer programmer intent.

and though this intention is not at all obscured once you're used to reading this kind of code (i kind of am from second-hand smoking), it introduces a deeper problem in that what you write is not really what you're asking the computer to do; i cannot just effortlessly peek at the assembly through my mind's eye when i look at this, and that means i don't know what i'm *actually* doing.

but that's a problem of high-level programming languages in general, save for those closer to pure C. ironically, they pay for abstraction with disconnect from the underlying machine they are talking to. functional stands apart in that it inevitably deepens this effect.

@3dgoosee dude its *literally* in the bible

{And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four QUATERNIONS of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.}

ima rant a lot ok

in C, i'd want a binary format so i can parse it with structs and minimal logic, rather than parsing text which is way more annoying. inspecting/editing files in a more human-readable form would then be done in some utility program maybe

also no spatial partition means floating point precision is gonna fuck you in the ass. i'd say break the scene into cells and plot them in a graph or whatever, then arrange the nodes within each cell hierarchically

yes, you *could* use doubles for coordinates instead to push the problem into the heat death of the universe. but your future self will thank you if you do some form of partition anyway to make annoying-to-code bits like pathfinding and culling less stupid. algorithms that rely on "spatial awareness" so to speak can become a big fucking problem if the data isn't sorted for it

also 3dgoodes Y U NO QUATERNIONS

forgot question but still giving answer uuh mystery of universe

@AlgoRythm the academic circle jerk does indeed breed higher forms of degeneracy.

but more on topic i vaguely recall trying both ocaml and haskell at one point out of curiosity forever ago, wanted to see what the fuzz was about. my lasting impression is that functional languages were specifically designed for mathematicians to cosplay as programmers, i really do get that vibe.

as i see it, strict FP makes nearly everything more complicated than it needs to be for no benefit, save a vague sense of correctness that i find to be more illusory than anything else. akin to writing an abstract class for the first time, not quite right but feels like it if you think hard enough. i can't stand the hyperfocus on theory rather than practice is what i'm getting at.

anyway, learn haskell, 0/10 it's the last thing i would recommend to a sentient being. but if you want to learn functional it'll do the trick.

@12bitfloat yes. retoori wanted to gotcha you with trick question, but phrased it in a way that makes the surprise response fall flat. she is internet fren so i play along.

> both have indentation as syntax

sacrilege

@YourMom to godot's credit, they at least let you use C++. i only riff on godot becuass i have beef with arch altright clickbait man and tinfoil brigade commander acedragon who is a godot fanboy. wow. much lore. such expanded universe.

@retoor googled video to give punitive dislike~

this message is written in a declarative programming language because of homosapiens brain interpret.

inb4 godot user suggests html is a programming language~

@whimsical no, cannot drop. need bedtime stori.

@Hazarth take pity on poor ceo he need more yacht for bahamas~

@whimsical i am the mike

@Liebranca oh noes too late to edit. where it says "usage patterns (...)" it should say "stack usage patterns (...)"

@whimsical yes i have the good shit on speed dial https://gist.github.com/Liebranca/...

the OS owns all physical memory that the BIOS doesn't reserve for hardware. stack is part of the *virtual* memory given to your process by the OS at startup. heap is the exact same thing, just given at a later date.

the real difference -- and cause of overhead -- is two-fold: one, that usage patterns plus contiguity and frequent reuse is much more cache efficient. and two, that in nearly every scenario you have an involved mechanism to manage the heap, keeping track of occupied/freed blocks to enable checking for reusable space before asking the OS to allocate more pages to the process.

if you dynamically allocate a large block and set it as the stack you've eliminated the overhead. because memory is just memory. but we could also say it's just stack allocation with extra steps :)

but retoori, the *right* question is 'what is faster, stack or heap?'

i mean for real, who even std::cout << "does it like this." << std::endl.

@12bitfloat perl is more or less bash on steroids. it's very convenient for string processing, and surprisingly fast at it too, so i tend to use it a lot. but 95% of this virtual machine stuff i actually shouldn't be doing in perl like at all lmao.

@whimsical reviewing that would be such a nightmare that i think i like my chances better with a straight-up rewrite.

@12bitfloat mainly? i like writing assembly, and spent a good time doing it, so it's kinda easy for me to generate assembly. i then just designed the vm to be similar enough to make it viable, and that was that, pretty much.

here's that 'complex' memory operand getting decoded https://github.com/Liebranca/... the 'seg' part is from back when i was doing segmented memory, which isn't actually the case anymore. anyway, it's actually like what... 40 SLOC? :)

ok im cheating because it's perl. i should rewrite it in C to be honest. but i'll use my preprocessor, which does let me use perl inside C macros. hehe.

but anyway defining your own ISA kinda helps, which is what i did here. you just take the instructions you actually care about and the rest...

EDIT: oooh my bad, i read the operand wrong. anyway, it's just swapping out what is multiplied by the scale.

@12bitfloat my backend is flat assembler lmao. i compile first to bytecode, and then transpile that into fasm, with the big-brain idea being oh i can eventually support more than one architecture if i write more translators.

but my virtual machine is *kind of* like an x86, and what i output has to be valid x86_64 assembly code for it to work, so wink wink, not all *that* different.