00:00.45 |
starseeker |
It depends. Apparently FIT doesn't, or maybe
this one is just too old... |
00:01.26 |
starseeker |
Or too obscure... my interests do seem to run
that way sometimes |
00:04.27 |
brlcad |
haven't made it out the door
actually |
00:05.05 |
louipc |
starseeker: maybe they just have a really
weird delivery system |
00:05.32 |
starseeker |
made an interesting mental image - brlcad on a
runner coding away |
00:05.41 |
brlcad |
african swallows |
00:05.50 |
brlcad |
starseeker: i've done that before |
00:05.59 |
starseeker |
Does it burn more calories? ;-) |
00:06.21 |
brlcad |
the jolting is a bit hard though.. elliptical
or bike are slightly easier |
00:06.37 |
starseeker |
Ah, yes. I'm an elliptical fan
myself |
00:07.19 |
starseeker |
louipc: Apparently some years back someone
implemented a basic Lisp using Forth as a substrate |
00:07.45 |
starseeker |
louipc: They published a paper and a thesis,
and so far I can't find either one online anywhere. |
00:08.14 |
louipc |
hmm |
00:08.26 |
starseeker |
My local library couldn't even request the
thesis from the college itself successfully - I'm going to have to
try ordering a physical back issue of the journal |
00:09.00 |
starseeker |
I suppose it's not an idea that would appeal
to most people anyway... |
00:09.42 |
starseeker |
It's of interest to me in the context of
building a proof backed system all the way down to the machine
language itself |
00:09.56 |
louipc |
I guess not otherwise it might be more
accessible |
00:10.28 |
starseeker |
I've got half a notion to scan the whole lot
of 'em if I do get ahold of them, but regrettably our copyright
laws have something to say about that... |
00:12.16 |
louipc |
in canada it's legal to put a book on a
photocopier, just not to push the copy button or
something |
00:12.48 |
starseeker |
LOL. So all you need is a "smart" copier that
identifies when a document is there and automatically copies it
:-) |
00:13.32 |
louipc |
they used that analogy in some p2p case ... so
it's legal to present the public with what backup copies of
software, music, or movies |
00:13.54 |
brlcad |
academic use is one of the fair use
clauses |
00:14.56 |
brlcad |
I scanned several entire books in college at
the uni library |
00:14.59 |
louipc |
starseeker: yeah you wouldn't sell it would
you now? |
00:15.44 |
starseeker |
No, but I understand that's irrelevant to
copyright infringement |
00:16.15 |
starseeker |
It has something to do with what damages you
can collect, IIRC... |
00:17.55 |
starseeker |
So few people actually want to learn things,
the fewer artificial barriers around knowledge the better |
00:19.16 |
starseeker |
Particularly publicly funded research - the
tax payers are paying for it, after all... |
00:19.35 |
louipc |
yeah of course if it's publicly
funded |
00:20.02 |
starseeker |
I guess when universities noticed the revenue
they could get from patents generated by research that was more or
less the end of the "knowledge for knowledge's sake"
environment... |
00:22.39 |
starseeker |
Maybe that's why I like open source so much -
there's still a sense of fun in it |
00:23.30 |
louipc |
I like it because there's a sense of hope in
it |
00:25.40 |
starseeker |
That too |
00:26.46 |
``Erik |
heh |
00:26.56 |
``Erik |
starseekers unified theory of computation?
"it's forth all the way down"? |
00:27.02 |
starseeker |
:-) |
00:27.34 |
starseeker |
More along the lines of "I need a way to get
from machine language to Lisp that has a hope of being understood
by a wide audience" |
00:27.52 |
``Erik |
oh, uh |
00:27.56 |
``Erik |
pdp assembly isn't that? |
00:28.09 |
starseeker |
pdp assembly? |
00:28.21 |
``Erik |
or ibm 704 asm? :D |
00:28.38 |
starseeker |
Ah :-). The other requirement is
portability. |
00:28.55 |
starseeker |
I've heard it said you can get to a working
Forth environment in a very small number of machine
instructions |
00:29.12 |
``Erik |
so get a 704 emulator |
00:29.27 |
``Erik |
I mean, shit, 'car' and 'cdr' come from 704
opcodes... |
00:29.51 |
starseeker |
It may be possible to do a VERY basic Lisp
straight from machine code |
00:29.59 |
starseeker |
That was the first Lisp, after all |
00:31.43 |
``Erik |
hmmm, indeed O.o |
00:31.59 |
``Erik |
a minimal lithp can be done in 7
operations |
00:32.04 |
starseeker |
Sweet |
00:32.15 |
``Erik |
uhm, paul graham has a paper explaining each
of them |
00:32.19 |
starseeker |
I wonder what the actual minimal bootstrap
path is |
00:32.31 |
``Erik |
then you need another dozen or so to make a
useful lisp, which will still need bits of asm |
00:32.37 |
starseeker |
Sure. |
00:33.07 |
``Erik |
but after those 7, you quickly go from writing
asm to writing lithp with a little augmenting goop under the
hood |
00:34.02 |
starseeker |
That could be a way to go. |
00:34.15 |
``Erik |
(or writing forth, or writing ...) |
00:34.38 |
starseeker |
The key is understandability, and (possibly)
being able to prove properties of code |
00:35.26 |
``Erik |
then you naturally want to avoid silicon like
x86... |
00:35.51 |
``Erik |
:D |
00:35.59 |
starseeker |
Indeed. If at all practical, I would prefer
to build a system using open cores and hardware... |
00:36.13 |
starseeker |
I think the ultrasparc specs are out there,
aren't they? |
00:36.30 |
``Erik |
the reason I'm keen on a lithp/scheme
'primitive' operating system is to get away from things like mixing
C function semantics with lithp function semantics |
00:37.21 |
``Erik |
I think so, uh, 'opensparc' or something?
there're other specs that might be better to address... naturally,
you want hte simplest ISA with minimal 'fancy' stuff if you really
want provability... taht is, if you don't assume the hw is
magic... |
00:37.40 |
starseeker |
Ah - ha: http://www.opensparc.net/opensparc-t2/ |
00:37.55 |
``Erik |
cache, pipelines, variable sized opcodes, ...
all complications :) |
00:38.33 |
starseeker |
My take on it is pretty much as follows: From
the software standpoint, start with machine language as the assumed
correct layer and work up. Everything below that is subject to
experimental verification |
00:39.02 |
starseeker |
Of course, some hardware designs can be
verified in theory, but that's just part of the platform
design. |
00:39.04 |
``Erik |
dig into some OS code sometime, there're so
many workarounds for flawed hw, its'sick |
00:39.12 |
starseeker |
Indeed |
00:39.56 |
starseeker |
We could just do an implementation of the lisp
machine on a chip, but I'd prefer something that has a non-zero
chance of doing useful work within this century ;-) |
00:40.08 |
``Erik |
hrmmmm |
00:40.14 |
``Erik |
but those did useful work in the
80's |
00:40.27 |
starseeker |
True enough. |
00:40.39 |
``Erik |
arrogant academic spazzes crappe all over
thenotion of 'business sense' (cuz it was evil) |
00:40.51 |
``Erik |
or somethin' |
00:40.58 |
yukonbob |
SPARC is only a spec... |
00:41.00 |
starseeker |
I've always wondered what a from scratch
implementation of a "modern" OS would actually need from hardware,
if it didn't have to do any legacy support |
00:41.30 |
starseeker |
For sure Windows Vista isn't a good way to
judge... |
00:41.34 |
``Erik |
what exactly defines "operating system",
"modern, and "legacy support"? |
00:41.51 |
``Erik |
thems're fuzzy topics :D |
00:42.31 |
starseeker |
Capable of at least opengl level graphics,
multithreaded multitasking, and implementing compilers/drivers/etc
only for one hardware design |
00:42.33 |
yukonbob |
starseeker: see NetBSD -- one codebase to rule
them all... |
00:42.40 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: Heh |
00:42.47 |
``Erik |
is "posix" legacy support? |
00:42.59 |
starseeker |
``Erik: Good question. |
00:42.59 |
``Erik |
what about supporting a ps/2 kbd when usb is
available? |
00:43.11 |
starseeker |
I'd say usb only |
00:43.24 |
``Erik |
how modern is modern? everything these days
seems to be rehashing of things that were popular 20-50 years
ago |
00:43.26 |
starseeker |
(so long as adapters exist for my IBM keyboard
;-) |
00:43.52 |
starseeker |
``Erik: Oh, I don't dispute it's a fuzzy
topic |
00:43.54 |
``Erik |
is opengl all that modern? |
00:44.09 |
starseeker |
No, but it seems to still be a useful
graphical standard. |
00:44.21 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: opengl?!!! Two minutes ago we were
talking about lisp! |
00:44.47 |
``Erik |
what defines a thread? a sun style "string"?
or a UNIX process? or the linux 'whatever you specify'
monstrosity? |
00:44.47 |
yukonbob |
back to the future. |
00:45.10 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: In order to support 3D graphics,
you need to be able to work with graphics hardware. There are some
lisp implementations of opengl, IIRC, but they are very
basic... |
00:45.35 |
starseeker |
``Erik: There I'm not an expert. |
00:45.36 |
``Erik |
yukonbob: I'm trying to tear down starseekers
vague requirements... personally, I LIKE both lisp and
opengl |
00:46.21 |
yukonbob |
starseeker: of course -- I was just joking
about definitions of "modern" and OpenGL -- but a couple minutes
ago you were talking about implenting Lisp in Forth -- funny how
"standards" change (for some definition of "standards") |
00:46.24 |
starseeker |
I'm not disputing those requirements are
vague. I just know I wouldn't want to try using a modern
interactive CAD modeling environment on a 386 with no graphics
acceleration ;-) |
00:46.48 |
``Erik |
hum |
00:46.50 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: They're all part of the solution to
the problem, or they might be |
00:46.54 |
``Erik |
like one of those? |
00:47.02 |
starseeker |
Bingo :-) |
00:47.52 |
yukonbob |
"a 386 with no gfx acceleration" is an
implementation detail -- not a design requirement. |
00:48.13 |
starseeker |
It's an example of a system that would not
meet the requirements |
00:48.38 |
yukonbob |
what's that got to do with OS design,
though? |
00:49.22 |
yukonbob |
and what are the "requirements"? It wasn't
*that* long ago where one would start a render and wait many, many
hours for it to finish... |
00:49.25 |
starseeker |
Well, the original motivating problem was/is
to create a computer algebra system that produces answers that can
be trusted |
00:49.58 |
yukonbob |
well -- are you saying 80386s are not
trustworthy? Maybe moreso than some pentiums ;) |
00:49.58 |
starseeker |
so that's where discussions of hardware come
in, because if your hardware can't be trusted it's game over
before the software even begins... |
00:50.35 |
``Erik |
thus my argument for absolute minimal hw... :D
wtf does ogl have to do with provable computation? |
00:50.36 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: I'm not sure. But proving
properties about them and software written in their machine code
would likely be more of a challenge than for some other platforms,
which was ``Erik's point |
00:50.54 |
starseeker |
provably correct visualization of a surface
plot? |
00:51.29 |
starseeker |
So, if we want "absolute minimal hw" but still
want to solve interesting problems, where's the middle
ground? |
00:51.35 |
starseeker |
that was how all that started |
00:51.44 |
yukonbob |
starseeker: well --- if you've got a good test
harness, and keep primitives to a minimum, according to ``Erik you
can bootstrap a Lisp environment in 7 instructions... |
00:52.03 |
starseeker |
Hehe |
00:52.10 |
``Erik |
um, 7 primitive functions, not necessarily 7
instructions |
00:52.15 |
starseeker |
Right |
00:52.27 |
``Erik |
and you need more to do anything beyond a
minimal symbol processor :D |
00:52.38 |
``Erik |
I'd hate to code up math routines in symbol
land |
00:52.39 |
yukonbob |
right -- but that's still a small amount of
code than writing a whole common lisp env in asm |
00:53.04 |
``Erik |
be about as useful as a calculator in sed :D
(and a similar construction, I'd imagine) |
00:53.20 |
``Erik |
and I aint' never said nothin' about common
lisp... |
00:53.32 |
``Erik |
be a fair amount of work to make a provable
lisp1.5 :D |
00:53.33 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: For something like Axiom, I'm
assuming most of Common Lisp would be needed. So the question
becomes how to get there from nothing |
00:53.44 |
starseeker |
``Erik: Indeed! |
00:54.01 |
starseeker |
It was actually some guys on comp.lang.lisp
that pointed me to Forth |
00:55.07 |
``Erik |
that's the natural way a lithper works,
yukonbob |
00:55.17 |
starseeker |
Whether it's a project that is possible or
even interesting is certainly up for debate. I suspect this all
goes back to my phyiscs professors in undergrad, who stressed the
point we couldn't trust Mathematica to give us the right
answer |
00:55.52 |
``Erik |
recursive fully computational macros, 'top up'
primitive operations, build your DSL implementation bit at a time
until the problem is trivial |
00:56.14 |
starseeker |
While of course they were correct (and the
primary point of needing to develop one's own mind is independent
of the trustworthiness of the CAS) I became fascinated by the
question "what would it take to create a CAS that COULD be trusted
to give the right answer?" |
00:56.15 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: -- and so, with 7 primitives, audited
for good code (which is _still_ only an implementation detail) and
sound logic, you've got a system -- and it's got _nothing_ to do
with whether it's running on an atari or a cray. |
00:56.38 |
``Erik |
what was the quote about solving every problem
by adding another level of abstraction? :D |
00:57.05 |
``Erik |
it has to be proven to run on SOMETHING,
dude... whether silicon or a forth vm |
00:57.14 |
starseeker |
Correct |
00:57.52 |
``Erik |
oh, so the ALU abstracted to microcode
abstracted to the ISA abstracted to C is too much? :D |
00:58.06 |
yukonbob |
"it" is the 7 (or however many) primitives...
of course it has to run -- unless "imagination" qualifies as a type
of computer too... |
00:58.08 |
``Erik |
flying electrons abstracted to gates
abstracted to the alu? |
00:58.36 |
``Erik |
dude, it's abstractions all the way
down! |
00:58.40 |
starseeker |
A stack of machine -> machine language
-> Forth -> Lisp -> SPAD/Aldor/Qi is probably about the
minimum needed to get the proper tradeoffs in complexity and
functionality. |
01:01.07 |
starseeker |
The idea of Forth would be that since it is
optimized to need very few machine commands to go from nothing to
Turing Complete, it would offer the minimum "proof burden" when
porting from one platform to another. That of course is only in
theory, since a proper lisp compiler would still need to know a lot
about the machine arch. to do anything serious, but it's a
start |
01:02.08 |
starseeker |
Or if the machine happens to have a good ASM
(like the IBM 704) you could skip the Forth and go straight to
Lisp |
01:02.43 |
``Erik |
hum, with new developments in quantum
understanding and microphysics going on, are gates even provable?
O.o or just statistically ok and overengineered to
compensate? |
01:02.49 |
``Erik |
:D |
01:02.56 |
starseeker |
``Erik: A good point, actually |
01:03.04 |
starseeker |
``Erik: You're quite correct |
01:03.04 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: ++ |
01:03.18 |
starseeker |
``Erik: The same holds true for our
brains |
01:03.24 |
yukonbob |
that's what we have ECC memory
for... |
01:03.31 |
``Erik |
brains are provably wrong, due |
01:03.33 |
``Erik |
dude |
01:03.47 |
starseeker |
``Erik: Just most of them ;-) |
01:03.49 |
``Erik |
ecc is another example of statistical
over-engineering, not provability... |
01:04.13 |
yukonbob |
right -- the reason it's _needed_ is because
of errors... |
01:04.17 |
``Erik |
math types are weird |
01:04.46 |
starseeker |
What you can do is prove that the behavior is
correct, assuming a given behavior of the hardware |
01:04.54 |
starseeker |
this is if you fully understand your
software |
01:05.18 |
``Erik |
yeah, but then you have turing-church
theories, lambda calculus, ... it's all done |
01:05.19 |
yukonbob |
but obviously not the hardware, or at least
can't guarantee the hardware... |
01:05.20 |
starseeker |
If you know the statistical behavior of your
hardware, you can then estimate (with a LOT of work) the
probability that a given calculation is incorrect |
01:05.28 |
``Erik |
:D |
01:06.28 |
starseeker |
So if we ever understood fully how our own
brains solved problems, we could also come up with a probability
that a given human performed calculation was incorrect |
01:09.11 |
starseeker |
I think someone broke down the problems humans
like to solve into four categories: solvable, not specifically
solvable but can prove a solution exists, provably not solvable,
and problems where we can't prove one way or the other whether it
can be solved or not |
01:10.23 |
starseeker |
sorry guys |
01:11.46 |
CIA-28 |
libirc: 03JeffM2501 * r354
10/trunk/libirc/examples/stupidBot/vc7.1/stupidBot.vcproj: include
the URLManger |
01:15.07 |
louipc |
wowzers |
01:15.16 |
starseeker |
louipc: ? |
01:15.21 |
``Erik |
sorry, the only proofs I work with these days
tend to be 10, 80, and 100 O:-) |
01:15.28 |
louipc |
lots going on here eh? |
01:15.39 |
starseeker |
No, just me going offtopic ;-) |
01:16.09 |
louipc |
``Erik: I worked with a 140 proof, man that
was caustic |
01:16.42 |
yukonbob |
starseeker: re: four categories -- didn't dick
cheney go on about that wrt iraq :) |
01:17.01 |
starseeker |
yukonbob: Argh, he might have |
01:17.31 |
yukonbob |
similar, not the same -- some goofy,
confusing-ish rambling... |
01:17.50 |
``Erik |
heh |
01:18.04 |
``Erik |
151, dude :D |
01:18.16 |
starseeker |
Politics is definitely a problem where we
can't even make definite statements of whether it's solvable in
theory or not ;-) |
01:18.26 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: thats your proof? :) |
01:18.37 |
yukonbob |
Oddfellows Local 151 |
01:18.43 |
``Erik |
I haven't worked with bacardi 151 in a
bit |
01:18.57 |
``Erik |
but it was fun :D light the shot on fire...
etc |
01:19.07 |
``Erik |
but that NEEDED a back on it |
01:19.18 |
louipc |
how fast does it burn? |
01:19.29 |
starseeker |
Jeez - you must have a Teflon shot
glass. |
01:19.38 |
``Erik |
um, I d'no, it didn't let it stay lit very
long.... |
01:19.51 |
``Erik |
didn't wanna break the shotglass and didn't
wanna lose all the fuel :D |
01:19.56 |
louipc |
ah |
01:19.59 |
yukonbob |
this makes me wish for some sambuca about
now... |
01:20.01 |
louipc |
fuel! yeah |
01:20.02 |
``Erik |
I have a massively thick shotglass |
01:20.20 |
yukonbob |
sure you do, ``Erik |
01:20.20 |
louipc |
sambuca is too dang sweet |
01:20.23 |
``Erik |
in fact, it's begging for a little bushmills
right now O.o |
01:20.35 |
``Erik |
I'll go weigh it :D |
01:20.58 |
yukonbob |
louipc: try Annisette |
01:21.21 |
louipc |
I'll try to remember that |
01:21.30 |
``Erik |
my normal shooter is 65g, the one I like to
use is 170g |
01:21.57 |
louipc |
haha YES |
01:22.33 |
``Erik |
or, wait, sorry I'm a stupid american, lemme
go measure those in uh, ounces or something |
01:24.03 |
starseeker |
Humph - the opensparc download requires
registration? |
01:24.05 |
yukonbob |
ye |
01:24.07 |
yukonbob |
ww |
01:24.09 |
yukonbob |
yes |
01:24.12 |
yukonbob |
fsck |
01:24.15 |
yukonbob |
;) |
01:24.20 |
starseeker |
lol |
01:25.27 |
``Erik |
sun has been slow to embrace 'open' in the way
we think of it |
01:25.33 |
``Erik |
look at the old java licenses |
01:30.56 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: use Tcl bytecode and we can integrate
it w/ BRL-CAD ;) |
01:33.39 |
``Erik |
heh, does tcl even have bytecode? |
01:34.16 |
yukonbob |
``Erik: yup |
01:39.04 |
yukonbob |
louipc: also, Passione Nera |
01:41.38 |
``Erik |
I'm gonna start using 'courics' as the weight
measurement for everything. |
02:00.41 |
louipc |
an acre is the area of a rectangle who's
length is one furlong and who's width is one chain |
02:39.52 |
``Erik |
heh |
02:40.06 |
``Erik |
which happens to be a classic western farm
plot |
04:26.37 |
*** join/#brlcad Twingy
(n=justin@74.92.144.217) |
04:28.32 |
brlcad |
starseeker: BeOS was specifically designed as
a "from scratch implementation" that was generally hailed as a
major [technical] success at the time albeit a failure commercially
(CEO was an idiot) |
04:32.16 |
brlcad |
and I learned a new word, thanks :) .. that
hasn't happened unintentionally in a really long time :) |
06:26.16 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * 10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/
(33 files in 33 dirs): make the AdditionalIncludeDirectories paths
match for Debug and Release |
06:51.23 |
*** join/#brlcad Z80-Boy
(i=clock@77-56-94-134.dclient.hispeed.ch) |
08:11.00 |
*** join/#brlcad DEFCON_
(n=def@74.17-246-81.adsl-static.isp.belgacom.be) |
08:22.10 |
*** join/#brlcad weebee
(i=86dd8008@gateway/web/cgi-irc/ircatwork.com/x-c128800636ce22c3) |
08:39.26 |
*** join/#brlcad Z80-Boy
(n=clock@zux221-122-143.adsl.green.ch) |
09:50.35 |
*** join/#brlcad archivist
(n=archivis@host81-149-119-172.in-addr.btopenworld.com) |
11:42.51 |
*** join/#brlcad elite01
(n=elite01@dslb-088-070-030-248.pools.arcor-ip.net) |
12:57.31 |
starseeker |
brlcad: I guess that's why the Haiku OS guys
have been stubbornly plodding along. It does look
interesting. |
13:13.55 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/brlcad/brlcad.sln: Changing the build
order to force tclsh to build sooner. Tclsh is used early in the
build to create the install tree. |
13:30.35 |
DEFCON_ |
C joke :D - http://www.ianai.net/jokes/WillNotThrow.gif |
14:56.17 |
*** join/#brlcad digitalfredy
(n=digitalf@200.71.62.161) |
17:42.49 |
brlcad |
heh |
17:45.14 |
brlcad |
starseeker: yeah, I was really big on BeOS for
years .. Haiku doesn't have the impressive foundation that Be had,
but they've kept the same basic philosophy and have made a ton of
great progress on reviving the effort |
17:45.43 |
brlcad |
and as open source, it's at least bound to
"not fail" so long as someone's still working on it ;) |
17:46.14 |
brlcad |
they're really close to a first 1.0 release,
so it'll likely be slashdotted and activity may really kick-start
after then |
17:59.39 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * 10brlcad/BUGS: |
17:59.41 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: annotate the opengl display manager
problems where the display doesn't |
17:59.43 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: automatically update any longer if
the context is invalidated; mention that the |
17:59.45 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: libfb ogl interface seems horribly
broken at the moment as it just crashes |
17:59.47 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: (consistently, at least on Mac OS X);
and mention that the open dialog problems |
17:59.59 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: seem to be Mac OS X specific too as
they worked under Linux (7.10.1 Mac also |
17:59.59 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: seemed to work fine, so something
since then). |
18:00.48 |
brlcad |
``Erik: what do you mean by fix the hacks --
add more of them, or do something about them so they're not
hacks? |
18:01.48 |
brlcad |
I worked on what to do about that a while ago
and didn't see any really easy fix for the problem given the way
the data is being marshalled into and out of ClientData
objects |
18:02.50 |
``Erik |
add them until they get fixed? |
18:03.02 |
``Erik |
make 'em easily greppable, anyways |
18:03.30 |
brlcad |
okay, just checking what 'fix' meant -- works
for me |
18:03.46 |
``Erik |
given that ClientData is a point type,
defining the field as size_t MIGHT be workable, but that field is
sometimes used as an int and sometimes as a pointer, ... |
18:05.12 |
``Erik |
pointer, even |
18:05.17 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/tclsh/library/installTree.tcl: Initial
check-in. This script will be called by Visual Studio to build the
install tree. |
18:06.55 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/tclsh/tclsh.vcproj: Calling
installTree.tcl instead of treeInit.sh. |
18:10.09 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/Makefile.am: include the new scripts in
the source dist |
18:30.45 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * 10brlcad/librt/ (const.c
hist.c plane.c polylib.c polyno.h snoise.c): once again, try to
delete these zombie files that have again mysteriously shown up
after an update |
19:02.29 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/tclsh/tclsh.vcproj: Remove command to
copy clock.tcl. |
19:09.18 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/include/config_win.h: No longer need to define BRLCAD_DATA
and BRLCAD_ROOT. |
19:10.20 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/archer/archer.bat: Archer now uses bwish. |
19:11.57 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/mged/mged.bat: Define WEB_BROWSER to point to
IEXPLORE.EXE. |
19:12.08 |
prasad_ |
boo |
19:14.52 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/tclscripts/archer/Archer.tcl: brlcadDataPath can now
be set the same on Windows as it is on Unix. |
19:16.16 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/tclscripts/mged/ (openw.tcl mged.tcl): Normalize the
path when setting mged_default(html_dir). |
19:27.53 |
*** join/#brlcad Elperion
(n=Bary@p548743C3.dip.t-dialin.net) |
19:59.02 |
brlcad |
yo prasad_ |
20:03.12 |
prasad_ |
yo yo |
20:10.26 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/misc/win32-msvc8/tclsh/library/installTree.tcl: Copying
many more files to the install tree. |
20:19.27 |
*** join/#brlcad Z80-Boy
(i=clock@77-56-83-251.dclient.hispeed.ch) |
20:53.59 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/tclscripts/lib/tclIndex: Put things back. |
21:36.26 |
``Erik |
O.O holy crap, it worked |
21:38.22 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/archer/archer: html is no longer under doc on
Windows. |
21:39.53 |
brlcad |
a dirt worked? |
21:43.00 |
``Erik |
heh, yeah |
21:43.05 |
``Erik |
the gtk snake thingy |
21:43.39 |
``Erik |
and, uh, ain't nothin' worth worrying about
for public consumption other than perhaps terminology, I
think |
21:45.15 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03bob1961 *
10brlcad/src/tclscripts/archer/tclIndex: Looks like things
accidently got wacked. |
21:53.14 |
``Erik |
heh, I'd forgotten about 'diva' |
21:55.43 |
``Erik |
hum, forgot some stuff last night, wonder if I
stopped in the middle of it or something |
21:56.10 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03erikgreenwald * 10brlcad/src/adrt/
(libcommon/unpack.c librender/plane.c librender/spall.c): update
the tie_init() calls with the new parm |
21:59.01 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad *
10brlcad/src/other/incrTcl/itk/pkgIndex.tcl.in: there is no
ITK_VERSION, use ITCL_VERSION |
22:06.39 |
prasad_ |
http://www.kloonigames.com/blog/ |
22:16.52 |
Z80-Boy |
How do I do a regular tetrahedron? |
22:17.00 |
Z80-Boy |
With an arbn, n=4? |
22:23.04 |
brlcad |
you could do that, but better would be to
create an arb4 |
22:23.22 |
CIA-28 |
BRL-CAD: 03brlcad * 10brlcad/INSTALL: sync
options with configure: add dtrace, remove automatic |
22:23.56 |
brlcad |
(subtle, but "arbn" are not the same as "arb#"
objects) |
22:30.10 |
``Erik |
woops, that sounded like a steam whistle, time
to go hom |
22:58.42 |
minute |
http://my.brlcad.org/~MinuteElectron/live/wordpress/?p=5 |