Ian Kelly wrote:
>The task doesn't disallow it. If it's somehow helpful to do that, go for it.
The task specification doesn't explicitly disallow printing out non-primes
either. Would a program that prints all integers from 0 to 255 qualify?
-zefram
Iammars wrote:
>I join the above contest.
There is no contest above. There was a contest *below* that sentence.
A: Yes.
Q: Are you sure?
A: Because it destroys the flow of conversation.
Q: Why is top-posting bad?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in email?
-zefram
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Zefram wrote:
> The task specification doesn't explicitly disallow printing out non-primes
> either. Would a program that prints all integers from 0 to 255 qualify?
Actually it says (and only prime numbers). -G.
On 12/12/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A: Yes.
> Q: Are you sure?
> A: Because it destroys the flow of conversation.
> Q: Why is top-posting bad?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in email?
It's less annoying than quoting the entire message and then bottom-posting :D
On Dec 12, 2007 7:57 AM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/12/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A: Yes.
> > Q: Are you sure?
> > A: Because it destroys the flow of conversation.
> > Q: Why is top-posting bad?
> > A: Top-posting.
> > Q: What is the most annoying thing in email?
>
> I
-zefram
film showed scenes in rev... no wait, they did that one.
Imagine if a novel had the chapters printed in reverse order. Or if a
with having to repeatedly jump backwards.
really need to be read in chronological order. The same issue arises
the newest post first, but as themes are discusse
On Dec 11, 2007 6:18 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 10 December 2007, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > We'll begin relatively simple: the first task for Brainfuck Golf is
> > to print out all the prime numbers (and only the prime numbers) less
> > than 256, delimited by newlines, and then te
On Dec 11, 2007 7:18 PM, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suggest that all Agorans come to aid our fellow nomic, B Nomic, in a time of
> need. Currently, its rules seem to be breaking down. The Grand Chancellor of
> B has taken control of the game state. Therefore, I request that all
On 12/12/07, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Imagine if a novel had the chapters printed in reverse order.
I know of at least one children's novel that does this.
> I'm sure you'll agree it's much more readable than
> the usual kind of top-posting.
(giggle)
Wait, are you serious?
Wooble wrote:
I didn't try to figure out how to actually go about computing primes;
how to do any sort of useful conditional statements was beyond me
(since submitting my program I read up a bit on brainfuck algorithms
and should probably be better equipped for the next task, but it would
have f
On Dec 11, 2007 11:01 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, can you clarify: the list of allowable printing methods permits
> different bases as long as its consistent, but just printing out the ASCII
> character for each number and referring to the lookup table (as someone
> sugge
On 12/12/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I explicitly enumerated the allowable printing methods, and base 256
> wasn't one of them. Or at least that was my intention. I'll have to
> be clearer next time.
What about little-endian binary?
On 12/11/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I end the voting period.
> Valid votes are:
> SUPPORT
> OBJECT
> The decision made by Agora is APPROVE.
Don't you need more support than object?
--
Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Please let me know if there's any further trouble I can give y
On Dec 12, 2007 11:28 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I came very close to writing a perl program that was going to figure
> out for me the optimal steps to take to do things this way, which also
> seemed a bit like cheating. Then I briefly toyed with the notion of
> writing a Brai
On Dec 12, 2007 11:36 AM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wooble wrote:
>
> > I didn't try to figure out how to actually go about computing primes;
> > how to do any sort of useful conditional statements was beyond me
> > (since submitting my program I read up a bit on brainfuck algorithms
>
I've usually already read the messages being replied to, and don't
re-read them in the quoted message.
My mail client also collapses all the quoted stuff since it's
displayed immediately above the new message in the previous message.
Again, blame Gmail.
On Dec 12, 2007 8:26 AM, Zefram <[EMAIL PRO
On Dec 12, 2007 10:35 AM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/12/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I explicitly enumerated the allowable printing methods, and base 256
> > wasn't one of them. Or at least that was my intention. I'll have to
> > be clearer next time.
> What about li
On Dec 12, 2007 11:30 AM, Taral <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/11/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I end the voting period.
> > Valid votes are:
> > SUPPORT
> > OBJECT
> > The decision made by Agora is APPROVE.
>
> Don't you need more support than object?
The action was with
On 12/12/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The action was without 2 objections, not with Agoran consent.
And the original intent was stated as "without 3 objections".
> However, I think that was a list of ballot options rather than a
> tally, so the resolution is probably ineffective any
On Dec 12, 2007 3:40 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 December 2007, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > > What about little-endian binary?
> > I would interpret "binary" to mean "binary numeral system" rather than
> > "binary data encoding". I've never seen any version of Arabic
> > numera
Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
Rule 101/0
A citizen shall not commit treason (disobey the rules).
Rule 102/0 (Blue)
At the moment the game starts, the rules consist of Rules 101
On Wednesday 12 December 2007, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > What about little-endian binary?
> I would interpret "binary" to mean "binary numeral system" rather than
> "binary data encoding". I've never seen any version of Arabic
> numerals that was little-endian.
>
> -root
Not sure what you mean there,
Cross posting, because I'm not sure where to send this.
Looks rather interesting to me. My only gripe is with the Suber
numbering system which I have always found to be highly annoying (pet
peeve I guess). Begin rule and proposal numbers with 0 or 1 and I
would participate.
BobTHJ
On 12/12/07, E
Ed Murphy wrote:
Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
I'd be interested. I don't see any game killers. A few things I'd
probably do differently, but that's what proposals are for ;)
Levi
On Dec 12, 2007 3:54 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
> below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
I'm in.
-root
On Dec 12, 2007 4:04 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Looks rather interesting to me. My only gripe is with the Suber
> numbering system which I have always found to be highly annoying (pet
> peeve I guess). Begin rule and proposal numbers with 0 or 1 and I
> would participate.
I agree
On 12/12/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2007 4:04 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Looks rather interesting to me. My only gripe is with the Suber
> > numbering system which I have always found to be highly annoying (pet
> > peeve I guess). Begin rule and propos
Ian Kelly wrote:
> I've never seen any version of Arabic
>numerals that was little-endian.
Actually Arabic numerals in their original form *were* little-endian.
Written right-to-left, like the rest of the Arabic script. When they
were adopted by Europeans, the same visual
On Dec 12, 2007 5:54 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
> below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
>
>
I'm interested. I don't see any problems myself.
I will point out that, in keeping with the
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Ed Murphy wrote:
> Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
> below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
Killing something before the mission starts is expected, Citizen.
On Dec 12, 2007 4:25 PM, Zefram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ian Kelly wrote:
> > I've never seen any version of Arabic
> >numerals that was little-endian.
>
> Actually Arabic numerals in their original form *were* little-endian.
> Written right-to-left, like the rest of the
On Dec 12, 2007 3:54 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
> below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
Since the initial rules already mention clones, there might as well be
something like this:
Rule
On Dec 12, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Dec 12, 2007 3:54 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would anyone be interested in starting a new game using the rules
below? Are there any problems that would kill it before it started?
I had kicked around a similar idea a while back.
On Dec 12, 2007 6:28 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Computer decides all CFJs. (Which of course needs an appropriate
> mechanism.) Appealing a ruling of The Computer demonstrates doubt in
> The Computer's infallible governing, which is treason.
Yes! Eminently abusable, th
On 12/12/07, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2007 6:28 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The Computer decides all CFJs. (Which of course needs an appropriate
> > mechanism.) Appealing a ruling of The Computer demonstrates doubt in
> > The Computer's infallible
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 11:30:05 Taral wrote:
> On 12/11/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I end the voting period.
> > Valid votes are:
> > SUPPORT
> > OBJECT
> > The decision made by Agora is APPROVE.
>
> Don't you need more support than object?
>
> --
> Taral <[EMAIL P
On 12/12/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry; that's a result of my preferred method for publishing votes.
> SUPPORT people who supported
> OBJECt people who objected.
> There were no votes, so it's approved. ;)
Way obscure, especially with the heading "Valid votes are", which
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 21:52:37 Taral wrote:
> On 12/12/07, Josiah Worcester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sorry; that's a result of my preferred method for publishing votes.
> > SUPPORT people who supported
> > OBJECt people who objected.
> > There were no votes, so it's approved. ;)
>
>
38 matches
Mail list logo
