Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.theory > #143266 > unrolled thread

In the hospital with pneumonia for three weeks recovering at home on oxygen

Back to article view | Back to comp.theory

Contents

  In the hospital with pneumonia for three weeks recovering at home on oxygen olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-08 10:30 -0500
    Happy Recovery (was: Re: In the hospital with pneumonia for three weeks recovering at home on oxygen) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-09 02:20 +0800
      Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-08 16:13 -0500
        Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-10 05:40 +0800
          Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-09 18:07 -0500
          Re: Happy Recovery "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-08-10 13:13 -0700
        Re: Happy Recovery "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2026-08-10 08:31 +0200
          Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-10 08:26 -0500
            Re: Happy Recovery Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-08-10 07:02 -0700
              Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-10 10:20 -0500
            Re: Happy Recovery Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-08-11 11:22 +0300
              Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-11 07:35 -0500
                Re: Happy Recovery Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-08-12 11:46 +0300
                  Re: Happy Recovery olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-12 08:36 -0500
                    Re: Happy Recovery Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-08-13 10:07 +0300
                      Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-13 04:05 -0500
                Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 01:55 +0800
                  Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-14 16:25 -0500
            Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 01:49 +0800
              Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-14 16:22 -0500
                Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 13:31 +0800
                  Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-15 05:33 -0500
                    Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 19:26 +0800
                      Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-15 08:32 -0500
                        Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-15 22:36 +0800
                          Re: Happy Recovery "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-08-15 12:33 -0700
                Re: Happy Recovery Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-08-15 10:51 +0300
                  Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-15 05:26 -0500
                    Re: Happy Recovery Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-08-16 10:29 +0300
                      Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-16 07:34 -0500
                    Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-16 16:03 +0800
                      Re: Happy Recovery Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2026-08-16 12:52 +0000
                        Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-16 21:20 +0800
                        Re: Happy Recovery polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-21 12:36 -0500
                          Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-22 02:17 +0800
                            Re: Happy Recovery olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-21 15:02 -0500
                              Re: Happy Recovery Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-22 07:35 +0800
                                Re: Happy Recovery olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-08-21 21:41 -0500
          Re: Happy Recovery "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-08-10 13:12 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#143303 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>
>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>
>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>> so this must be a simple task.
>>
>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when coding
>> graphs in C.
>>
>>
>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
> 
> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
> between the nodes.
> 
> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
> classes/objects.

In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular list of
you in Common Lisp.

   (nconc polcott polcott)

Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking asshole.

See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in the
fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you theoretic-
al asshole?

> 
> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
> into totally independent modules such that changes
> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
> of the others. It makes system development much easier
> and much more reliable and has very little learning
> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
> of C++.
> 

On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, unlike
you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own plea-
sure?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143306 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/15/2026 12:31 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>
>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>
>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when coding
>>> graphs in C.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>
>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>> between the nodes.
>>
>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>> classes/objects.
> 
> In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular list of
> you in Common Lisp.
> 

Disrespecting me gets you *plonked* or ignored.

>    (nconc polcott polcott)
> 
> Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking asshole.
> 

Lisp is generally too slow compared to C++.
The system that I propose is a production system
requirng maximum performance to minimize hardware
costs.

> See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in the
> fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you theoretic-
> al asshole?
> 
>>
>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>> of C++.
>>
> 
> On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, unlike
> you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
> put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own plea-
> sure?

Side effects are bugs.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143307 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 6:33 PM, polcott wrote:
> On 8/15/2026 12:31 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>
>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>> coding
>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>
>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>> between the nodes.
>>>
>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>> classes/objects.
>>
>> In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular list of
>> you in Common Lisp.
>>
> 
> Disrespecting me gets you *plonked* or ignored.
> 
>>    (nconc polcott polcott)
>>
>> Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking asshole.
>>
> 
> Lisp is generally too slow compared to C++.
> The system that I propose is a production system
> requirng maximum performance to minimize hardware
> costs.
> 
>> See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in the
>> fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you theoretic-
>> al asshole?
>>
>>>
>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>> of C++.
>>>
>>
>> On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, unlike
>> you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
>> put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own plea-
>> sure?
> 
> Side effects are bugs.
> 

I see.  Please unplug you monitor.  It has side effects, and is there-
fore buggy.  You're unfit to post on Usenet, because you don't under-
stand that the machine has side effects.

And never, ever re-plug your monitor.  You're unfit to see what I post
on Usenet!

-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143309 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/15/2026 6:26 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 6:33 PM, polcott wrote:
>> On 8/15/2026 12:31 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>>> coding
>>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>>
>>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>>> between the nodes.
>>>>
>>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>>> classes/objects.
>>>
>>> In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular list of
>>> you in Common Lisp.
>>>
>>
>> Disrespecting me gets you *plonked* or ignored.
>>
>>>    (nconc polcott polcott)
>>>
>>> Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking asshole.
>>>
>>
>> Lisp is generally too slow compared to C++.
>> The system that I propose is a production system
>> requirng maximum performance to minimize hardware
>> costs.
>>
>>> See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in the
>>> fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you theoretic-
>>> al asshole?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>>> of C++.
>>>>
>>>
>>> On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, unlike
>>> you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
>>> put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own plea-
>>> sure?
>>
>> Side effects are bugs.
>>
> 
> I see.  Please unplug you monitor.  It has side effects, and is there-
> fore buggy.  You're unfit to post on Usenet, because you don't under-
> stand that the machine has side effects.
> 
> And never, ever re-plug your monitor.  You're unfit to see what I post
> on Usenet!
> 

Containment (encapsulation) in C++ means that a
unit of code (a class) holds its data and the
operations that manipulate that data inside one
protected structure. Its benefit is that it keeps
the data safe from accidental misuse by forcing
all access to go through the class’s own functions.

In C, a struct holds only the data, and any part
of the program can read or modify that data directly.
All the rules for using the data are scattered across
the codebase, so nothing prevents incorrect access,
missed initialization, or broken usage patterns.

This is the only aspect of the complex details
of C++ that I have ever used.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143310 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 9:32 PM, polcott wrote:
> On 8/15/2026 6:26 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 6:33 PM, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/15/2026 12:31 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>> On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>>>> coding
>>>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>>>
>>>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>>>> between the nodes.
>>>>>
>>>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>>>> classes/objects.
>>>>
>>>> In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular list of
>>>> you in Common Lisp.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Disrespecting me gets you *plonked* or ignored.
>>>
>>>>    (nconc polcott polcott)
>>>>
>>>> Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking 
>>>> asshole.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Lisp is generally too slow compared to C++.
>>> The system that I propose is a production system
>>> requirng maximum performance to minimize hardware
>>> costs.
>>>
>>>> See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in the
>>>> fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you 
>>>> theoretic-
>>>> al asshole?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>>>> of C++.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, unlike
>>>> you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
>>>> put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own 
>>>> plea-
>>>> sure?
>>>
>>> Side effects are bugs.
>>>
>>
>> I see.  Please unplug you monitor.  It has side effects, and is there-
>> fore buggy.  You're unfit to post on Usenet, because you don't under-
>> stand that the machine has side effects.
>>
>> And never, ever re-plug your monitor.  You're unfit to see what I post
>> on Usenet!
>>
> 
> Containment (encapsulation) in C++ means that a
> unit of code (a class) holds its data and the
> operations that manipulate that data inside one
> protected structure. Its benefit is that it keeps
> the data safe from accidental misuse by forcing
> all access to go through the class’s own functions.

You really need to get out of your bed, and read /The Shellcoder's
Handbook/, by Anley, Heasman, Lindner, and Richarte.  I hope I got
all the names right, as I typed this in myself, from my shelf.

In my world, /accidental misuse/, or more likely, intentional mis-
use, is when a foreign binary code forces its way to access private
class members.  This is generally done with /remote code execution/
error, and I have never practiced this myself, as I find creating my
own programs more fruitful than to try to break someone else's.

In any case, whatever you may /think/, and /theorize/ about what a C++
compiler assures, none of it matters once the code is running on a
machine, and someone else has the power to run a piece of code in the
same process.

> 
> In C, a struct holds only the data, and any part
> of the program can read or modify that data directly.
> All the rules for using the data are scattered across
> the codebase, so nothing prevents incorrect access,
> missed initialization, or broken usage patterns.

In C, we don't pretend that the compiler assures anything, at all, and
hand verify our own work.

> 
> This is the only aspect of the complex details
> of C++ that I have ever used.
> 

Then please get out of bed, and fuck off to do some complex details.
And Learn OpenGL, and make a game.  It'll be a good exercise for you.

This theoretical bullshit is going to your head, and you need to reduce
your oxygen intake; because you're completely high on theory!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143312 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/15/2026 7:36 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 9:32 PM, polcott wrote:
>> On 8/15/2026 6:26 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 15/08/2026 6:33 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/15/2026 12:31 AM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>>> On 15/08/2026 5:22 AM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>>>>> coding
>>>>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>>>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>>>>> between the nodes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>>>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>>>>> classes/objects.
>>>>>
>>>>> In that case, I upstage you, you asshole, and create a circular 
>>>>> list of
>>>>> you in Common Lisp.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Disrespecting me gets you *plonked* or ignored.
>>>>
>>>>>    (nconc polcott polcott)
>>>>>
>>>>> Because Common Lisp in infinitely superiour to C++, you fucking 
>>>>> asshole.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lisp is generally too slow compared to C++.
>>>> The system that I propose is a production system
>>>> requirng maximum performance to minimize hardware
>>>> costs.
>>>>
>>>>> See, I didn't even need any /library function/, it's right there in 
>>>>> the
>>>>> fucking programming language!  What do you think of that, you 
>>>>> theoretic-
>>>>> al asshole?
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>>>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>>>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>>>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>>>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>>>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>>>>> of C++.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, Common Lisp can have side effects everywhere, 
>>>>> unlike
>>>>> you, you Haskell licking slut!  Do you think monads are something you
>>>>> put on your food?  Or do you suck monads all day long for your own 
>>>>> plea-
>>>>> sure?
>>>>
>>>> Side effects are bugs.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I see.  Please unplug you monitor.  It has side effects, and is there-
>>> fore buggy.  You're unfit to post on Usenet, because you don't under-
>>> stand that the machine has side effects.
>>>
>>> And never, ever re-plug your monitor.  You're unfit to see what I post
>>> on Usenet!
>>>
>>
>> Containment (encapsulation) in C++ means that a
>> unit of code (a class) holds its data and the
>> operations that manipulate that data inside one
>> protected structure. Its benefit is that it keeps
>> the data safe from accidental misuse by forcing
>> all access to go through the class’s own functions.
> 
> You really need to get out of your bed, and read /The Shellcoder's
> Handbook/, by Anley, Heasman, Lindner, and Richarte.  I hope I got
> all the names right, as I typed this in myself, from my shelf.
[...]

Good! :^)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143304 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 00:22, polcott wrote:
> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>
>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>
>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>> so this must be a simple task.
>>
>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when coding
>> graphs in C.
>>
>>
>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
> 
> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
> between the nodes.
> 
> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
> classes/objects.
> 
> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
> into totally independent modules such that changes
> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
> of the others. It makes system development much easier
> and much more reliable and has very little learning
> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
> of C++.

If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.

-- 
Mikko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143305 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 00:22, polcott wrote:
>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>
>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>
>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when coding
>>> graphs in C.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>
>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>> between the nodes.
>>
>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>> classes/objects.
>>
>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>> of C++.
> 
> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
> 

It is inherently a tree like structure that only
adds leaves.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143315 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 13:26, polcott wrote:
> On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 00:22, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>
>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>> coding
>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>
>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>> between the nodes.
>>>
>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>> classes/objects.
>>>
>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>> of C++.
>>
>> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
>> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
> 
> It is inherently a tree like structure that only
> adds leaves.

You just need be careful that the restrictions are fully implemented.

-- 
Mikko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143317 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/16/2026 2:29 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 13:26, polcott wrote:
>> On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 15/08/2026 00:22, polcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>>
>>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>>> coding
>>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>>
>>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>>> between the nodes.
>>>>
>>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>>> classes/objects.
>>>>
>>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>>> of C++.
>>>
>>> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
>>> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
>>
>> It is inherently a tree like structure that only
>> adds leaves.
> 
> You just need be careful that the restrictions are fully implemented.
> 

Obviously

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143316 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 15/08/2026 6:26 PM, polcott wrote:
> On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 00:22, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/14/2026 12:49 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>>> On 10/08/2026 9:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If you understand what a directed acyclic graph
>>>>> is then you will understand how you are wrong.
>>>>>
>>>> Since you have all the knowledge, why don't you teach us how you
>>>> code directed acyclic graphs, in C?  I mean, show code, and not
>>>> just spout theoretical nonsense.  You say you're already recovered,
>>>> so this must be a simple task.
>>>>
>>>> Or at minimum, tell us exactly which graph library you'd use when 
>>>> coding
>>>> graphs in C.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes, and happy coding in C!
>>>
>>> I would make a rooted directed acyclic graph using
>>> C++ std:vector with integer indices as the links
>>> between the nodes.
>>>
>>> A small subset of C++ is enormously better than C.
>>> I only use 2 or 3 std library functions and C++
>>> classes/objects.
>>>
>>> This last difference lets you divide up a a system
>>> into totally independent modules such that changes
>>> to one cannot possibly have any side-effects on and
>>> of the others. It makes system development much easier
>>> and much more reliable and has very little learning
>>> curve. I make sure to totally ignore all of the rest
>>> of C++.
>>
>> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
>> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
>>
> 
> It is inherently a tree like structure that only
> adds leaves.
> 

What the fucking stupidity are you talking about?  How the fuck
can you not connect two /acyclic directed graphs/ together and
still get a /directed acyclic graph/ out of it?

Are you fucking stupid?  Do you belong in elementary school?  Have
you never, ever, worked with a forest of /directed acyclic graph/
trees?

Now and immediately, go to your fucking nearest bookstore, and buy a
hardcopy of Loudon's /Mastering Algorithms in C/, and type in the code,
then, and only then, will I start to respect you, you fucking stupid
piece of shit!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143318 — Re: Happy Recovery

[ Followup-To: set ]

In comp.theory Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
wrote:
> On 15/08/2026 6:26 PM, polcott wrote:
> > On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:

[ .... ]

> >> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
> >> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.


> > It is inherently a tree like structure that only
> > adds leaves.


> What the fucking stupidity are you talking about?  How the fuck
> can you not connect two /acyclic directed graphs/ together and
> still get a /directed acyclic graph/ out of it?

> Are you fucking stupid?  Do you belong in elementary school?  Have
> you never, ever, worked with a forest of /directed acyclic graph/
> trees?

> Now and immediately, go to your fucking nearest bookstore, and buy a
> hardcopy of Loudon's /Mastering Algorithms in C/, and type in the code,
> then, and only then, will I start to respect you, you fucking stupid
> piece of shit!

Can we please manage without all this profanity.  In this instance, there
wasn't even any provocation for it.  comp.theory is not a group where
foul language acts to eliminate sensible discussion.  Let's keep it that
way.  Thanks!

> -- 
> Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
> I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
> https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143319 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 16/08/2026 8:52 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> [ Followup-To: set ]
> 
> In comp.theory Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 6:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
> 
> [ .... ]
> 
>>>> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
>>>> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
> 
> 
>>> It is inherently a tree like structure that only
>>> adds leaves.
> 
> 
>> What the fucking stupidity are you talking about?  How the fuck
>> can you not connect two /acyclic directed graphs/ together and
>> still get a /directed acyclic graph/ out of it?
> 
>> Are you fucking stupid?  Do you belong in elementary school?  Have
>> you never, ever, worked with a forest of /directed acyclic graph/
>> trees?
> 
>> Now and immediately, go to your fucking nearest bookstore, and buy a
>> hardcopy of Loudon's /Mastering Algorithms in C/, and type in the code,
>> then, and only then, will I start to respect you, you fucking stupid
>> piece of shit!
> 
> Can we please manage without all this profanity.  In this instance, there
> wasn't even any provocation for it.  comp.theory is not a group where
> foul language acts to eliminate sensible discussion.  Let's keep it that
> way.  Thanks!


Fuck you!  I have zero tolerance for narcissists who're pretending to be
smart.  This polcott character has learned just enough "vocuabulary" of
theoretical technical matters to almost sound like he knows what he's
talking about, but to us experienced people, he's obviously a know noth-
ing burger who feeds off of people who thinks his /rhetoric/ means any-
thing at all.

These kinds of people are a drain on the social circles they inhabit,
and everyone here in comp.theory should know this.  If not polcott,
then everyone who bothers to read his -- or hers? -- complete and utt-
er stupidity!


Have a nice theoretical day, asshole!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143354 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/16/2026 7:52 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> [ Followup-To: set ]
> 
> In comp.theory Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On 15/08/2026 6:26 PM, polcott wrote:
>>> On 8/15/2026 2:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
> 
> [ .... ]
> 
>>>> If you want a directed acyclic graphs as a datatype you must check
>>>> every time the structure is updated that no cycle is produced.
> 
> 
>>> It is inherently a tree like structure that only
>>> adds leaves.
> 
> 
>> What the fucking stupidity are you talking about?  How the fuck
>> can you not connect two /acyclic directed graphs/ together and
>> still get a /directed acyclic graph/ out of it?
> 
>> Are you fucking stupid?  Do you belong in elementary school?  Have
>> you never, ever, worked with a forest of /directed acyclic graph/
>> trees?
> 
>> Now and immediately, go to your fucking nearest bookstore, and buy a
>> hardcopy of Loudon's /Mastering Algorithms in C/, and type in the code,
>> then, and only then, will I start to respect you, you fucking stupid
>> piece of shit!
> 
> Can we please manage without all this profanity.  In this instance, there
> wasn't even any provocation for it.  comp.theory is not a group where
> foul language acts to eliminate sensible discussion.  Let's keep it that
> way.  Thanks!
> 
>> -- 
>> Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
>> I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
>> https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
> 

I am doing much better now.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143355 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 22/08/2026 1:36 AM, polcott wrote:

> I am doing much better now.
> 

That's great to hear!  Have you decided not to be stupid and spout
nonsense, and start to work on your own non-trivial project, for
whatever passes for non-trivial for you?

You can always make your own /computer algebra system/ if you need
a mathematically inclined challenge, or pick up graph visualization,
and compete with Graphviz!


Happy coding something, anything, practical!
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143356 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/21/2026 1:17 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 22/08/2026 1:36 AM, polcott wrote:
> 
>> I am doing much better now.
>>
> 
> That's great to hear!  Have you decided not to be stupid and spout
> nonsense, and start to work on your own non-trivial project, for
> whatever passes for non-trivial for you?
> 
> You can always make your own /computer algebra system/ if you need
> a mathematically inclined challenge, or pick up graph visualization,
> and compete with Graphviz!
> 
> 
> Happy coding something, anything, practical!

I did successfully complete my 28 years of research
as outlined below. No one here has even a slight
basis for understanding how this work is anchored.

Even the smartest guy here: Ross Finlayson is stuck
on baseless denigration utterly refusing to obtain
the required basis.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143358 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 22/08/2026 4:02 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/21/2026 1:17 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>> On 22/08/2026 1:36 AM, polcott wrote:
>>
>>> I am doing much better now.
>>>
>>
>> That's great to hear!  Have you decided not to be stupid and spout
>> nonsense, and start to work on your own non-trivial project, for
>> whatever passes for non-trivial for you?
>>
>> You can always make your own /computer algebra system/ if you need
>> a mathematically inclined challenge, or pick up graph visualization,
>> and compete with Graphviz!
>>
>>
>> Happy coding something, anything, practical!
> 
> I did successfully complete my 28 years of research
> as outlined below. No one here has even a slight
> basis for understanding how this work is anchored.
> 
> Even the smartest guy here: Ross Finlayson is stuck
> on baseless denigration utterly refusing to obtain
> the required basis.
> 

That's good to know, and now that your research is finished, why don't
you top it off, so to speak, by writing something inherently practical
in a programming language of your choice?  I am currently writing a C
compiler in Rust, and a Tiger compiler in C.  These are two books you
have probably never heard of, so I'll mention them by name, again.

See comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.c, comp.lang.misc, comp.lang.asm, alt.
lang.asm, and comp.os.msdos.programmer for the relevant context.

The first book is Andrew W. Appel's [1] /Modern Compiler Implementation
in C/, and the second book is Nora Sandler's /Writing a C compiler/.
I'm sure you can find both in your nearest physical bookstore, so please
use your newfound health and take a walk.

On the subject of health, I also took plenty of walks in London, earlier
this year.  It's absolutely lovely in and around Hyde Park.  And un-
related to /The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde/ by Robert Luis
Stevenson, available for checkout at

   https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/43

so you can just read it.

So, next time you're on a walk, please let us know here in comp.theory
if you encounter any gothic horrors.  I'd be delighted to read them
stories.


Happy gothic horror stories in comp.theory!


[1] That's his name; it's not a typo.
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com
https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143361 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/21/2026 6:35 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
> On 22/08/2026 4:02 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/21/2026 1:17 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 22/08/2026 1:36 AM, polcott wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am doing much better now.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's great to hear!  Have you decided not to be stupid and spout
>>> nonsense, and start to work on your own non-trivial project, for
>>> whatever passes for non-trivial for you?
>>>
>>> You can always make your own /computer algebra system/ if you need
>>> a mathematically inclined challenge, or pick up graph visualization,
>>> and compete with Graphviz!
>>>
>>>
>>> Happy coding something, anything, practical!
>>
>> I did successfully complete my 28 years of research
>> as outlined below. No one here has even a slight
>> basis for understanding how this work is anchored.
>>
>> Even the smartest guy here: Ross Finlayson is stuck
>> on baseless denigration utterly refusing to obtain
>> the required basis.
>>
> 
> That's good to know, and now that your research is finished, why don't
> you top it off, so to speak, by writing something inherently practical
> in a programming language of your choice?  I am currently writing a C
> compiler in Rust, and a Tiger compiler in C.  These are two books you
> have probably never heard of, so I'll mention them by name, again.
> 
> See comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.c, comp.lang.misc, comp.lang.asm, alt.
> lang.asm, and comp.os.msdos.programmer for the relevant context.
> 
> The first book is Andrew W. Appel's [1] /Modern Compiler Implementation
> in C/, and the second book is Nora Sandler's /Writing a C compiler/.
> I'm sure you can find both in your nearest physical bookstore, so please
> use your newfound health and take a walk.
> 

I did write a C compiler in C using YACC and LEX.
I only did the hard part of control flow. My purpose
was to create my hybrid language named 2.5GL. It
added C control flow on top of assembly language.

> On the subject of health, I also took plenty of walks in London, earlier
> this year.  It's absolutely lovely in and around Hyde Park.  And un-
> related to /The strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde/ by Robert Luis
> Stevenson, available for checkout at
> 
>    https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/43
> 
> so you can just read it.
> 
> So, next time you're on a walk, please let us know here in comp.theory
> if you encounter any gothic horrors.  I'd be delighted to read them
> stories.
> 
> 
> Happy gothic horror stories in comp.theory!
> 
> 
> [1] That's his name; it's not a typo.


-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
(a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

(b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#143279 — Re: Happy Recovery

On 8/9/2026 11:31 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 08.aug.2026 om 23:13 schreef polcott:
>> On 8/8/2026 1:20 PM, Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
>>> On 08/08/2026 11:30 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>
>>>  > My 28 year goal has been to make
>>>  > "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
>>>  > reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
>>>  > The complete structure of this system is now defined.
>>>  >
>>>  > The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
>>>  > comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
>>>  > (a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.
>>>  >
>>>  > My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
>>>  > expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
>>>  > language such as CycL of the Cyc project.
>>>  >
>>>  > (b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
>>>  > entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).
>>>
>>> Do I understand you correctly, that you plan to make a compiler for
>>> the ML language from 1997?  Which stands for M.L., the /meta language/,
>>> and never /machine learning/.
>>>
>>>
>>> Happy compiler making!  I can point you in some directions, but I
>>> believe you have the basics covered!
>>
>> I spent 28 years 
> 
> You told us that this sentence has no truth value, because of a 
> pathological self-reference with the word 'I'.
> 
>  >> figuring out how to make the body of> general knowledge fully 
> computable from first principles.
>>
>> I can now explain 
> 
> Again a pathological self-reference. Can we assume that you mean no 
> truth value? Is it not true?
Not sure.

[...]

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.theory

csiph-web