egg changed the topic of #kspacademia to: https://git.io/JqLs2 | Dogs are cats. Spiders are cat interferometers. | Document well, for tomorrow you may get mauled by a ネコバス. | <UmbralRaptor> egg|nomz|egg: generally if your eyes are dewing over, that's not the weather. | <ferram4> I shall beat my problems to death with an engineer. | We can haz pdf | Logs: https://esper.irclog.whitequark.org/kspacademia
_whitelogger has joined #kspacademia
whitequark has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
egg|matrix|egg has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
queqiao has quit [Ping timeout: 189 seconds]
queqiao has joined #kspacademia
whitequark has joined #kspacademia
whitequark has quit [Quit: Client limit exceeded: 2]
egg|matrix|egg has joined #kspacademia
<egg|matrix|egg>
Catherine: https://twitter.com/whitequark/status/1609937502613434369 I wonder whether that might be artificially restrictive to C semantics though; would Ada access types count as pointers in that sense? You sure can express T** (type Access_T is access all T; type Access_Access_T is access all Access_T;), but pointer arithmetic is not a thing, pointer-to-integer conversions exist only in the sense that they exist for anything via
<egg|matrix|egg>
Unchecked_Conversion, but then sun.misc.Unsafe is a thing too
<egg|matrix|egg>
interior pointers are the thing you cannot pass to free? In that case that exists only if you are looking at Unchecked_Deallocation
_whitelogger has joined #kspacademia
_whitelogger has joined #kspacademia
<raptop>
An unsafe sun sounds like the setup for a joke
<SnoopJ>
I think her tweet was talking about "in Java" very specifically, as in "these concepts do not make sense in Java"
<egg|matrix|egg>
yeah, but I worry that by this reasoning they don’t might not make sense anywhere but in C
<egg|matrix|egg>
(aside : Ada’s handling of aliasing is surprisingly effective at allowing optimizations)
<SnoopJ>
I don't think anything in those tweets precludes the existence of incompatible classes of the concept of "pointer"
<egg|matrix|egg>
I don’t understand what you are saying here. The point I am trying to make is that the distinction in the preceding tweet « thing that refers to another thing » vs. « specific language construct », based on the criteria in the cited tweet, vs. « specific C or C++ language construct », which may be narrower than was intended
<SnoopJ>
k
<egg|matrix|egg>
* cited tweet, may be vs. «
<egg|matrix|egg>
!wpn Catherine
* galois
gives Catherine a hummingbird
<egg|matrix|egg>
huh
* egg|matrix|egg
pokes galois with a stick
<egg|matrix|egg>
ah the bridge was just sluggish
<egg|matrix|egg>
⟨egg|matrix|egg⟩ interior pointers are the... ⮪ (Unchecked_Deallocation on an universal access type, specifically)