From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhDRocLkBBoELeuC9w@googlegroups.com Wed Sep 15 02:25:02 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OvoEP-0005D5-GD; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:25:01 -0700 Received: by wyb35 with SMTP id 35sf1623326wyb.16 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=q/DmaItbOrbaXhN0KwHRVI+2B7EUroKjabJh54PTwxk=; b=q2KngQ6fo2nZhXi9shlZmw2ddEhoaU01k0hV3gqiigYIbpcYoPnunqGpcJPyYhsl4K sA6wcCIiKb+AdQh5r6e7NOYYxbF2/ojeU2nyb5r5Vj3vynzC0NtY95vcNcTFkdWWUcr8 gp8H4Nrrr2JtObtM+BzbGRhXGlqWS1SvzXlLM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=1OTiVF7jVddn9q3ueleH/VlaTRmTAAldpbaRwmRFmSqk5fEXHNAHzxRYZmvuOHRWWJ TCw9gTW9CJGT9F/tNM4nHC1D21dsu34BMBaFogwIlTO9F7wUOLTnl+1UThHLK0scPcC8 WIvBmPJwK35UImiy4eZZlZBHuk4XdJr3+1AmM= Received: by 10.216.144.25 with SMTP id m25mr280250wej.9.1284542673250; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:33 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.237.134 with SMTP id y6ls376401weq.2.p; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.26.74 with SMTP id b52mr276749wea.14.1284542672370; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.26.74 with SMTP id b52mr276748wea.14.1284542672344; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ww0-f45.google.com (mail-ww0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id r4si428949wec.14.2010.09.15.02.24.31; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.45; Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so7025213wwi.14 for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.145.199 with SMTP id p49mr4984140wej.18.1284542670486; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.22.199 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 02:24:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:24:30 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] Mex Operators (VUhU) From: Jonathan Jones To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d5094b92bf94049048e51b --0016e6d5094b92bf94049048e51b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Well, it looks good to me, although I admit to only glancing. The important stuff appears to be all there. On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:16 AM, Ross Ogilvie wrote: > coi rodo > > I've basically finished my work on the bpfy section "Mex Operators". > I have a few questions though: > > 1) How are the subcategories sorted? I know that it has no real > significance but I just don't see the pattern and it's bugging me. VUhU0 are > the two operators that don't do stuff. VUhU1 are the four arithmetic > operations (+, -, x, /). But I just don't get the other ones. > > 2) Minimiscience started the working on the section back in April and seems > to have been developing a type system (in a computer programming sense). > It's my opinion that we should give minimal definitions and in the least > technical way possible and leave the flexibility there for the operators to > be adapted to more technical situations in the way users see most fit. But > if s/he is around here somewhere and wants to speak up or clarify how > extensive this system was to be, I'd enjoy to hear from you (or anyone > really). The main practical difference this makes is whether we define > operations for vectors and matrices or just numbers. > > 3) My definitions are rather terse. Is this the sort of thing that is > wanted? Any other things criticisms? > > mu'o mi'e .ros > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "BPFK" group. > To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en. > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en. --0016e6d5094b92bf94049048e51b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, it looks good to me, although I admit to only glancing. The important= stuff appears to be all there.

On Wed, S= ep 15, 2010 at 3:16 AM, Ross Ogilvie <oges007@gmail.com> wrote:
coi rodo

I've basically finished my work on the bpfy section "Mex Operators". I have a few questions though= :

1) How are the subcategories sorted? I know that it has no real signifi= cance but I just don't see the pattern and it's bugging me. VUhU0 a= re the two operators that don't do stuff. VUhU1 are the four arithmetic= operations (+, -, x, /). But I just don't get the other ones.

2) Minimiscience started the working on the section back in April and s= eems to have been developing a type system (in a computer programming sense= ). It's my opinion that we should give minimal definitions and in the l= east technical way possible and leave the flexibility there for the operato= rs to be adapted to more technical situations in the way users see most fit= . But if s/he is around here somewhere and wants to speak up or clarify how= extensive this system was to be, I'd enjoy to hear from you (or anyone= really). The main practical difference this makes is whether we define ope= rations for vectors and matrices or just numbers.

3) My definitions are rather terse. Is this the sort of thing that is w= anted? Any other things criticisms?

mu'o mi'e .ros

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@goog= legroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bp= fk-list?hl=3Den.



--
mu'o mi'= e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e ko klama le bende pe denpa bu

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
--0016e6d5094b92bf94049048e51b--