[ipdf/documents.git] / irc / #ipdf.log

--- Log opened Mon Mar 17 12:20:15 2014
12:20 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
12:20 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
12:20 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 0 secs
12:20 -!- sulix changed the topic of #ipdf to: Angry Strawberry Summer
12:20 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by sulix
12:39 <@sulix> This is sensible discussion about the project.
12:39 <@matches> The suspense
12:39 <@sulix> Anyone up for lunch?
12:39 <@matches> Yes
12:40 <@sulix> drumroll...
12:41 <@matches> I don't think it worked
12:42 <@matches> Yes I did it manually
12:42 <@matches> Maybe cron is broken on motsugo
12:43 <@sulix> We shall find out next time at 12:40, I guess.
12:43 <@sulix> (Or the next time cron emails errors out, maybe)
12:52 <@matches> Let the record show that it didn't work because I didn't install the crontab
--- Day changed Wed Mar 19 2014
10:59 <@matches> Some guy asked me if he could use the whiteboard, so I let him rub out our timeline
10:59 <@matches> And all he did was write "hello world"
10:59 <@matches> >:(
19:10 <@matches> Testing
19:25 <@matches> So the IRC commits should have a different author
19:25 <@matches> So that I don't get a ridiculous number of daily IRC commits
19:26 <@matches> I could rebase the first three of them but I think that might break things
19:45 <@matches> Ok, and now it will only commit when there is more than one new line, so we won't get one every day when no one says anything
19:54 <@matches> Alright, and in theory
19:54 <@matches> If I spam this some more
19:54 <@matches> There will be a commit soonish
19:56 <@matches> Any second...
19:56 <@matches> Yes
19:56 <@matches> Now that is sorted out I can attain maximum productivity
19:56 <@matches> (Sorry)
--- Log closed Mon Mar 24 01:12:25 2014
--- Log opened Mon Mar 24 08:40:12 2014
08:40 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
08:40 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
08:40 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 3 secs
13:26 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
13:27 < matches> Uh oh
13:29 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
13:31 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
13:32 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
13:40 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
13:40 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
16:19 < matches> Well that will make a nice automatic commit
--- Day changed Tue Mar 25 2014
21:33 < matches> So, I am pretty much free all day tomorrow
21:33 < matches> Also Thursday
21:34 <@sulix> I'm pretty busy Thursday, but I'm free all tomorrow so long as I can get some maths done at some point.
21:34 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by sulix
21:35 <@matches> I'm supervising a test from 2-3pm but that's it
21:35 <@matches> So, I will try and get to UWA as early as I can
21:35 <@matches> It might be a good idea to have some kind of start on a code base
21:35 <@matches> Even though we're supposed to be focusing on a literature review, I don't really like not having any code done yet
21:36 <@sulix> Yeah. I agree.
21:36 <@sulix> Code + fixing git stuff + preparing for this "talk" on Friday.
--- Day changed Wed Mar 26 2014
11:32 <@matches> I am in the super secret room
11:36 <@sulix> Okay, I'll head in shortly. Had a small "parents fell for a scam email and entered passwords on dodgy websites" crisis here this morning.
11:37 <@matches> Oh dear
11:42 <@matches> The phone is ringing :O
11:43 <@matches> Phew, it stopped
22:42 <@matches> I think I have a way to do tests in the Makefile without using cmake
22:42 <@matches> You can alter a variable for a target
23:20 <@matches> Well, that ended badly
23:21 <@matches> With me erasing my own Makefile using make
23:21 <@matches> :P
23:24 <@sulix> Better than erasing the source code, I guess.
23:34 <@matches> This is why we have git
--- Day changed Thu Mar 27 2014
00:15 <@sulix> Crazy templated loading and saving!
00:15 <@sulix> And now for bed!
00:30 <@matches> Well
00:30 <@matches> It doesn't break the test
01:22 <@matches> We now have an arbitrary precision float
01:22 <@matches> Where in this case arbitrary precision means I have no idea what the precision is but it is very bad
01:35 <@matches> Ok I think I made a half precision float
01:35 <@matches> They are quite bad
01:36 <@matches> Um, I can probably make a graph of it being terrible as my contribution for Friday
01:36 <@matches> Assuming I've done it right
--- Day changed Wed Apr 02 2014
09:41 <@matches> Dammit codejam is coming up again
09:41 <@matches> There goes productivity
09:42 <@matches> If you are not busy this afternoon we should do work
09:42 <@matches> On the project I mean
09:45 <@matches> Although it is tempting to just practice codejam problems for the next week
12:44 <@matches> If I work on the project it will help when the inevitable "64 bits is not enough" problem comes up!
12:45 <@matches> Maybe
--- Day changed Sun Apr 06 2014
13:40 <@matches> I get the feeling my part of the project could just be "typedef Real to something from boost"
14:15 <@matches> I suppose I could talk about FPU and hardware
--- Day changed Mon Apr 07 2014
21:42 <@matches> I had a horrible horrible thought... implement a FPU in VHDL and then somehow run all our floating point operations on it :P
21:42 <@matches> (This is not a good idea at all but it might be fun)
21:42 <@matches> You know, for some definition of fun
21:44 <@matches> So my lit review will probably be 1) We need higher precision documents because science (Pixels or Perish) 2) This is how FP works in hardware 3) This is how you can get higher precision in software
21:45 <@matches> Oh, and 4) Document formats and rendering them (PDF/PostScript etc)
21:46 <@matches> That is starting to sound suitably ridiculously broad?
21:46 <@matches> Can always cut things out I guess
21:47 <@matches> To reflect what we actually end up doing
22:05 <@sulix> From what Tim was saying, I don't think "too broad" is a possibility.
22:05 <@sulix> We could be talking about Aztec history and it'd probably not be "too broad."
22:05 <@sulix> I do need to remember to read "Pixels of Perish," though.
22:19 <@matches> I'll have a look into VHDL stuff, there seem to be compilers and simulators for linux
22:20 <@matches> For a minute I was afraid I'd have to use the UWA EE VHDL environment
22:20 <@matches> Which is like, running a Java program in a Windows XP VM
22:20 <@matches> I heard you liked simulations of hardware so I simulated some hardware in your simulated hardware
--- Day changed Tue Apr 08 2014
10:46 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mits.mits.au.uniirc.com, services.uniirc.com, irc.cassa.au.uniirc.com, mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
10:46 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
11:31 <@matches> The "Experiment Running" sign seems to have worked
11:31 <@matches> Also open source VHDL stuff is less "actually compiles" than I had hoped
11:32 <@matches> The two I've tried so far seem to generate absolute monstrosities of C or C++ files and then fail to compile and/or link
--- Day changed Wed Apr 09 2014
15:27 <@sulix> So I've been hitting my head against my desk for about half an hour trying to work out where some bugs were in some ipdf code I'm writing.
15:27 <@sulix> Turns out to have mostly been precision issues due to the lack of precision in your Real data type.
15:28 <@sulix> Switching it to double fixes them all.
15:32 <@matches> Oh
15:32 <@matches> Sorry
15:37 <@sulix> Nah: it's good. It means that precision actually is important!
15:37 <@sulix> (I was getting a little bit concerned for a while :P)
15:40 <@matches> Well
15:40 <@matches> I have rediscovered just how awful VHDL is
15:41 <@matches> It seems like you can't define anything without typing it three times
15:42 <@matches> You define an entity
15:42 <@matches> Then you define a component with identical ports
15:42 <@matches> Then you tell it to use the entity for that component
15:42 <@matches> Then you tell it to map the identical ports to the entity ports
15:42 <@matches> adder_0 : adder port map (a=>a, b=>b, cin=>cin, s=>s, cout=>cout);
15:44 <@matches> Pretty much all the hardware papers I found talk about using VHDL for things
15:46 <@matches> Let's see if I can make any sense of this jop-devel thing that appears to be a JVM implemented in VHDL
15:47 <@matches> Uh oh, .bat files
15:48 <@matches> This looks ominous
15:51 <@sulix> The whole swapping out main thing breaks the makefile in a few ways btw.
15:51 <@sulix> Because none of main.cpp's dependencies are listed.
15:51 <@matches> Ah
15:51 <@sulix> So if you change main.h, nothing gets recompiled.
16:02 <@sulix> Okay, just pushed support for click+drag and zoom in and out in the viewer.
16:03 <@sulix> (I did change the default precision to single, rather than half, as zoom out was totally broken with half-precision)
16:05 <@matches> The half precision implementation is broken itself anyway
16:07 <@matches> Hmm
16:07 <@matches> I can't seem to compile anymore
16:07 <@matches> Hang on
16:07 <@matches> That would be because `uname -i` reports "unknown"
16:12 <@matches> I have made unknown default to x86_64 :S
16:13 <@matches> I can see the precision issues! Good work
16:14 <@matches> These lecture notes seem useful: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~demmel/cs267/lecture21/lecture21.html
16:14 <@matches> Lecture notes > Blog post in terms of suitable reference?
16:16 <@sulix> It's got fortran in it, it must be suitably acedemic.
16:18 <@matches> Haha
16:18 <@matches> The VHDL compiler I am experimenting with uses Ada
16:18 <@sulix> I'm getting my fill of new languages by trying out some c++11 features.
16:20 <@sulix> I think I broak realtofloat by changing things to be single precision by default.
16:22 <@sulix> (Hopefully fixed)
16:49 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
16:49 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
16:54 <@matches> What's with the netsplits
16:55 <@matches> You're on mussel? I'm on mantis? They are VMs on the same host?
16:55 <@matches> I don't know what this uniirc nonsense is
16:56 <@matches> What is "arctic"
16:56 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: Happy Bannana Netsplit
17:33 <@matches> Well I compiled the VHDL FPU
17:33 <@matches> It seems to work quite well
17:33 <@matches> Except for the part where it never actually finishes an operation
17:34 <@matches> One of the virtual transistors must have overheated
17:43 <@matches> Oops it might help to actually give it a valid operation
18:27 <@matches> Alright, so I'm going to experiment with getting our Real operations to run on the virtual FPU
18:28 <@matches> Then I can look into both hardware and software ways of getting arbitrary precision.
18:30 <@matches> VHDL appears to have text I/O so I could make everything read and write from pipes, but this seems like a terrible idea
18:30 <@matches> On the other hand the compiler is using Ada
19:21 <@matches> Oh wow
19:21 <@matches> To open stdout
19:22 <@matches> You pass it a string "STD_OUTPUT" for the filename
21:40 <@matches> Ok, I give up trying to link this thing
21:40 <@matches> fork() and exec() is seeming more and more elegant
22:11 <@matches> Nooo, buffering
22:11 <@matches> Ok, screw this
--- Day changed Thu Apr 10 2014
00:00 <@matches> Note: Actually exec'ing the program instead of just going straight to "exit(EXIT_FAILURE)" is generally important
00:00 <@matches> Wall of text commit message incoming
00:01 <@matches> Horribly inefficient interface to virtual FPU sort of implemented
00:02 <@matches> I would have made it based on binary read/write rather than hex strings but I could not work out how to do that in VHDL
00:08 <@matches> I still can't believe what I have just done, it seems ludicrous
00:08 <@matches> Using an entire executable and stdio operations
00:08 <@matches> To do a floating point addition
00:10 <@matches> You should see how much is involved in compiling the VHDL FPU...
00:11 <@matches> I'm very pleased that it actually compiled from the version in jop's github without much effort, but still
00:11 <@matches> It's like 30 object files
00:11 <@matches> This is why it isn't in the code repo
00:19 <@matches> Whoops, there are some blatantly wrong comments in vfpu.cpp
00:19 <@matches> Oh well
--- Day changed Fri Apr 11 2014
13:38 <@matches> Warning! I am about to make a ipdf/vfpu repo
13:43 <@matches> You know what's really cool
13:43 <@matches> You can run it as `vfpu --vcd=output.vcd`
13:43 <@matches> And it will create a gtkwave file as it runs showing all the operations
13:44 <@matches> You only get the simulated time from the point of view of the device
13:44 <@matches> Which is probably useful
13:46 <@matches> Or it would be if I wanted to compare different devices
13:47 <@matches> To do that I need to actually make different devices...
17:12 <@matches> Would you prefer seperate repos for the individual reports or just sub directories in the documents repo?
17:12 <@matches> I can't decide
17:12 <@matches> On the one hand 5+ repos is getting a bit out of hand
17:12 <@matches> On the other hand they are individual work
17:24 <@matches> Individual seems best
20:31 <@matches> Hmm
20:31 <@matches> The sqrt op in the fpu appears to have been commented out
20:31 <@matches> Also despite having constants for the sizes of things they have just used magic numbers everywhere
20:34 <@matches> I need an IRC script to prevent myself from saying stuff unless someone else has said things, or this channel will just be me ranting
--- Day changed Mon Apr 14 2014
13:42 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
13:43 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
14:42 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
14:43 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:32 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:32 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:34 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:35 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:36 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:38 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:40 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:41 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:41 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:43 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:45 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:45 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:46 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:47 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:54 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
18:56 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
18:59 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:00 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:03 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:04 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:07 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:08 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:10 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:10 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:13 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:13 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:15 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:15 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:17 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:18 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:21 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:22 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:23 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:23 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:26 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:26 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:27 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:29 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:30 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:31 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:32 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:35 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
19:35 -!- ServerMode/#ipdf [+o sulix] by mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com
19:40 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:42 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:44 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:48 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
19:48 -!- ServerMode/#ipdf [+o sulix] by mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com
19:54 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:54 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:54 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:54 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:55 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:56 -!- You're now known as 13VAAAAGJ
19:56 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> Why am I now known as 13VAAAAGJ
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> ARE WE UNDER ATTACK
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> Oh crap this is #ipdf
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> Um, disregard this bit of the totally project related conversation
19:57 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> I'd edit the commit script to censor the swear words, but effort
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> Oh dear
19:57 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
19:57 <@13VAAAAGJ> Hello
19:58 <@13VAAAAGJ> I think mantis might be dying?
19:59 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:00 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:01 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:01 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:04 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:04 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:05 <@13VAAAAGJ> Sigh
20:07 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:07 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:08 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:08 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:08 -!- Netsplit mantis.ucc.au.uniirc.com <-> arctic.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:09 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
20:09 -!- Netsplit arctic.uniirc.com <-> mussel.ucc.au.uniirc.com quits: @sulix
20:10 -!- Netsplit over, joins: @sulix
--- Log closed Mon Apr 14 20:11:29 2014
--- Log opened Mon Apr 14 20:18:05 2014
20:18 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
20:18 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
20:18 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 0 secs
22:04 < matches> Ergh
22:06 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ghdl.bug
22:06 < matches> Pretty
22:10 < matches> Looks like we'll be sticking with ASCII input files for the FPU
--- Log closed Mon Apr 14 22:29:33 2014
--- Log opened Mon Apr 14 22:44:34 2014
22:44 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
22:44 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 1 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 0 normal]
22:44 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
22:44 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 12 secs
22:53 <@matches> Someone's VPS was compromised and killing our network
22:53 <@matches> For reference
22:53 <@matches> It affects this project because
23:07 <@matches> Argh
23:07 <@matches> So I thought I was being really clever
23:07 <@matches> I had files of type "bit" and everything
23:07 <@matches> Guess how a "bit" is represented...
23:08 <@matches> It's an ASCII "0" or "1"
23:09 <@matches> I guess I will just conclude that ASCII strings treated as hex is the only way
--- Day changed Wed Apr 16 2014
00:10 <@matches> I'm either about to perpetrate horrible things on your nice View class or give up and go to sleep
00:28 <@matches> Yeah... the problem is if we want to overlay objects rendered using different precision's over each other
00:28 <@matches> It leads towards templates
00:29 <@matches> And templates lead towards fear
00:29 <@matches> And fear leads towards anger
00:29 <@matches> And anger leads to hate
00:29 <@matches> I think
00:29 <@matches> Saving an image
00:29 <@matches> Recompiling the program
00:29 <@matches> Overlaying the image
00:29 <@matches> Is going to lead to less hate
00:30 <@matches> Otherwise pretty much every occurance of "Real" needs to be come a template
00:50 < sulix> So there are a couple of problems with doing that.
00:51 < sulix> - You'd need some way of storing objects of different precision. Possibly an extra "high-precision bounds" struct.
00:51 < sulix> - View also uses real for its internal bounds, which is where many of the problems appear.
00:52 < sulix> (I guess you could have a "high-precision viewport" as well.)
00:52 < sulix> - The actual upload of graphics data to OpenGL is done as 32-bit floats, no matter the type of real, as that's all OpenGL supports.
00:53 < sulix>   (At some point we'll have to actually do some view transforms on the CPU rather than just passing all of the bounds and viewport straight to OpenGL)
01:02 <@matches> Yeah I don't want to replace Real with templates
01:02 <@matches> That'd be horrible
01:03 <@matches> By the way, the introduction of SDL_Renderer in SDL2 is confusing
01:05 <@matches> I thought it was replacing Surface with Renderer and Texture
01:05 <@matches> But Surface seems to still be a thing
01:13 < sulix> Yeah: basically Surfaces are in CPU memory, textures in GPU memory.
01:13 <@matches> Right
01:14 <@matches> And renderers magically put stuff on surfaces/textures
01:14 < sulix> Yeah.
01:14 < sulix> So it basically represents the graphics card.
01:15 < sulix> But if you want to just use OpenGL yourself, you don't need to create a renderer at all.
01:15 <@matches> Ah, but the plot thickens
01:15 <@matches> I'm saving the window to a bmp
01:16 <@matches> Which requires a renderer
01:16 < sulix> Hmm... I'm not sure if that will work.
01:16 <@matches> It does
01:16 <@matches> It seems rather convoluted though to be honest
01:16 < sulix> (In theory, it shouldn't, but it probably actually does)
01:16 <@matches> I seem to remember it not being this convoluted in SDL1.2
01:16 <@matches> -_-
01:16 <@matches> So the procedure is
01:17 <@matches> 1. Get a surface associated with the window
01:17 <@matches> 2. Allocate buffer of unsigned char for the pixels
01:17 < sulix> Yeah, TBH I prefer SDL1.2's rendering API, but I generally just use OpenGL anyway.
01:17 <@matches> 3. Get renderer from the window (NB: Don't use SDL_CreateRenderer, only the (undocumented) SDL_GetRenderer works because the Window already has a Renderer because it has been created with an OpenGL flag)...
01:18 < sulix> In theory we should probably use glReadPixels.
01:18 <@matches> 4. Use the magical renderer power to put pixels into the pixel array
01:18 <@matches> 5. Create an RGB surface from the pixel array
01:18 <@matches> 6. Now you can call SDL_SaveBMP, congratulations
01:18 <@matches> What's this about a glReadPixels
01:18 <@matches> I was just about to commit this
01:19 < sulix> Well, you can use glReadPixels instead of steps 1,3 and 4.
01:19 < sulix> (This is what SDL is doing behind the scenes)
01:20 < sulix> Unfortunately, the SDL wiki is still down thanks to heartbleed. :/
01:20 <@matches> :O
01:20 <@matches> It was up when I looked at it before
01:20 <@matches> Throwing python exceptions when I tried the search function though
01:21 < sulix> Ryan said that it was up, but I'm still getting revoked certificate errors.
01:22 <@matches> Hmm, I needed to do step 1 in order to know the size of the pixel array in step 2...
01:23 < sulix> Screen::ViewportWidth(), Screen::ViewportHeight()
01:26 <@matches> Yeah this is looking a lot shorter than what I had
01:33 <@matches> It doesn't seem to work though
01:35 <@matches> I'm getting a segfault
01:35 <@matches> And of course valgrind automatically exits when it gets more than 1000000 errors from the flgrx driver
01:38 <@matches> First call to glReadPixels is OK but the bmp is just white, second call segfaults
01:39 < sulix> Hmm... what's the call?
01:44 <@matches> Segfault was due to me forgetting about the pixels needing 4 bytes for RGBA
01:44 <@matches> Still white though
01:45 < sulix> (That was going to be my guess)
01:45 <@matches> The advantage of getting the SDL_Surface
01:45 <@matches> Was that you just pass all the surf->format->format->stuff
01:45 <@matches> Everywhere
01:45 <@matches> Also makes it rather verbose
01:46 < sulix> The white screen might just be an fglrx bug.
01:46 <@matches> There we go
01:47 <@matches> No, it helps to remember that the pixels need 4 bytes for RGBA
01:47 <@matches> I have very selective memory
01:47 <@matches> I had to remember it for each line individually
01:47 <@matches> Right I guess it is slightly nicer now
01:47 <@matches> Although it has a bunch of magical "*4" everywhere
01:48 <@matches> I'm going to put this on Stack overflow as an alternative to the answer I was originally following
01:48 < sulix> Well, I'm going to attempt to sleep...
01:48 <@matches> Thank you for fixing my bug without seeing it :S
01:49 < sulix> I have far too much experience breaking glReadPixels...
01:53 <@matches> We need an easy way to compare our document rendering the same thing using a different Real and/or view representation
01:53 <@matches> Templates would only solve changing the Real and really they probably wouldn't actually solve it
01:53 <@matches> They'd just create nightmares
01:53 <@matches> Hmm
01:55 <@matches> Um
01:55 <@matches> Just looking at View::Render
01:55 <@matches> Why is there a seperate loop for each type of object...
01:56 <@matches> With "continue" statements for the other types in each loop
01:56 <@matches> Is this so you can just make one call to glBegin and glEnd...
01:56 <@matches> I am suitable scared
01:57 <@matches> suitably scared and also suitable scared
22:05 <@matches> Ok, trying again. This is the sort of thing a template is supposed to be used for... I just seem to always end up suddenly having to make everything all the way back to Document into a template class :S
22:07 <@matches> blergh
22:07 <@matches> trying again
22:07 <@matches> After getting coffee
22:07 <@matches> I think
22:30 <@matches> Ok, templates is way too complicated
22:30 <@matches> I am going to do the following instead:
22:31 <@matches> 1. Allow a "save this region to bmp" argument
22:31 <@matches> 2. It reads the specified bmp, saves a new bmp with the current view overlayed in a different colour or something
22:32 <@matches> 3. Makefile hacks to recompile the program using a different typedef of Real and then do 1. and 2. for them all
22:32 <@matches> 4. Realise I probably should have used templates
23:02 <@matches> So, according to my timeline that I haven't looked at since submitting the proposal, I will have done a draft literature review by tomorrow...
23:02 <@matches> Hah
--- Day changed Thu Apr 17 2014
00:26 <@matches> I am not good at OpenGL/SDL
00:26 <@matches> I am the master of producing a black screen
00:26 <@matches> Also we have FILLED and OUTLINE the wrong way round still
14:01 < sulix> Bunch of bugfixes incoming.
14:01 < sulix> I'm not proud of what I did to glReadPixels, but it works.
14:02 <@matches> Uh oh
14:02 <@matches> I just worked it out!
14:03 <@matches> The dreaded merge begins
14:03 <@matches> I'm tempted to just delete my changes and merge yours but I should probably do a real merge
14:04 <@matches> I fixed it (on my machine at least) by: Using GL_BGRA instead of GL_RGBA (should probably detect which one to use from the screen's format)
14:04 <@matches> And calling glReadBuffers and glPixelStorei before glReadPixels
14:05 < sulix> glPixelStorei is probably nicer than what I'm doing.
14:05 < sulix> I tried just giving SDL a negative pitch and a pointer to the bottom-right corner of the buffer, but somehow it didn't like that much.
14:07 <@matches> You do actually check the byte order which is good
14:08 <@matches> I worked that out but basically just changed it to match my machine :S
14:08 < sulix> There are a bunch of endian problems in the load-save code anyway if we want it to run on big-endian machines.
14:09 < sulix> (Well, big-endian documents don't load with little-endian code and vice-versa)
14:10 <@matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/code/src/screen.cpp
14:10 <@matches> Is the merge
14:10 <@matches> Which one is better?
14:11 < sulix> I think yours will still get the bitmaps upside down?
14:11 <@matches> Ah yes they do tend to be upside down
14:12 < sulix> I'm not sure you should need the front buffer stuff anymore with mine, so if you just keep mine (which is doing the flipping), everything should work.
14:12 <@matches> Woah you fixed the FILLED vs OUTLINE
14:12 < sulix> I did test overlaying bitmaps and it was fine.
14:12 <@matches> Good
14:12 <@matches> Does this seem like a better way to compare approaches than using a template and having View<float> View<double> etc?
14:13 <@matches> It means recompiling
14:13 <@matches> But it means a lot less templates
14:13 <@matches> Pretty much the entire thing has to be templatified that way
14:13 <@matches> And then there's the issue of what type the document is saving with
14:13 < sulix> I think, long term, it'd be worth just extending the view to have a "bounds" and a "high_precision_bounds" or something.
14:14 < sulix> But that is kind-of ugly.
14:14 <@matches> I think it's probably nicer to just have real.h contain nothing but a typedef
14:14 <@matches> And just recompile with a different typedef and overlay the images
14:15 < sulix> Yeah, but there are some artefacts that really show better in motion, so it's probably worth supporting that at some point.
14:15 <@matches> True
14:15 <@matches> But including a video in the pdf will be difficult anyway
14:16 < sulix> (Clearly, we should add embedded videos to ipdf)
14:16 <@matches> You could also make a movie using ffmpeg
14:16 <@matches> Haha
14:16 < sulix> (I've got some OpenGL video playback code somewhere...)
14:17 <@matches> In fact, if you can output a video you can just overlay two videos
14:17 < sulix> Oh... my... god!
14:17 <@matches> I don't know if there's a better way to make a video but I'd just be saving a .bmp every frame and then combine them all with fmpeg
14:17 < sulix> Nope, that's probably a good way.
14:18 < sulix> With some MAGIC it wouldn't even be slow.
14:20 <@matches> Whoops your code isn't giving me a second bmp anymore
14:20 <@matches> At least, not one that has pixels that aren't white
14:20 <@matches> Does my glReadBuffer thing work for you?
14:21 < sulix> Hmm...
14:21 <@matches> Can fix the upside-downness some other way
14:21 < sulix> Did you make clean
14:21 < sulix> Because main.cpp/main.h won't recompile otherwise.
14:21 < sulix> And I moved the glClear() calls.
14:22 <@matches> I did make clean
14:22 < sulix> Which is a less hacky way of solving the problem than reading the front buffer.
14:23 <@matches> So the problem is that the texture rendered by Screen::RenderBMP isn't in the buffer that glReadPixels reads from?
14:23 <@matches> (Even though it gets shown on the screen fine)
14:25 < sulix> Hmm... it works fine here with or without glReadBuffers.
14:27 < sulix> Try changing it to save the screenshot before calling scr.Present() in main.h
14:29 <@matches> That works
14:29 <@matches> But why?
14:29 < sulix> Because when you call Present(), it allocates a new buffer to render into.
14:30 <@matches> Right
14:30 < sulix> This is so that you can start rendering the new frame immediately, rather than having to wait for the window manager to actually re-render the screen.
14:31 <@matches> I have merged it
14:33 < sulix> Excellent.
14:33 < sulix> This is much more fun than literature!
14:33 <@matches> :S
14:35 <@matches> It's important
14:35 <@matches> It's part of the timeline
14:35 <@matches> Just you know
14:35 <@matches> It comes after the Literature Review
14:37 < sulix> Strictly speaking the Lit Review deadline is past, now, isn't it... :/
14:38 <@matches> Well technically it was never a deadline for me... :P
14:38  * sulix sighs
14:38 < sulix> I'm special.
14:39 <@matches> I need to read that last paper on FPUs more
14:39 <@matches> It was talking about how there are all these software techniques from the 1960s that can actually be done on the FPU itself
14:40 <@matches> I'll probably just work on getting our / jop's FPU working for different sized floats instead
14:40 <@matches> In theory that will teach me how they actually work
14:40 <@matches> Then I can actually understand the papers
14:40 < sulix> But can you write about it in a Lit Review?
14:42 <@matches> Maybe not so much the Lit Review, but it means I can write the Background section that explains how they work
14:43 <@matches> There's probably some early papers on them that I can reference at the same time if I try hard enough to find them
14:44 <@matches> The modern papers all have a lot of assumed knowledge
15:59 <@matches> Instead of reading papers I have progressed towards compiling different types and then overlaying them
16:02 <@matches> I didn't know you could do such cool things with Makefiles and flags to the compiler
16:02 <@matches> If people knew more about this maybe we wouldn't have to have python
16:03 <@matches> I will learn to do all my highlevel programming using Make
19:48 <@matches> Our Render/Screenshot combo for overlaying bitmaps and $$$ only works the first time it is done
19:49 <@matches> Or maybe it's RenderBMP that only works once
19:49 <@matches> Hmm
19:52 <@matches> I swear the format was BGRA earlier and now it's RGBA
19:53 <@matches> This can probably get fixed after some Literature Review
20:09 <@matches> Anyway you can now set the type of Real with `make DEF=-DREAL=X`
20:09 <@matches> Or `make single` and `make double`
20:09 <@matches> 0 and 1 respectively
20:09 <@matches> I tried a little bit too hard to get it working with actual C strings
21:32 <@matches> Minutes now have less "~*" in them
21:32 <@matches> Wrong channel
21:32 <@matches> Very wrong channel
--- Day changed Mon Apr 21 2014
12:32 <@matches> Literature Review O'Clock
12:36 < sulix> I have just returned from my Easter holiday and have some horrible code for you to scream at while I have lunch. :P
12:43 <@matches> Uh oh
12:44 <@matches> stb_truetype ?
12:44 <@matches> DejaVuSansMono.ttf ?!
12:44 <@matches> Is this going to render a font...
12:45 <@matches> Woah
12:47 <@matches> Looks good
12:48 <@matches> I think I will avoid looking at stb_truetype too closely...
12:48 <@matches> Too late
12:48 <@matches> Why are all the implementations in the .h file
12:48 <@matches> And the .cpp file just has some defines...
12:48 <@matches> shudder
12:53 <@matches> I particularly like #define STBTT_assert(...) do {} while(0)
12:53 < sulix> That's a standard way of doing that. SDL_assert does the same thing.
12:54 < sulix> It lets you put a semicolon after it or use it in an if() statement without braces, etc, without things breaking horribly.
12:56 <@matches> But... your assert doesn't actually assert anything?
12:56 < sulix> That's because you generally only want it enabled in debug builds.
12:56 <@matches> I guess
12:57 < sulix> So typically you'd have it as do {} while(0) in release builds, and something like a function call in debug builds.
12:57 <@matches> So what is this "more code" going to do :P
12:57 < sulix> Slightly more modern opengl.
12:58 <@matches> Yeah, that would be a good idea
12:58 < sulix> In particular, uploading the content of a document to a VBO, and just re-rendering from that when needed.
12:58 <@matches> Cool
12:58 < sulix> Jumps from 9 fps -> 37 fps with 1024^2 objects.
12:59 < sulix> I've been without internet, though, so it's pretty broken in many ways, still.
12:59 < sulix> Like outline rects don't work.
12:59 < sulix> And it still uses a bunch of OpenGL 1.0 stuff.
12:59 < sulix> And for some reason the glPrimitiveRestartIndex() function isn't working.
13:00 < sulix> Also I need to write shaders at some point, which will be work.
13:00 <@matches> I just found the best comment in an IEEE email list
13:00 <@matches> We should totally use it
13:01 <@matches> "It is too late now to repair the mistakes of the past that are present in millions of installed systems, but it is good to know that careful research before designing hardware can be helpful"
13:01 < sulix> Oh man, that's basically the thesis in one sentance.
13:02 <@matches> Dibs!
13:02 <@matches> Although I doubt anyone will care if we both quote it
13:03 < sulix> One thing I did discover reading my OpenGL book is that I think we can get OpenGL to use doubles with some shader hackery.
13:03 <@matches> :O
13:03 < sulix> Then again, the book was (partly) written by (one of) the authors of fglrx, so take it with the requisite salt.
13:04 <@matches> Ah, so how many goats were required?
13:05 < sulix> Just the two, I think.
13:06 <@matches> This email message seems sort of vaguely relevant? It's the "infamous double rounding problem"
13:06 < sulix> I take it that you worked out how to swap between CPU and GPU transforms with right-click.
13:07 <@matches> I read it in the commit message
13:08 < sulix> I was quite happy with how much nicer things ran with CPU transforms and doubles.
13:08 <@matches> I think I can see a difference zooming in far enough
13:08 <@matches> Yeah that's a huge difference
13:08 <@matches> I had a tester that was going to automatically make images of the difference when you zoomed in really far
13:09 <@matches> But there were issues with the screen shot / bmp rendering
13:09 <@matches> Probably the bmp rendering
13:09 < sulix> .bmp files suck.
13:10 <@matches> They are nice and simple though?
13:10 <@matches> At least, the SDL API is nice and simple
13:10 < sulix> That's more a triumph of SDL than of the .bmp file format.
13:10 <@matches> After looking through gm6 files with a hex editor to try and extract sprites...
13:11 <@matches> Well we could always just fwrite the pixel buffer and fread it back
13:11 <@matches> If you want no one to be able to use our files without compiling our program :P
13:12 < sulix> I'm personally a fan of LodePNG, but I'm too lazy to hack it in at the moment: http://lodev.org/lodepng/
13:13 < sulix> I'm probably going to get around to fixing all of the warnings in stb_truetype one day.
13:13 <@matches> Haha
13:13 <@matches> What about implementing an Oct-tree?
13:14 <@matches> So .bmp is just a header and then the raw pixel data? What's disgusting about that? No compression?
13:16 <@matches> Wait png is also just a header and then an IDAT section
13:17 <@matches> Oh well you can put lodepng in if you want I guess
13:17 <@matches> As long as I can open the images in eom
13:18 <@matches> Ah so PNG is compressed. I missed that
13:19 <@matches> Meh
13:19 <@matches> Oh and alpha channel
13:19 <@matches> Yeah
13:19 <@matches> I remember that now
13:20 <@matches> xpaint is the least shitty of the shitty sprite editors in debian, but it only stores RGB because it was designed around bmp and I guess they just hacked on exporting to other formats later
13:21 <@matches> If you open things with alpha it gets really confused
13:23 < sulix> You can put alpha in .bmp files, but then they sometimes crash KDE.
13:26 <@matches> We can just run all our bmp files through image magick
13:26 <@matches> convert a.bmp a.png
13:26 <@matches> Done
13:27 <@matches> Hmm, maybe if I opened the data from the gm6 files as png they would work, I was assuming they were bmps -_-
13:27 <@matches> Actually gif
13:27 <@matches> Probably
13:28 <@matches> Since it has "Save as gif"
13:28 <@matches> But that is not relevant to this project
13:33 < sulix> Damn, just discovered that the opengl feature I was using for rectangle outlines is not supported by my laptop's hardware.
13:34 < sulix> (This explains one of the bugs I've been seeing, but sadly only one)
13:47 < sulix> Okay, remaining code pushed.
13:47 < sulix> I am sorry.
13:53 <@matches> I'm messing around trying to do something evil so I'll merge later
13:53 <@matches> But you don't seem to call ToggleGPUTransform when there is a right click
13:54 <@matches> Oh wait, I need to make clean
13:54 <@matches> Cool
13:54 <@matches> (So much for our Makefile magically tracking the header files :S)
13:58 < sulix> It does it for every header file except ones included by main.cpp because of the weird main.cpp swapping stuff.
13:59 <@matches> That main swapping stuff is amazing
13:59 <@matches> It is worth it
13:59 <@matches> Except main.cpp ends up eventually including all the header files
14:00 <@matches> I think there is an alternative Makefile that just has every single header file in the current directory as a dependency for each .o file
14:01 <@matches> But I'm normally used to running make clean anyway
14:22 <@matches> Eh I was going to make a video of the difference between GPU and CPU coord transforms but it's not that great
14:23 <@matches> Whatever you have done does not look happy
14:24 < sulix> It takes like 5 minutes to DebugDumpObjects with a million objects, but it works okay* after that.
14:24 <@matches> Yeah ok
14:24 < sulix> *well, sort-of.
14:25 < sulix> If you just want to show off the precision, getting rid of most of those objects is probably the right thing to do.
14:25 <@matches> Interesting things happen when you zoom out really far
14:25 <@matches> Do we care about that
14:25 < sulix> I'm going to go with "no".
14:26 <@matches> Ah, but the rectangles are not all the same size
14:26 < sulix> This is a product of rounding to the nearest pixel. They'd be fine with antialiasing.
14:29 <@matches> I have pushed a single line contribution
14:29 <@matches> I decided not to bother with all the changes I made to make the video prettier
14:29 <@matches> Since I can't actually capture my desktop properly anyway
14:30 <@matches> I suppose I could make it render bmps and ffmpeg them all but that is way too much effort
14:31 <@matches> So
14:31 <@matches> Literature Reviews
14:31 <@matches> They are a thing
14:38 <@matches> I probably should not reference an email thread
14:53 <@matches> In other news, I think this jvm FPU doesn't actually implement sqrt
14:57 <@matches> It always gives 0x0 on sqrt ops
14:57 <@matches> I certainly hope there isn't a jvm somewhere that just doesn't do square roots
14:58 <@matches> They probably hacked it into some other part of their project instead of putting it in the FPU
16:08 <@matches> So fprintf style formatting isn't very clever when it comes to floats vs doubles vs long doubles
16:11 <@matches> Eg: %lf will work for either floats or doubles and %f will work for either floats or doubles (by truncating) but %llf is the only thing that works for long doubles and it only works for long doubles
16:12 <@matches> s/truncating/casting whatever
16:52 <@matches> We can compile with long double
16:52 <@matches> I suspect this may break things but whatever
16:52 <@matches> Running calculatepi on motsugo to see how much difference it actually makes...
17:08 <@matches> Charles Babbage seems like an interesting fellow
17:09 <@matches> "e sought to prove the
17:09 <@matches> reality of the devil by drawing with his blood a
17:09 <@matches> circle on the floor and repeating the Lord’s prayer
17:09 <@matches> backward"
17:09 <@matches> The things one does for science
17:44 <@matches> Reading about Charles Babbage counts as Literature Review...
17:44 <@matches> Actually I'm trying to find a paper written *by* him
17:44 <@matches> Since apparently he came up with Floating Point representations
22:11 <@matches> Found an actual paper talking about floating points on GPUs
22:12 <@matches> It says they don't conform to IEEE and also the manufacturers don't like to tell people what they do do
22:12 <@matches> So they wrote a version of Paranoia, which was a test program for computers in the 1980s before IEEE, to work out the characteristics of flops on various GPUs
22:13 <@matches> This is probably of interest
22:14 <@matches> So far one of the best papers I have on algorithms in software is actually one talking about implementing those algorithms in hardware instead
22:15 <@matches> I also have a random obituary to Charles Babbage just because
22:16 <@matches> Unfortunately UWA directs me to some useless website that just tells me the citation details and doesn't give me a download for any of Babbage's papers
22:17 <@matches> He has some books but they are mostly about economics
22:18 <@matches> Would have been nice if he'd written something that says "I have invented floating point" but I guess not
22:18 <@matches> That's only really of historical interest but it'd be nice
--- Day changed Tue Apr 22 2014
01:17 <@matches> Urgh looking at the git diff
01:17 <@matches> I really have not accomplished much
01:30 <@matches> Oooh, motsugo finally got to a number of intervals where long double is better than double
11:56 < sulix> So it turns out that I've broken the open-source GL drivers.
11:56 < sulix> They don't support one of the features ("primitive restart") we need when in compatibility mode.
11:56 < sulix> So I guess now I've got to rewrite everything to use OpenGL 3.
14:47 <@matches> ?
14:48 <@matches> I should probably look more carefully at what the OpenGL stuff is doing nowdays
14:49 <@matches> Downgrading to OpenGL 3 sounds drastic
14:50 <@matches> Wait 3 is the OK one, 4 is the new one
14:50 <@matches> 1 is the ancient one
14:52 <@matches> I see pointer arithmetic...
14:53 <@matches> banana would be furious
14:53 <@matches> should be using std::super_ptr_unsegfaultable_arith
14:53 <@matches> (I am not a fan of the smart pointers)
14:55 <@matches> *indexData = 0xFFFFFFFF; // Primitive restart.
14:55 <@matches> I do not know what is going on here :S
14:58 <@matches> Ahh I get it now
14:58 <@matches> Reading commit messages turns out to be useful
15:04 <@matches> git blame for view.cpp reveals that I still own the opening braces on some things
15:05 <@matches> That's about it :P
15:06 <@matches> I'm going to keep looking at rounding errors and maybe have a better thing than calculating pi
15:06 <@matches> As a bench mark
15:07 <@matches> I might look at Paranoia
15:07 <@matches> Although it was originally in BASIC
15:07 <@matches> And ~7000 lines
15:07 <@matches> With almost no whitespace characters
15:07 <@matches> And totally no indents
15:08 <@matches> I sometimes get the feeling people used to be smarter than we are now...
15:08 <@matches> Then I remember that those people are ultimately responsible for the tools we use now
15:15 < sulix> Speaking of tools we use now, I think I've just got the debug font code to not only randomly corrupt a varible, but also cause valgrind to crash.
15:18 < sulix> Okay, we need to fix that makefile at some point.
15:38 <@matches> make clean?
15:41 <@matches> It's not actually swapping out main.cpp
15:41 <@matches> It just doesn't have main.o in the link objects and has main in the $(BIN) target and the testers in the tests/% target
15:42 <@matches> I guess that is swapping out main but MAIN is not being changed
15:42 <@matches> derp
15:45 <@matches> I think I fixed it?
15:45 < sulix> Ah. Well, you've got a merge conflict to look forward to.
15:45 <@matches> Not if I just NEVER COMMIT IT
15:46 <@matches> I'm going to call your fix being right and mine being a horrible hack
15:46 <@matches> Ok I pullsd some changes to graphics stuff, is that it or is there more?
15:46 < sulix> I haven't fixed it, I've just gone and bu(gg|ff)ered up the font stuff.
15:47 <@matches> So it's not meant to render unless something changes? But the debug font stuff is changing so it needs to keep rendering?
15:48 <@matches> I see a lot of "Flushing Debug Font arrays"
15:48 < sulix> The debug font stuff is separate from the whole view system.
15:48 <@matches> That makes sense
15:48 < sulix> It's just trying to fill up a buffer of quads with individual characters in it and then draws them when the buffer gets full.
15:49 < sulix> One more step on the path of getting rid of all of the OpenGL 1.1 stuff.
15:50 <@matches> Haha
15:50 <@matches> git stash seems to think I modified graphicsbuffer.h and screen.h
15:51 <@matches> git diff seems to think everything is identical
15:51 <@matches> I'm just going to git reset the things I didn't actually change...
15:52 < sulix> I do that far too often.
15:52 <@matches> Oh there is a comment "//test" for testing the Makefile
15:53 <@matches> And a comment "This isn't the Screen class?" where you copy/pasted the screen class description for the GraphicsBuffer class
15:53 <@matches> I don't think they need to be preserved
15:54 < sulix> Yeah, I should have got rid of that screen class bit by now.
15:55 <@matches> Have a 2 line commit
15:55 < sulix> The best kind.
15:55 <@matches> I really need to cut back on the new line creep
15:56 <@matches> It's like I can't add a line by itself without putting in extra whitespace 
15:57 <@matches> Uh oh we've ran out of coffee here
15:58 <@matches> I'm slightly scared by how much the graphics code has increased since I last actually understood how it worked...
15:59 <@matches> Can you change those *vertexData to *(vertexData++) or is that considered even uglier
16:03 < sulix> I thought of that, but given how much pointer arithmetic debugging I was going to do, I wanted it to be really obvious when the pointer was being incremented.
16:03 < sulix> The plan is to have a nice AppendFloat() function or similar that will do this eventually.
16:05 < sulix> Hmm: "Buffer usage warning: Analysis of buffer object 2 (bound to GL_ARRAY_BUFFER_ARB) usage indicates that the GPU is the primary producer and consumer of data for this buffer object. The usage hint supplied with this buffer object, GL_STATIC_DRAW, is inconsistent with this usage pattern. Try using GL_STREAM_COPY_ARB, GL_STATIC_COPY_ARB or GL_DYNAMIC_COPY_ARB instead.
16:06 < sulix> Thanks nVidia.
16:06 < sulix> Now if only we were using OpenGL 4.4 which got rid of buffer usage hints entirely.
16:29 <@matches> Also I think you forgot the naming scheme :P
16:30 <@matches> vertex_data
16:31 <@matches> I will go back to pretending to be doing a literature review
16:32 <@matches> Instead I will probably plot some graphs
16:48 <@matches> So
16:48 <@matches> If you look up "Handbook of Floating Point Arithmetic" on google (which lots of things like to reference these days)
16:48 <@matches> You can download the entire thing
16:48 <@matches> I was prepared to pay like $20 for it on amazon
16:49 <@matches> Oh amazon doesn't sell actual books anymore though does it?
16:49 <@matches> No they do have it
16:50 <@matches> For $100...
16:50 <@matches> I think I'll just stick with my free pdf thanks
16:55 <@matches> "Handbook" being 579 pages...
17:04 <@matches> I think if a textbook is citing blog posts we can probably get away with it
17:05 <@matches> Oh my god I love this textbook
17:05 < sulix> I was watching a conference talk last night when the presenter just said: "this technique is described on this guys blog. Here's a link."
17:05 <@matches> "Table 1.1 gives the results obtained by compiling Program 1.1 and running on a Pentium4, using the GNU Compiler Collection and the Linux system"
17:06 <@matches> [Complete C code for Program 1.1 follows]
17:06 <@matches> None of this "Pseudo code" crap
17:07 < sulix> Clearly we should get an extra 10% for every line of pointer arithmetic in our theses.
17:07 <@matches> There'
17:07 <@matches> s a problem here
17:07 <@matches> How do I not make the entire literature review just paraphrased from this one text book
17:08 <@matches> Mr Gullible and the Chaotic Bank Society!
17:08 <@matches> It has stories!
17:08 <@matches> Parents should read this textbook to their children
17:09 < sulix> I'm pretty certain I know someone with a data structures and algorithms picture book...
17:09 <@matches> That reminds me of a children's book I wrote about multithreading
17:10 <@matches> I should probably scan it one day
17:10 < sulix> Did it begin "Once upa timeon...
17:10 <@matches> I think it did actually
17:10 <@matches> Once upon a time there was a process who had a lot of work to do...
17:11 <@matches> "I should probably scan it one day" - Why not TODAY!
17:11  * matches goes searching
17:16 <@matches> It is no where to be found
17:16 <@matches> I distinctly remember going to throw it out and deciding not to, but not where it actually went
17:27 <@matches> So maybe compiling a bunch of HFPA's examples using our Real type is a good way to make benchmarks
17:27 <@matches> I don't know
17:27 <@matches> My part of the project seems to move further and further away from the document formats thing
17:27 <@matches> Maybe I'll try and compile the GPU Paranoia
17:28 <@matches> Hah
17:34 <@matches> It seems like whatever Mathematica does is what we should do
17:35 <@matches> I wonder if wolfram is open about how Mathematica actually works
17:35 <@matches> I don't think they are
17:35 <@matches> The CQM lecturer for physics found a bug in Mathematica's number representation once that she showed us
17:35 <@matches> Apparently she reported it years ago and it's still there
17:36 <@matches> This segued nicely into why we should learn fortran
--- Day changed Wed Apr 23 2014
14:00 <@matches> IEEE's float encoding is inconvenient
14:01 <@matches> The mantissa is like, reversed
14:01 <@matches> b_{23-i} * 2^{-i}
14:19 <@matches> And the implicit extra 1 except when it isn't is a pain in the ass as well
14:19 <@matches> It's like
14:19 <@matches> I can't just copy the right bits I have to think
14:19 <@matches> What is this
14:19 <@matches> Mental effort
14:19 <@matches> Blargh
14:20 <@matches> I should have just stuck with the 8 bit floats with their 2 sign bits
14:20 <@matches> The hydra float
15:17 <@matches> Wow you get really different representations with an IEEE encoding of the bits
15:17 <@matches> ...
15:17 <@matches> I think I liked just treating the two parts as integers in the order they were stored better
15:18 <@matches> I have to call pow(3) and a floating point division for every '1' in the mantissa to get it to agree with IEEE
15:19 <@matches> Unless I'm missing some obvious trick
15:20 <@matches> But in IEEE the mantissa is not an integer
15:37 <@matches> Ooookkk
15:38 <@matches> You're precision doesn't disappear as fast when you do it that way
15:38 <@matches> Your
15:38 <@matches> Whatever
--- Day changed Thu Apr 24 2014
14:40 -!- You're now known as notmatches
14:40 -!- You're now known as matches
14:41 <@matches> Ok, less spammy channel time
14:41 -!- mode/#ipdf [+b m:matches!*@*] by matches
14:41 <@matches> Spam
14:41 <@matches> Dammit
14:42 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
14:42 < matches> Spam
14:43 < matches> Yay
14:43 < matches> ... this will all appear in the next git commit won't it -_-
14:52 -!- You're now known as notmatches
14:52 -!- You're now known as matches
--- Day changed Sat Apr 26 2014
00:45 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
00:46 <@matches> Incoming "at least it is self consistent in its wrongness" floating point conversion
00:48 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
00:48 < matches> Still can't talk
00:48 < matches> Excellent
--- Day changed Sun Apr 27 2014
17:10 < sulix> I finally got ipdf working on my laptop again by porting everything to OpenGL 3.1.
17:10 < sulix> I'm so sorry about how ugly the code now is, by the way.
18:04 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
18:04 -!- Pommers [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
18:05 < Pommers> You know what a really good feature for a PDF reader would be? The ability to have it completely borderless without menus, so you just see the page!
18:05 -!- Pommers [[email protected]] has left #ipdf []
18:06 <@matches> Wat
18:06 <@matches> Well we've got that
18:06 <@matches> We just can't read pdfs
18:07 <@matches> Did you get much done not going to the cleanup?
18:07 <@matches> I managed to transfer some dust from one location to another location, and then the wind blew it back in my face
18:08 <@matches> Then I looked at Frames' proposal and despaired at how much it is actually complete and has words in it
18:08 <@matches> I think he's onto something with his plan of actually writing things
18:14 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: ipdf the pdf doesn't stand for pdf
18:14 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: ipdf the pdf doesn't stand for pdf but the df stands for df
18:14 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: Sort of
18:15 <@matches> I need a script to auto mute me...
18:15 < sulix> I spent basically all of today on that one commit.
18:15 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
18:15 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
18:15 < sulix> Whether or not that was more useful than the cleanup remains to be seen.
18:16 <@matches> I should look at it I guess :P
18:16 < sulix> It compiles*
18:16 < sulix> *but has lots of warnings.
18:16 <@matches> It can't be worse than my tester that converts floats to floats
18:17 < sulix> I'm pretty certain it can be and is worse.
18:17 <@matches> However I've realised I kind of actually do need to be able to do that
18:17 <@matches> Woah 3k+ lines
18:17 <@matches> * 4k+ lines
18:18 < sulix> Most of it was autogenerated, but still...
18:18  * matches weeps for OpenGL 1
18:18 < sulix> You don't realise how much you miss it until it's gone...
18:19 <@matches> So what does all this stuff actually do
18:19 <@matches> Because I could see rectangles and things just fine without it
18:19 < sulix> Exactly the same thing as before but it works on my laptop now.
18:19 <@matches> I see a shader program, that's obviously good
18:20 <@matches> Actually I see code for a shader but no shader yet
18:20 < sulix> The shaders are all #defines, I'm afraid.
18:22 <@matches> What was wrong with your laptop?
18:23 < sulix> It doesn't support the OpenGL compatibility mode, so --- as I was using the OpenGL 3.1 feature of "primitive restart", I had to code the entire thing in OpenGL 3.1
18:23 < sulix> On the bright side, this paves the way for doing things like getting the GPU to use doubles.
18:26 <@matches> Ooh
18:27 < sulix> (also halves)
18:27 < sulix> (halfs?)
18:27 <@matches> Do GPUs use IEEE floats? I had a reference that seemed to be complaining they didn't
18:27 <@matches> Although it was circa 2007
18:28 < sulix> I don't think that there's a requirement that they internally use them, but they do read and write them.
18:28 < sulix> A bit like how x86 processors use(d) 80 bit reals internally and rounded when reading/writing to memory.
18:28 <@matches> Do halves have a different mantissa encoding
18:29 <@matches> The examples given on wikipedia seem wrong
18:30 < sulix> I think this is the canonical description: http://www.opengl.org/registry/specs/NV/half_float.txt
18:33 <@matches> That would be before IEEE specified half (binary16) but its the same summation for the mantissa anyway
18:33 <@matches> binary16 is (briefly) in the 2008 revised 754
18:34 <@matches> So I think wikipedia is giving a wrong example, but I'm not confident enough to go and change wikipedia
18:35 <@matches> Also I just realised my conversion of the mantissa to a Real is horrible
18:35 <@matches> Oh well, it can get fixed later
18:36 <@matches> Hopefully I can finish my fluid mechanics assignment quick enough to actually work on my progress report / proposal / thing
18:36 <@matches> (Hah)
18:36 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
18:37 < sulix> Yeah, I'm going to see how much Lit review I can write for tomorrow. :/
--- Day changed Mon Apr 28 2014
22:06 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
22:10 <@matches> Must find motivation to work on Lit Review at 10pm...
--- Day changed Tue Apr 29 2014
10:06 <@matches> Must find motivation to work on Lit Review at 10am...
--- Day changed Wed Apr 30 2014
13:04 <@matches> I wanted to rasterise a vector image so I could compare them at the same scale ("These look the same!") and zoomed ("This one looks crappier!)
13:04 <@matches> But because vector graphics editor/viewers don't use pixels as units but they do when they export to a bitmap, it's difficult to actually get them to look the same
13:04 <@matches> Before scaling
13:05 <@matches> I guess a screenshot tool might be the best way
13:06 <@matches> I don't know if I need to do this really
13:07 <@matches> I guess Mechanical and Chemical engineers marking this will probably benefit from having an example
13:07 <@matches> Doesn't everyone know the difference between vector and raster graphics
13:07 <@matches> Where was that paper that had tux vector and rasterised
13:10 <@matches> Ah, worth2003xr.pdf
13:11 <@matches> If it's in a paper I guess it can go in a Lit Review
13:11 <@matches> At least until I have something better
13:15 <@matches> Kind of ironic that the image I am using was actually scanned first as a bitmap and then converted to vector using Trace Bitmap
13:57 <@matches> Ah, it's actually impossible to get it to be exactly the same, because even taking a screenshot on my own screen it will then be different depending on the display of whoever reads the digital pdf
13:57 <@matches> Oh well
13:58 <@matches> I suppose "It looks shittier" will have to suffice without trying to make them look exactly the same before scaling
13:59 <@matches> I have spent WAY too long making this example
13:59 <@matches> I could have just gone "See \cite{worth2003xr.pdf}"
16:00 <@matches> So it might be worth talking about dpi in pdf viewers and how it SUCKS
20:17 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
21:14 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
21:46 <@matches> I have perpetrated XML on the codebase
21:47 <@matches> I have grand visions of our code supporting SVGs
21:47 <@matches> I also have grand visions of actually doing a Literature Review
21:50  * sulix git pull's with some trepidation.
21:52 < sulix> Never heard of pugixml before but it looks okay.
21:55 <@matches> The W3C XML specification is pretty terrifying
21:56 <@matches> I will feel more like I've satisfied the "Document Formats" part of the Literature Review if I say some things about it
21:57 <@matches> Well SVG in particular
21:57 <@matches> SVG defines a "minimum" precision of IEEE binary32 
21:58 <@matches> But there's a specification for "High Quality" viewers that have to use binary64
21:58 <@matches> That's probably the only real thing relevant directly to our problem
--- Day changed Thu May 01 2014
01:23 <@matches> It's May 1st
01:23 <@matches> This means we can no longer say "The Literature Review is due Next Month"
01:23 <@matches> IT'S DUE THIS MONTH
01:23  * matches freaks out
01:23 <@matches> ... but after sleep
01:25 <@matches> Page 12 of my Literature Review by the way
01:25 <@matches> Is the only page I like
16:34 <@matches> The C version of paranoia compiled for me
16:34 <@matches> Not terribly exciting (I have an IEEE 754 compatible processor! Amazing)
22:17 <@matches> W Kahan's website is a very interesting if slightly difficult read
22:24 <@matches> He appears to have written this 80 page pdf in a day
22:27 <@matches> It kind of reads like one of those religious propaganda pamphlets
22:27 <@matches> "Java is the Work of Satan"
22:27 <@matches> "Kernighan-Ritcie C floating-point semantics are the light"
22:28 <@matches> But every so often he has a graph or example that makes him seem less crazy
22:34 <@matches> "And now Java forbits you to mention or use extra-precise long double arithmetic, though IEEE Standard 754 recommends its use and over 95% of computers on desktops have it built into their hardware. You paid for it, but Java denies you its benefits."
22:34 <@matches> Java has long double now right?
22:34 <@matches> Although that JOP I was looking at was just 32 bit
22:36 <@matches> Ah, java.lang.math.BigDecimal
22:37 <@matches> "But be careful with division, because it will throw exceptions if it's like 1/3, then it will be Non-terminating decimal expansion."
22:37 <@matches> That sounds horrifying
22:40 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
--- Day changed Sat May 03 2014
22:01 < sulix> My crazy idea to you would be to research p-adic number representations.
22:01 < sulix> It's been a while, but they were mentioned a couple of times in pure maths units and seemed interesting/crazy and I can't remember much about them.
22:28 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
22:29 <@matches> I will look at them, the "just use a float but with more bits until you run out of memory" doesn't seem a very well thought out approach
22:29 <@matches> Maybe someone actually cares enough to research better ways
22:29 <@matches> I mean, something's wrong with an idea when you can write "1/3" and have a runtime exception (re: Java BigNumber)
22:30 <@matches> I plan to write some nasty things about Java based on Kahan's rants so as to gloss over the fact that it has BigNumber built into it and forstall the inevitable "Why didn't you use Java!"
22:31 < sulix> I think we want to truncate to whatever the most accurate you can see at the given zoom level.
22:31 <@matches> Yeah
22:32 <@matches> It annoys me that XML and HTML specs don't have a PDF version
22:32 < sulix> I've been printing to pdf for some of those things.
22:33 <@matches> None of the links to different sections would work though
22:35 <@matches> Specifications are thrilling
22:35 <@matches> "How to read this specification"
22:35 <@matches> "This specification should be read like all other specifications"
22:35 <@matches> Oh wait
22:35 <@matches> It actually gets better
22:35 <@matches> Is that...
22:35 <@matches> Humour!
22:36 <@matches> I thought that wasn't allowed!
22:36 <@matches> "First it should be read cover-to-cover, multiple times. Then, it should be read backwards at least once. Then it should be read by picking random sections from the contents list and following all the cross references"
22:37 <@matches> As much as I love the idea of reading 626 pages of specification backwards...
--- Day changed Tue May 06 2014
00:39 <@matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/sam/rate-my-litreview.py
00:39 <@matches> Tim will be thrilled!
00:40 <@matches> I'm probably going to really regret making that
00:41 <@matches> The regret is rising to the surface
00:41 <@matches> It's an example of an interactive document format
00:41 <@matches> The pixels or perish guy would approve
00:43 <@matches> So much regret
00:43 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
23:37 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
23:38 <@matches> So, I have this book called "Computer Graphics" that is pretty amazing
23:38 <@matches> Funnily enough it has all the algorithms in it
23:38 <@matches> For computer graphics
23:38 <@matches> Probably should have been reading it ages ago but I thought we were worrying more about precision
23:38 <@matches> I don't even know anymore
23:39 <@matches> Have to read 500pg textbook on graphics, 500pg textbook on floating point numbers, 500pg PDF/PostScript standards...
23:39 <@matches> Too many pages
23:39 <@matches> Anyway it has a section on Octrees
23:39 <@matches> But don't worry
23:39 <@matches> It mentions Quad trees
23:39 <@matches> It also actually mentions fractals
23:39 <@matches> As a thing
23:40 <@matches> In other news, extending the document we have at the moment to allow anything other than rectangles will be interesting
23:41 <@matches> Did you do this on purpose? :P
--- Day changed Wed May 07 2014
12:32 <@matches> We need to do something about all the warnings generated by the magic OpenGL 3 stuff
12:32 <@matches> It's making it hard to sport warnings that I actually care about
12:33 <@matches> Like: You forgot to return a value in this function :S
13:52 <@matches> Gah I did it again
13:52 <@matches> auto is dangerous
13:53 <@matches> Possibly because it's buggy
13:53 <@matches> I can't actually see any compiler warnings at all
17:39 <@matches> So you can almost maybe see a difference between beziers calculated using floats and doubles
17:40 <@matches> If you squint
17:40 <@matches> And view them on different monitors
17:41 <@matches> Ah there we go
17:41 <@matches> I successfully broke it
17:42 <@matches> When you round to pixel positions it doesn't make a difference
17:43 <@matches> But on the other hand if you calculate beziers using really big numbers they look wierd :P
17:43 <@matches> That's important
17:43 <@matches> Because if you have an arbitrary infinite document you might be at coordinate positions that are really big
17:43 <@matches> Captain Obvious strikes again
17:45 <@matches> I think I will make a video of a circle moving towards infinity
17:45 <@matches> This probably won't help the literature view much but it's too tempting to resist
17:46 <@matches> I gave up trying to deal with our document format so I currently just generate vector<pair<T, T> > and then map that to a bitmap :P
--- Day changed Thu May 08 2014
10:57 <@matches> So circle was a terrible example
10:57 <@matches> It stays as a circle
10:58 <@matches> Hopefully the first curve I tried wasn't just a bug
12:31 <@matches> I think it was a bug
13:35 <@matches> There are bezier things in ipdf/code/src/tests now
13:57 < sulix> I am very confused. 
13:57 < sulix> It generates bitmaps of circles in varying shades of red?
13:58  * sulix decides to actually read the code.
14:03 < sulix> Ah: I see what it's doing now.
14:16 <@matches> Your first comment was pretty accurate :S
14:17 <@matches> I was trying to obtain some amazing animation of a circle that hopelessly collapsed or exploded or something
14:19 < sulix> I'm slightly terrified that it's generating a vector of points.
14:19 < sulix> On the other hand, it looks like the rest of the world is realising what a mistake making OpenGL 3 terrifying was.
14:19 <@matches> Yeah that's a bit lazy
14:19 <@matches> Although, is returning a vector optimisable?
14:20 < sulix> In C++11 it is.
14:20 < sulix> (But not C++98)
14:20 <@matches> C++11 is growing on me
14:20 < sulix> Yeah: I've found the same thing.
14:21 < sulix> I'm a bit scared about what that means, though.
14:21 < sulix> Maybe one day I'll think boost was a good thing, and then I'll truly be lost.
14:21 <@matches> Hahaha
14:21 <@matches> The lambdas remind me of Javascript :S
14:22 < sulix> I think lambdas are one of those things that are good for you in moderation, but poisonous in large quantities.
14:22 <@matches> Probably
14:23 < sulix> I won't be around on Monday, btw, so I'll miss the meeting.
14:23 < sulix> (Also I'm missing out on Codejam, sadly)
14:23 <@matches> No!
14:23 <@matches> (To both of those things)
14:24 <@matches> Oh god that means I need to make double the progress
14:25 < sulix> I spoke to Tim, he said that it might be worth cancelling the meeting altogether.
14:26 <@matches> Haha
14:26 <@matches> I'm not sure if I should take that as a good or bad sign
14:27 <@matches> I'm not going great with the literature review
14:28 < sulix> I rated a bit of it.
14:28 < sulix> (Though there wasn't a submit button, and it took me a few goes to get through the Turing test)
14:28 <@matches> Page 20?
14:28 <@matches> Haha
14:28 <@matches> The turing test defaults to the accepted answer though!
14:28 <@matches> You have to actually change it to get it wrong
14:29 < sulix> Yeah, I thought it was a trick question.
14:29 <@matches> Maybe I'll give Tim a slightly less joke-worthy version of Rate My LitReview when the draft is done
14:29 <@matches> ... when hell has frozen over...
14:29 <@matches> Whichever comes first
14:31 < sulix> You should read James Mickens' USENIX articles: mkdir -p vogl/vogl_build/bin/release64 && cd $_                                                                                                                                                                                  
14:31 < sulix> cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release -DBUILD_X64=On ../../..                                                                                                                                                                         
14:31 < sulix> make -j 10
14:31 < sulix> (Also I should paste the right thing in)
14:31 < sulix> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/mickens/
14:32 <@matches> Ah yes, I will read those at some point
14:32  * matches downloads the first one, telling himself he will not read it until working on the lit review
14:33  * matches reads it anyway
14:33  * sulix feels guilty about not doing lit review at the moment, too.
14:40 <@matches> Have you heard of /read Computer Graphics by Hearn and Baker?
14:40 <@matches> I have the ancient "In the dawn before OpenGL 1.0" version
14:41 <@matches> There is a section mentioning "GL"
14:41 <@matches> I don't think they use GPU anywhere, they call them "Display Rasterisers" or something
14:42 <@matches> Display Processor
14:43 <@matches> A Display Processing Unit is a Display Processor for a Random Scan (vector) display system
14:43 <@matches> Input devices are interesting too
14:44 <@matches> "Input Dials"
14:44 <@matches> A box of variable resistors basically
14:45 <@matches> Working with computers in the 70s/80s would have been interesting although probably just as horrible as it is today
14:45 <@matches> But at least it would have been less "webby"
14:46 <@matches> Where "How do I centre a div" is a deep philosophical question
14:48 <@matches> I should probably obtain / read a newer edition of this if I want to put it in my lit review?
14:48 <@matches> Although it is referrring to the same papers we had about Bressenheim
15:14 <@matches> Oh my god they mention precision!
--- Log closed Thu May 08 17:04:49 2014
--- Log opened Thu May 08 18:56:39 2014
18:56 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
18:56 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [0 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 2 normal]
18:56 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 3 secs
19:55 < matches> Bresenham made a tutorial on rasterisation
19:56 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
19:56 <@matches> Bresenham has a nice tutorial about rasterising
19:56 <@matches> Ties in with the "Since mankind came down from the trees" angle
19:57 <@matches> "Needlepoint or counted cross-stitch, such as that popularised by the image on a box of Whitman Sampler chocolates..."
19:57 <@matches> I'm not sure how to relate the rasterisation stuff to the precision stuff
19:58 <@matches> You have to make a pretty big rounding error to end up in the wrong pixel
19:59 <@matches> Hearn and Baker mention rounding errors as being one reason why you don't want to use floats and then round them when rasterising things
19:59 <@matches> The (bigger) reason being that floating point operations are expensive
20:00 <@matches> They say pixels could move from the line in the DDA algorithm for long lines... I wonder how long they mean... 1e38 pixels? :P
20:02 <@matches> I want to actually make a drawing of things that look different due to rounding errors dammit!
20:03 <@matches> None of this "here is a sentence or two of handwaving"
20:04 <@matches> Maybe rounding errors were a problem on computers with 8 bit floats and terrible resolution displays :P
20:04 <@matches> Except the worse your resolution the less you'd notice rounding errors
20:04 <@matches> Well the more you'd notice them, the less they'd happen?
20:04 <@matches> I don't know
20:05 -!- mode/#ipdf [-o matches] by matches
20:30 < sulix> These were recommended: http://www.amazon.com/Forman-S.-Acton/e/B001IYTXGY/?_encoding=UTF8&tag=mollrock-20&linkCode=ur2&qid=1358713701&camp=1789&sr=8-3&creative=390957
20:30 < sulix> (By a blog post, which turned out not to be about floating point precision, but does mention it: http://mollyrocket.com/casey/stream_0009.html )
21:21 < matches> I'll look at them at some point
21:22 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
21:22 <@matches> I'll look at them at some point
21:22 <@matches> I sort of got bogged down explaining how lines are drawn :S
21:22 <@matches> Graphics is complicated dammit
21:22 <@matches> I'll probably get more done if I just write about everything no matter how irrelevant
21:23 <@matches> Sooner or later I'll actually write something important and the rest can be appendicised
21:23 <@matches> Hopefully
21:25 <@matches> Oh dear, I have located some primitive form of blog
21:26 <@matches> Well, it talks about things, so I'll reference it...
21:26 <@matches> "The good-looking textured light-sourced bouncy fun smart and stretchy page"
21:26 <@matches> It's generally best to not go up a directory from the page you are looking at
--- Day changed Sun May 18 2014
15:47 <@matches> So things are due soonish
15:47 <@matches> :S
20:09 <@matches> Are you alive, because I don't think I'm alive
20:10 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
20:11 <@matches> I'm feeling pretty guilty about all that work I didn't do last week...
20:47  * sulix agrees entirely.
22:11 <@matches> I give up
22:11 <@matches> I will just have to face disappointment O'clock tomorrow
22:22 < sulix> I still have to put more work in before I feel I even deserve disappointment, I think... :/
22:23 < sulix> I made the mistake of deleting the irrelevant bits from my lit review, and now there's almost nothing left!
--- Day changed Mon May 19 2014
08:03 < sulix> At the risk of causing terror: is your final Lit review due on Friday too?
08:05  * sulix has discovered that his is, and is currently trying to work out how to type in the foetal position.
09:59 <@matches> Yeah it's due on Friday
09:59 <@matches> Today is not off to a good start
10:00 <@matches> I missed an 8am lab but I can't blame the 2 buses I missed because I actually forgot about it
10:00 <@matches> Then I missed the 2 buses
10:00 < sulix> Ouch.
10:00 <@matches> I think missing my tutorial this afternoon is a bad idea but on the other hand... lit review
10:02 < sulix> I'm frantically writing irrelevant stuff now.
10:03 < sulix> I'm a little concerned about my entire section on "Document Formats" basically only referencing some specs and "Pixels or Perish".
10:03 <@matches> That's what I do
10:03 < sulix> Whereas I have like 20 references for graphics papers that are almost totally irrelevant.
10:04 <@matches> I have a reference for shading on a vector display
10:04 <@matches> That's pretty irrelevant
10:04 < sulix> I've started referencing data structures that are "kinda similar I guess" to the Quadtree, as well. :/
10:05 <@matches> I ham fisted it in with the paper about embedding 3d figures in documents
10:05 <@matches> Like "in the 70s even though people had algorithms for things they still drew the diagrams by hand!"
10:05 < sulix> Peasants!
10:06 <@matches> My section on number representations is pretty shite
10:06 <@matches> I still haven't finished floats
10:06 < sulix> Mine is currently under construction, as it were.
10:06 <@matches> And the whole point is supposed to be that floats are not good enough
10:07 < sulix> I've got a terrible thing about floats, but have started talking about arb. precision floats now.
10:07 <@matches> All I know about the alternatives are that they are basically still floats
10:07 <@matches> But with more bits...
10:07 < sulix> I also have some maths I made up that is maybe wrong.
10:07 <@matches> Will you be here in time for doom O'clock?
10:08 <@matches> *cough* I meant eleven
10:08 < sulix> We can but hope.
10:08 < sulix> I'm sort-of counting on the meeting not happening until 11:20 or so. :/
10:09 <@matches> I'll show him Rate My Lit Review
10:09 <@matches> That'll distract attention from the lack of Lit Review
10:09 <@matches> I'm also assuming no one is ever going to read these IRC logs
10:09 < sulix> We can but hope.
10:10 < sulix> I'm feeling dirty because I've just referenced the java standard library.
10:10 < sulix> Out damnéd 
10:10 < sulix> java.math.BigDecimal.
10:15 <@matches> I was going to reference that at some point
10:16 <@matches> I feel like you've made more progress than I have been
10:17 <@matches> Possibly the decision to sleep last night was a poor one
10:26 < sulix> Having done the opposite: it wasn't.
10:30 <@matches> Argh I just got the icedove reminder for the meeting
10:32 <@matches> So I washed out my Guild (TM) Keep Cup (TM) this morning and now my tea tastes like detergent
16:37 <@matches> We didn't get the random asking about photoshop in here
16:37 <@matches> I feel left out
22:49 <@matches> sjy in #ucc mentioned Knuth's Metafontbook in regards to rendering fonts at infinite precision
22:49 <@matches> Yet another thing to get around to reading :S
22:49 <@matches> Before Friday :S
22:50 <@matches> Wednesday I guess if we meet Tim's deadline for a draft :P
23:08 <@matches> I guess I was meaning to reference the TeX book at *some* point
23:08 <@matches> So many things
23:08 <@matches> Oh dear it's 11pm already
23:08 <@matches> :-(
23:09 <@matches> Ok, so 
23:09 <@matches> Metafont seems to basically be symbolic ways to define fonts
23:10 <@matches> Also Beziers
23:10 <@matches> All the beziers
23:10 <@matches> Good
23:11 <@matches> I was on the right track when I said Beziers were really important
23:11 <@matches> Knuth is so detailed
23:12 <@matches> Now I feel guilty about my cartesian line
23:12 <@matches> That I didn't reference Rene Descartes La Geometrie 1637
23:12 <@matches> I'm a monster
23:15 <@matches> I think instead of thinking of things as either interpreted or dom-y like Hayes does, the best way is to think about "What is in the document (eg: DOM)" and "How it is drawn" and you can either have your format care about both things or just one but obviously the most useful formats allow for both
23:16 <@matches> Actually scratch that
23:16 <@matches> I don't know anymore
23:16 <@matches> It's too philosophical
23:16  * matches goes back to floating point nubers
23:18 <@matches> So I wonder how much of PostScript is a shameless rip off of METAFONT
23:18 <@matches> It's not like you have to give credit when you are trying to sell something
--- Day changed Tue May 20 2014
09:29 <@matches> So it's quite easy to do a 
09:29 <@matches> "fractal" in SVG/Javascript
09:29 <@matches> Where easy does not necessarily mean it isn't horrifying
09:30 <@matches> Aaand there goes all my RAM
21:43 <@matches> Casually slipping in a footnote directing the reader to rabbitgame.net in my lit review...
21:43 <@matches> So my webby documents section is probably my least shitly written, or maybe that's just because it has pointless pretty pictures in it
21:44 <@matches> It is basically
21:44 <@matches> "Here are the w3c standards"
21:44 <@matches> "Here are some pretty pictures made with SVGs, can't you just see the DOM leaching out of them?"
21:44 <@matches> :S
21:45 <@matches> I'm not sure how well I am treading the line between actually reviewing literature and just giving examples of things
--- Day changed Wed May 21 2014
12:09 <@matches> PDF is a mess of a "standard"
12:09 <@matches> As are all useful things I suppose
12:09 <@matches> As far as I can work out
12:09 <@matches> It is not a DOM but a graph
12:10 <@matches> However, it is also PostScript-y
12:10 <@matches> But they deal with "interactivity"
12:10 <@matches> By including XHTML
12:10 <@matches> And having an "action dictionary" which is literally just a string of javascript
12:11 <@matches> I just
12:11 <@matches> Can't even begin to understand how it all works
12:12 <@matches> But yeah, not really "Crippled Postscript" so much as "Everything including the kitchen sink except for a few bits of Postscript"
12:13 <@matches> So the Postscript part of it is no longer turing complete, but I don't think you can pretend something in which you can stick arbitrary Javascript isn't turing complete :S
12:13 <@matches> Oh and even though they have XHTML-ish stuff their Javascript API is totally different to W3Cs
12:13 <@matches> Hooray
12:14 <@matches> I suppose the fact that nothing except Adobe products seem to actually use Javascript/XHTML stuff is telling us something about this approach
12:15 <@matches> I reckon the ideal standard
12:15 <@matches> Would probably be the DOM but with the "we actually care about efficiency" parts of PDF
12:18 <@matches> The interactivity of web pages combined with the actually professional looking type setting of PDF
12:18 <@matches> Or just plain text files
12:19 <@matches> Plain text files are an underapreciated Document Format
12:23 <@matches> Ah, I think it sort of makes sense now
12:23 <@matches> PDF uses what is essentially PostScript to construct this graph thing
12:24 <@matches> And the graph thing can have elements in it that are just "Make this part of the graph the equivelant DOM from this XHTML"
12:25 <@matches> And it can also have elements that are "Execute this Javascript to dynamically change this graph"
12:25 <@matches> But the normal elements are just like PostScript as it would be sent to a printer to show the thing statically
12:26 <@matches> So when it's rendered it is interpreting the Postscripty bits and when its being interacted with it is updating the Postscripty bits
12:26 <@matches> I *think*
12:26 <@matches> This is different from the webby standards which don't really specify how things are actually drawn
12:27 <@matches> No wait it's not
12:27 <@matches> Argh I don't know
12:27 <@matches> You can't classify this shit
12:27 <@matches> Document Goes In -> Pixels Come Out
12:28  * matches despairs
12:49 < sulix> You will find (slightly) less despair if you relegate javascript to the footnote where it belongs. :P
13:07 < sulix> Hmm... the HTML 2 spec looks like it almost got properly IETF standardised. Might just reference that.
13:12 < sulix> Oh, they obsoleted it and replaced it with a "Just look at w3c" standard...
13:17 <@matches> But PDF isn't just flattened PostScript
13:17 <@matches> It is like, everything
13:17 <@matches> All merged into one horrifying standard
13:18 <@matches> Oh well
13:18 <@matches> I made my shape example in PostScript by removing the alpha
13:18 <@matches> I'm not sure whether there's any point in including it as a figure
13:18 <@matches> Most of the PostScript file is taken up by the header
13:19 < sulix> Holy balls, I just looked up the CSS spec. There are like 200 of them.
13:19 <@matches> Yeah I just used CSS2
13:19 <@matches> The others are like
13:19 <@matches> Colours
13:19 <@matches> Or something
13:20 < sulix> That's what I'm using, too. 
13:20 < sulix> The tired and tested "what gets top result on google" method of paper selection.
13:20 <@matches> Closer examination reveals that most of the PostScript header is defining commands to be shorter :P
13:20 <@matches> Amazing
13:20 <@matches> Cairo probably needs to get referenced somewhere
13:21 <@matches> If only so I have a way out of my Javascript in PDF section by saying that Cairo doesn't support it
13:21 <@matches> I desperately need to escape the Javascript
13:25 < sulix> I think the secret is to use the phrase "rendering model" wherever possible.
13:51 <@matches> Dammit
13:51 <@matches> So I have that wierd shape in both SVG and PostScript now
13:51 <@matches> The SVG version fits beautifully and is wonderfully concise and you can see how SVG works
13:51 <@matches> The PostScript version is just like, BLARGH WALL OF TEXT
13:51 <@matches> ALSO WE DON'T HAVE ALPHA
13:52 <@matches> So I'm not sure whether to cut just the PostScript one or both of them now :S
13:53 <@matches> PDF looks distinctly not like it is just PostScript the more I think about it
13:53 <@matches> It's like "We are using the same model as PostScript in that commands go in and pixels come out"
13:54 <@matches> By that logic SVG is also the same
13:54 <@matches> I think what I should do is just make an appendix
13:54 <@matches> "A Shape in 20 Document Formats"
13:56 <@matches> SVG really is the most concise compared to PS and PDF
14:53 <@matches> Right I can simplify the god awful mess of PS a bit
14:54 <@matches> I'm hoping I can just say "Here is the PS reference and here is some PostScript as you can see it is interpreted-ish"
14:54 <@matches> Cairo appeared to draw each element backwards and reverse it after drawing it
14:54 <@matches> It is stupid
14:57 <@matches> Like, why bother doing definitions like m == moveto etc
14:57 <@matches> If you're just going to stick pointless crap in
14:57 <@matches> My document is half the size without using single letter definitions
15:31 < sulix> Welp. The wrath of Tim is upon us...
15:41 <@matches> I'm choosing to latch onto the "quite good" rather than "some way to go"
15:45 <@matches> It sort of sounds like "Well at least you gave me a pdf file" :P
15:48 < sulix> One day, all anyone will use are ipdf files...
15:50 <@matches> Right, TeX is very different from PostScript I think
15:50 <@matches> At least, pure tex
15:50 < sulix> Also, holy mackerel, I might have just found a paper on precision in document formats...
15:50 <@matches> :O
15:50 < sulix> It even quotes Kahan
15:50 <@matches> :OOO
15:50 < sulix> https://www.tug.org/TUGboat/tb28-3/tb90beebe.pdf
15:50 <@matches> What is it
15:50 <@matches> Emergency rewrite of entire lit review
15:51 < sulix> It's a bit TeX specific, but still.
15:51 <@matches> That's alright
15:51 <@matches> It ties in amazingly with my decision to hamfist TeX and Metafont into the lit review
15:52 <@matches> Although I'm not sure it is wise because it means I have to talk about fonts and things
15:53 <@matches> I wonder if "Fonts are just bezier curves" is sufficient
15:53 <@matches> They are always treated seperately to curved paths
15:53 <@matches> Which is understandable because it's a bit inconvenient if you want text in a document to have to define the paths for each glyph
15:54 <@matches> Anyway I'm glad my assertion that Beziers are the only curves we care about is proving true
16:33 <@matches> Are you in a position to retrieve this "envelope"
16:57 < sulix> Not tonight: I'm going to pick it up tomorrow morning.
16:58 < sulix> And hopefully replace it with a sparkling, glorious review of literature.
17:00 <@matches> :(
17:00 <@matches> I cannot concentrate now
17:00 <@matches> Because I haven't read the comments, I could be doing everything wrong!
17:02 <@matches> Admitedly I'm technically "working" right now
17:27 < sulix> My "Document Format Taxonomy" is almost complete... Just need to add SVG.
17:28 < sulix> (And close my eyes and assert that Microsoft Word documents are not actually documents or something)
17:28 <@matches> I am jealous
17:29 <@matches> I just added PostScript it's not particularly well written
17:29 < sulix> (I don't have any pretty pictures or code, though)
17:29 < sulix> I've discovered that, despite having totally different numbers for "implementation limits", the PostScript and PDF specs are (a) talking about the same data types and (b) lying.
17:32 <@matches> Bahaha
17:32 < sulix> Do you know where the SVG spec mentions precision?
17:33 <@matches> Ah, I regret not noting the page number
17:33 <@matches> But a text search should find it
17:33 <@matches> It specifically says things
17:33 <@matches> I am interested in whether or not Javascript is subject to the same requirements
17:34 < sulix> All I've found is "must be correct within 1px at 1:1 zoom", and "It is suggested that viewers attempt to keep a high degree of accuracy when zooming".
17:35 <@matches> There's something that is about IEEE floats
17:35 < sulix> Aaah... and a "High-Quality Viewer" must support at least double precision on coordinate system transforms.
17:35 < sulix> But "IEEE" does not show up in a search of the spec.
17:36 <@matches> Ah right
17:36 <@matches> My brain just inserts IEEE whenever I hear "single" or "double" now
17:36 <@matches> "An IEEE Double Episode of MasterChef!"
17:36 <@matches> (Which would probably be infinitely more exciting)
17:37 < sulix> (Or would it be NaNly more exciting...? :P)
17:38 <@matches> Speaking of "where things are" are we meant to reference page numbers in standards?
17:38 <@matches> I guess I'll find out when I read Tim's comments
17:39 <@matches> Excellent my lab finished 20 minutes early
17:39 <@matches> And also 40 minutes later than the other demonstrators :S
17:40 <@matches> Do you want me to pick up your comments and scan them and email them to you? :P
17:40 < sulix> That'd be great.
17:40 < sulix> Also probably depressing.
17:41 < sulix> But great.
17:41 <@matches> Alright, ETA Transperth + Scanner is probably broken O'clock
17:42 < sulix> I'll savour the blissful ignorance.
19:50 <@matches> I don't think scanning is worth it, I'll just spam the feedback into this channel
19:50 <@matches> First up, David's Lit Review
19:50 <@matches> There is either "Gool" or "Cool" or possibly "Good" written and underlined on the first page
19:51 <@matches> The opening paragraph is "A little overdramatic?"
19:51 <@matches> (Since it's a question, I'd like to voice a "No" opinion here)
19:51 <@matches> The DOM in a footnote is not defined
19:52 <@matches> Page 2
19:52 <@matches> There is a tick
19:52 <@matches> A question mark in regards to the hyphenated bit in the rendering paragraph
19:53 <@matches> Say "avoid" instead of lack
19:53 <@matches> Add what the "basic primitives" actually are
19:53 <@matches> There appears to be an issue with hyphenated phrases the hyphens are circled
19:53 <@matches> Another tick!
19:54 <@matches> Oh, you have a $2^64 - 1$\footnote{} which is unfortunate because it looks like $2^64 - 1^2$
19:54 <@matches> That footnote (probably others?) would work in the paragraph without being footnote
19:54 <@matches> Fullstops go after \cite{}
19:55 <@matches> A tick (in regards to the quadtree diagram)
19:55 <@matches> The concluding comment
19:56 <@matches> "OK, Much to do (underline) There doesn't seem to be much scholarly references used. You have enough, but you seem to cite them in the context of their contributions to standards as opposed to how they addressed a research question or open problem"
19:57 <@matches> And (not even our references lists are safe!)
19:57 < sulix> Oh dear.
19:57 <@matches> Where referencing web pages, include the date retrieved
19:57 <@matches> That's it
19:57 <@matches> I shall move on to my own for completeness although you might not need to care
19:58 < sulix> Phew, that's not quite as horrible as it could have been, I guess.
19:58 <@matches> I also have "Good"
19:58 <@matches> There are some "I didn't read this bit but it had words that seemed vaguely relevant" ticks in Chapter 1 (Introduction) and 2 (Proposal)
19:59 <@matches> Sorry Tim if you read this
19:59 <@matches> But when I mark lab reports for Physics that's usually where I put the ticks :P
19:59 < sulix> (The secret comes out)
20:00 <@matches> (In my defence I did spend two hours marking the reports this morning and I am paid for none of them, so...)
20:01 <@matches> (It's the bits that I scribble all over that are where the marking gets done)
20:01 <@matches> (I think I've covered myself in case the lawyers of any of my students read this channel now, so I will resume my story...)
20:02 <@matches> Attention is called to the many glaring instances of [?] and "Refer to Section ?"
20:02 <@matches> :S
20:02 <@matches> I should probably define a vector image before comparing it to a raster image
20:02 <@matches> Incidentally my Fox looks amazing
20:02 <@matches> On printed paper
20:03 <@matches> (Tim didn't say that, that's just my modest opinion)
20:03 <@matches> Ahem.
20:03 < sulix> Can you see the difference between the vector and bitmap versions easily?
20:04 <@matches> At the original scale there is, alas, a very slight fuzziness
20:04 <@matches> But I reckon the markers will be old and blind
20:04 <@matches> Hmm, I should either be more careful about what I say here or stop logging this channel...
20:04  * sulix hopes they don't read that.
20:04 <@matches> Sorry markers
20:04 <@matches> I worship your power
20:04 <@matches> Please do not smite me
20:05 <@matches> The scaled up version is interesting
20:06 <@matches> It looks a bit like your circle with the blocky non-anti-aliased bit but actually anti-aliased by the pdf viewer
20:06 < sulix> I guess the scaling would be done by the printer's postscript RIP.
20:06 <@matches> Yeah I guess
20:07 < sulix> (Side note: I find the whole idea of Postscript interpreters being called RIPs somewhat fitting)
20:07 <@matches> The PDF decides not to antialias it and converts it to Postscript and then the postscript interpreter adds its own antialiasing?
20:07 <@matches> I don't know
20:07  * sulix joins the "SVG is the least broken format" club.
20:07 <@matches> It's very tempting to descend into footnote madness with this lit review
20:07 <@matches> "By the way, this very document is an example of this thing!"
20:07 <@matches> Etc
20:08 <@matches> Moving on
20:08 <@matches> The point of talking about vector displays at all is questioned (at least I think that's what the "Why?" refers to here)
20:08 <@matches> Or it could be "Why is there yet another ?? in this paragraph" I guess
20:09 <@matches> But probably the former
20:09 <@matches> I do not have space to include Bresenham's algorithm
20:09 <@matches> Oh boy, he's going to love what I did with the SVG and Postscript images...
20:09 <@matches> But I am glad I do not have to actually explain Bresenham's algorithm because it's actually annoyingly detailed
20:11 < sulix> All sane descriptions of Bresenham's algorithm end up being cascades of "By symmetry" anyway.
20:11 <@matches> I need to actually find a reference that applied Wu/Bresenham directly to a non-straight line
20:11 <@matches> You said Bresenham adapted his algorithm to circles but I don't think I'll bother unless someone adapted them to beziers
20:12 <@matches> Bresenham's paper on rasterisation techniques basically says "Compute some points close enough together and then just connect them with straight lines"
20:12 <@matches> But I think things might have advanced since the 1980s
20:12 < sulix> Well, we can compute points that are closer together and draw more lines, I guess.
20:13 <@matches> Next, Tim wants an example of a spline
20:13 <@matches> (Oh boy have I got that covered)
20:13 <@matches> My mathematics terminology on Beziers is not really great
20:14 <@matches> Well it's right but confusing maybe
20:14 <@matches> Or I just need to say "t is a trajectory parameter"
20:14 <@matches> Haha
20:15 <@matches> He found one of my "????" that is actually just me typing question marks and not a broken reference
20:15 <@matches> The *entire* section on shading and compositing has a big question mark
20:15 <@matches> Oh dear
20:15 <@matches> I just finished writing the compositing bit
20:16 <@matches> I hope the question mark means "Why isn't this written" and not "Why is this in here"
20:16 <@matches> Because it is quite useful for an excuse to say PostScript can't do alpha
20:17 <@matches> I need to refer to the IM (I really don't think that's a thing) and DOM when citing Hayes
20:17 <@matches> "I don't think Turing Completeness is essential" (Big cross through the Crippled Interpreted Model)
20:17 <@matches> Fair enough
20:17 <@matches> A tick appears
20:18 <@matches> Predictably in the web based documents part
20:18 <@matches> I need to explain why Ipython is cool if I want to talk about it
20:18 <@matches> My entire section on Precision as defined in the various formats is ?
20:20 <@matches> My still to be completed/started section on Graphics APIs, GPUs and Arbitrary Precision is three question marks and "How's all this going"
20:20 <@matches> The progress report gets a single tick
20:20 <@matches> And the references have similar issues
20:20 <@matches> Well
20:21 <@matches> I'll take a few minutes to quiver in terror
20:21 <@matches> But I think if I can just find a way to not sleep and still maintain productivity, I might be able to pull this off
20:22 <@matches> Interestingly he didn't call me out for just talking about standards
20:22 <@matches> But now I realise that's because I didn't have all the crap I've just written on standards in there
20:23 < sulix> It's going to be a long night, but I think we'll manage it.
20:23 <@matches> Mine will be too long but I don't care
20:24 <@matches> I'll ask for an extension to prepare a condensed version if I must :P
20:28 <@matches> It's kind of funny I've been spending more time making my vector image in SVG and PostScript nice than actually writing about either of those standards
20:50 <@matches> Argh the idea of making my koch snowflake example for PS just got in my head
20:50 <@matches> Which would be brilliant I guess if the topic was still "Fractal Document Formats"
20:50 <@matches> It probably would be useful if I could demonstrate precision issues..
20:50 <@matches> NO
20:50 <@matches> MUST WRITE 
20:50 <@matches> WORDS
20:50 <@matches> NOT PICTURES
20:51 <@matches> But still it would make the PostScript and SVG sections consistent with each other...
20:51 <@matches> NO
20:51 <@matches> Must control urge to put pointless pictures in
20:51 <@matches> No matter how much it seems like a good idea
20:51 <@matches> And not pointless
20:52 <@matches> Help I'm losing this battle
20:53 <@matches> It is probably actually a better way of making a Koch curve than the hideous Javascript parsing of strings version
22:50 <@matches> By the way, you can totally have "pre layout" stages in PostScript since you can define your own operators
22:50 <@matches> Or do I misunderstand your sentence
22:50 <@matches> Oh well it sounds smart anyway
22:51 <@matches> In fact it's a lot more concise than my DOM-y section
22:52 <@matches> I should sign my Lit Review as Captain Obvious
22:57 < sulix> My current version does have a "PostScript programs typically embody documents which have been type-
22:57 < sulix> set, though as a turing-complete language, some layout can be performed
22:57 < sulix> " sentence.
22:57 < sulix> by the document.
23:01  * sulix is still a little bit concerned about how he should reference things for their solutions to open problems rather than their contributions to standards.
23:03 <@matches> I think I am managing to do it
23:03 <@matches> I will commit something at some point
23:03 < sulix> I'm hoping that rewriting most of the rendering section with painful discussions of algorithms will do it.
23:03 <@matches> An example is Porter and Duff Compositing
23:04 <@matches> Because PostScript doesn't have alpha and I am really hoping that's just because Adobe had moved on to PDF by the time alpha was a thing
23:04 <@matches> And not because they thought alpha was dumb :P
23:05 <@matches> So I can relate Porter and Duff's model to the standards that do use it and say how it solves a problem that the standards that don't use it still have
23:05 <@matches> And then I can sit back in satisfaction
23:05 <@matches> And realise this says fuck all about precision
23:06 <@matches> But at least by talking about it, I have eliminated it from the set of things we need to worry about when talking about precision :P
23:06 < sulix> I've got a section which basically goes through all of the different document formats and looks at what their specs say about precision now.
23:06 <@matches> Yeah I have that, but it was dot-pointed
23:06 <@matches> I thought that would be OK actually but it has a question mark here... :S
23:06 < sulix> Basically most of them say "implementation-defined" anyway.
23:06 <@matches> Oh right because I was saying random stuff about how Postscript *used* to not have IEEE
23:07 <@matches> Yeah it is odd that the standards don't actually reference IEEE
23:07 <@matches> You'd think, since it's a standard...
23:07 <@matches> Instead they just say "single" or "double" or "it might be single if you're lucky but we don't care really"
23:08 <@matches> I assume "single" is widely accepted to mean IEEE single
23:08 < sulix> From my reading of the Postscript spec, it says basically "We've put IEEE here, but ask your printer manufacturer because they could be using anything for all we care."
23:08 <@matches> Ah I will check that more carefully
23:08 <@matches> But it sounds about right
23:08 < sulix> They give "typical limits" for their data types, but specifically do not specify what they are to be implemented as.
23:08 <@matches> I don't think I have the time to look at what PostScript did historically before IEEE-754 although it would be kind of interesting to know
23:09 <@matches> PostScript also does a bunch of silly maths because of units
23:09 < sulix> The idea being that each postscript interpreter could do whatever they liked.
23:09 <@matches> Cool
23:09 <@matches> I should know this already :S
23:09 <@matches> I just included a single character as a figure
23:10 <@matches> But I want to actually work out how to do it in LaTeX by setting the size of the font appropriately
23:10 < sulix> The PDF spec says pretty much the same thing, but notes that Adobe's implementation uses "Mostly IEEE singles" but "used to use 16.16 fixed point" and "still uses it for some things"
23:10 <@matches> I did see that
23:10 < sulix> TeX using 14.16 fixed point.
23:10 < sulix> DVI uses "up-to 32bit" signed integers.
23:11 <@matches> So basically no one actually uses IEEE for anything :P
23:11 <@matches> Good work
23:11 <@matches> I shall panic a bit and then try and actually do that work myself
23:11 < sulix> SVG uses "implementation defined" or "double-precision floating point" "for coordinate transforms" if you want to be certified "High Quality"
23:12 <@matches> I saw that one
23:12 <@matches> But I'm skeptical about how this plays with Javascript
23:12 <@matches> Not for High Quality even, just in general
23:12 < sulix> Javascript numbers are always IEEE 754 doubles.
23:13 <@matches> Ah thanks
23:13 < sulix> (Even their integers are IEEE 754 doubles, which just happen to be integers)
23:13 <@matches> Yes I have heard this before
23:13 <@matches> From you probably :P
23:14 < sulix> I don't have a source for that, and I'm not going to read the ECMAscript spec to find one, though.
23:16 <@matches> Oh right, Javascript is actually ECMAscript
23:16 <@matches> I forgot that
23:17 <@matches> Dammit I am struggling to stay awake here
23:17 <@matches> I'm not sure whether it's healthier to try to not sleep and give Tim a draft tomorrow and demand he read it in enough time to make last minute changes
23:18 <@matches> Or sleep and then be more coherant tomorrow
23:18 <@matches> I guess I'll try and finish a couple more sections
23:19 < sulix> I'm going to try to finish this tonight.
23:20  * sulix has another assignment due Friday that needs significant work.
--- Day changed Thu May 22 2014
00:47 <@matches> So X just managed to totally shit itself
00:47 <@matches> Time to see when I last pressed Ctrl-S
00:48 <@matches> Oh good (I typically press it once per sentence)
00:48 <@matches> I hope it wasn't one of my SVGs that broke everything
00:49 <@matches> Making all my figures in SVG
00:49 <@matches> Lovingly hand written
00:49 <@matches> I'm not sure that was a good idea
01:43 <@matches> Heh, converting SVG to PS in Inkscape appears to introduce rounding errors of up to 0.1 of whatever unit PS is using
01:44 <@matches> 1.25*56
01:45 <@matches> Disregard I appear to have mistaken this terminal for a calculator
01:45 <@matches> They do look similar at this hour in the morning
01:49 < sulix> I'm seriously doubting whether starting to write stuff about how all of the rasterizing algorithms work was a good idea.
01:49 <@matches> Haha
01:49 <@matches> I don't really have much rasterising as such
01:49 <@matches> Straight lines
01:50 <@matches> Beziers aren't really "rasterising" so much as defining curves
01:50 <@matches> Then I mention fonts and how they are all bezier-ish
01:50 < sulix> I've just spent about an hour trying to prove that bresenham's algorithm can be made to not depend on any coordinates outside the screen.
01:50 <@matches> Then I have a bit on shading that I can't do
01:50 <@matches> :S
01:50 <@matches> That's probably not important
01:50 <@matches> To quote Tim in my thesis regards to actually explaining algorithms
01:50 < sulix> It turns out that if you clip the endpoints (even correctly), you adjust the slope of the lines slightly.
01:51 <@matches> "No you don't have space. [...] details should be left to where they are useful"
01:51 <@matches> Having said that absolutely none of this is "useful"
01:51 < sulix> To fix it you have to initialize bresenham's "accumulated error" properly.
01:51 <@matches> That sounds sort of relevant
01:52 <@matches> Well I just copied some SVG into PostScript and discovered that the coordinates are all reflected :S
01:52 < sulix> My choices for referencing this is either a textbook I don't have that "apparently mentions this" or a blog post which rants about it a bit.
01:52 <@matches> Bahaha
01:53 <@matches> That sounds like work for the final lit review rather than this one
01:53 < sulix> Still need to work out how to actually work in how my references solved problems rather than contributed to standards or whatever.
02:05 <@matches> minipage for latex is great by the way
02:06 <@matches> Like <div> but not awful
02:40 <@matches> Oh year
02:40 <@matches> The best spline curve example ever
02:41 <@matches> Fuck it took about 3 hours to do that
02:41 <@matches> Dear god
02:41 <@matches> Ergh remind me to go censor the log before Friday 1am
02:50 <@matches> I pushed my references changes by the way
02:51 < sulix> Yay merging!
02:51 <@matches> Oh I forgot the actual pdfs but whatever
02:51 <@matches> I am jealous of your actual concise and to the point lit review
02:51 <@matches> Mine suddenly exploded into figures
02:51 <@matches> I should stop
02:51 <@matches> I think I will delete the Shading section
02:52 <@matches> No wait it would be a gap to take it out now
02:52 <@matches> Argh
02:53 <@matches> I will just have to resist the urge to put a diagram in showing how shading works
02:53 <@matches> All these diagrams will probably kill me
02:53 < sulix> I'm thinking of scrapping chunks of the Rendering section of mine just so I don't have to finish them and can go to sleep.
02:54 <@matches> Tim did seem strongly in favour of covering the rendering stuff
02:54 <@matches> At least referencing the papers and giving the definitions of things if not actually how to render them
02:55 <@matches> Anyway I think Beziers at least are important
02:55 <@matches> I'm discovering a few interesting things about SVG
02:56 <@matches> The path definitions are basically exactly the same as postscript's commands except less stack-y
02:56 <@matches> But it has relative commands as well
02:56 <@matches> Which is interesting because if you have a really really long curve defined with relative commands
02:56 <@matches> Maybe, just maybe, it will actually cause a precision issue
02:57 <@matches> I doubt it though
03:00 <@matches> Well good luck, I am going to sleep
03:01 < sulix> Thanks. I will see what I can say about Béziers.
03:38  * sulix collapses.
08:07 <@matches> Nice work
08:07 <@matches> Mine is too detailed I think
08:07 <@matches> It's horrible because now I'm committed to following through on that level of detail everywhere
08:09 <@matches> Removing detail feels like murder
08:12 <@matches> Would you be offended if I cited your lit review as a "more concise" overview for the bored reader? :P
14:28 < sulix> So apparently the entire internet is talking about Bézier curves today.
14:28 < sulix> This would have been really useful, say, yesterday.
14:30 < sulix> Also this page looks amazing... http://pomax.github.io/bezierinfo/
14:39 <@matches> Haha
14:39 <@matches> I think I've got the Beziers covered
14:39 <@matches> If you could just hop over to ratemylitreview and check me on that...
14:39 <@matches> :P
14:42 < sulix> Ratemylitreview has broken some of the equations...
14:46 <@matches> If I had time I would include a "rate ratemylitreview" field
14:46 <@matches> I sent an email
14:46 <@matches> Now to fear the wrath
14:47 <@matches> Half time
14:48 <@matches> Haha I'm somewhat regretting choosing such condescending ratings
14:49 < sulix> I got terrified seeing that email before I realised it was from you.
14:49 <@matches> Bahaha
14:49 <@matches> Well I have to give him something
14:50 < sulix> You should clearly make the ratings be all amazing, like: "Good, Great, Amazing, Truly Spiffing, Superlative and \"Everything in creation has been leading up to this page of my Lit review\""
14:51 <@matches> You can POST your own ratings but expecting that might be a bit much
14:51 <@matches> They are emailed to me as text and they are also stored in the database as text
14:51 <@matches> Not the most objective of systems :S
14:51 <@matches> I thought the ratings covered all the bases though
14:52 < sulix> You could always do what the Shakespeare proramming lanugage does. Positive adjectives +1, negative adjectives -1.
20:18 <@matches> I haven't said half of what I thought I should about floats
20:18 <@matches> Tim has been scarily silent :P
20:19 <@matches> I guess I will assume that means everything is FINE
20:19 <@matches> I finally got my Table of Contents and things to not take up 6 pages
20:20 <@matches> I have to resist the urge to add some snarky comments to my section on LaTeX
20:22 <@matches> About how in theory you don't have to worry about where things go but in practice you spend hours doing horrible things like arbitrarily adding vertical space to force something into position because the anchor position doesn't take into account your line spacing and thus isn't where you expect and the next element overlaps things as a result
20:22 <@matches> Blargh
20:22 < sulix> Just stumbled upon a mention of numerical precision causing issues with Wu's algorithm in a book.
20:22 <@matches> Cite it
20:23 <@matches> Also give it to me to cite if I can stay awake long enough to read it
20:23 <@matches> You have contributed some good last minute references
20:23 <@matches> I seem to have contributed Javascript
20:23 <@matches> I should be ashamed
20:24 < sulix> It's in Abrash's Black Book, end of Chapter 42 ("Wu'ed in Haste; Fried, Stewed at leasure"(
20:24 <@matches> Haha
20:24 <@matches> My venerable graphics book doesn't even have Wu in it :S
20:25 <@matches> It also doesn't really properly reference people's papers, or I guess you don't need to in a textbook?
20:26 <@matches> It gives De Casteljau's method without crediting him for example. It does credit Bezier with things though.
20:26 <@matches> But they clearly didn't have to worry about putting \cite{} after every single statement
20:27 <@matches> I'm not sure how well my "I couldn't find a reference, have a look at my website" footnotes are going to go down
20:27 < sulix> Casey from the Jeff & Casey show did a video blog on Bézier curves and interpolation this morning.
20:28 <@matches> I really should start reading blogs more, but I was in no position to be watching blogs this morning
20:28 < sulix> He claims that Bézier did not invent the Bézier curve, so why the hell are they named after him.
20:28 <@matches> Had I known
20:28 <@matches> Oh he didn't
20:28 <@matches> I know that
20:28 <@matches> That's in Metafont
20:28 < sulix> I should read Metafont.
20:28 <@matches> They were named after him because he was the first guy that said "These look useful for things"
20:28 <@matches> However
20:28 <@matches> I can't find the paper in a peer reviewed journal
20:29 <@matches> I think it was for Industry (TM)
20:29 <@matches> And also in French
20:29 <@matches> I just cited a paper he did write in English about his experiences with Computer Aided Design
20:29 <@matches> He doesn't define anything, just shows pictures of nice bezier curvey car bodies
20:30 < sulix> I saw a bunch of french papers by him, but couldn't be bothered trying to work out which ones were useful.
20:30 <@matches> De Casteljau's paper is also hard to find
20:30 <@matches> The order of events was
20:30 <@matches> 1912 - Bernshtein comes up with the basis polynomials for some sort of mathematical fitting
20:31 <@matches> 1959 - De Casteljau decides to approximate the curves using his algorithm
20:31 <@matches> (De Casteljau is only an approximation by the way, but it would converge to the true bezier curve)
20:31 <@matches> 196? - Bezier does stuff
20:31 <@matches> 1983/4 - Knuth decides to use them for fonts
20:32 <@matches> Somehow they ended up in PostScript around that time as well
20:32 <@matches> Now we're stuck with them
20:34 <@matches> Hmm I hope my Tensor Equation is right there
20:34 < sulix> Here's that Wu thing, btw: http://www.jagregory.com/abrash-black-book/#notes-on-wu-antialiasing
20:36 <@matches> I'm struggling to make my floating point section sound sane
20:36 <@matches> Too many little details
20:37 <@matches> Like that you can choose different bases
20:37 <@matches> What even is a number anyway
20:38 <@matches> I think the proper way to approach it is talking about a number represented by digits and some numbers take infinitely many digits etc
20:39 <@matches> Then computers can only fit X binary digits in their registers
20:39 <@matches> A floating point is basically where you have a fixed point mantissa and then shift the location of the fixed point
20:39 <@matches> Let's try and ignore the implicit leading one...
20:40 <@matches> It sort of all falls apart when trying to fit IEEE in there
20:40 <@matches> This thing is too big as well :(
20:41 <@matches> Page limits are stupid
20:42 <@matches> I can't remember what it even is but it's definitely less than what I have
21:06 <@matches> Ah I see, the aliasing of Wu's line isn't perfect
21:06 <@matches> I think Wu admits that
21:06 <@matches> Hmm, that is interesting
21:11 <@matches> Argh that blog is all like "We should use web based documents instead of PDF"
21:11 <@matches> Pixels or Perish detected
21:11 <@matches> To be fair it does actually look nice
21:14 <@matches> The table of contents in the black book are quite amusing
21:14 <@matches> No! I finished writing about graphics stuff I need to do floating stuff
21:15 < sulix> It's a brilliant book, but possibly for another day.
21:16 <@matches> Dammit I guess I do need to produce more figures
21:16 <@matches> Sigh
21:17 <@matches> A picture is worth a thousand words and all that
21:17 <@matches> And therefore takes at least as long as writing a thousand words to make
21:27 <@matches> The more I look at SVG files the more convinced I am that they are actually the write way to do things
21:27 <@matches> right
21:28 <@matches> Despite all that philosophical guff, you can do the same things as postscript in similar ways, but you also have a DOM that isn't terrifying like whatever PDF supposely does
21:28 <@matches> I guess PDF would be more efficient though
21:29 < sulix> That's pretty much the conclusion I've come to.
21:31 <@matches> Unfortunately now I know more about SVG I keep hand editing my figures
21:32 <@matches> I don't need to use gnuplot's terrible data point markers anymore!
21:32 <@matches> I am free!
21:40 <@matches> I particularly like
21:40 <@matches> That I can make the points have alpha now
21:40 <@matches> So if you plot overlapping points it is no longer impossible to see them
21:40 <@matches> Of course we are restricted by the zoom in the pdf viewer...
21:41 <@matches> This project is too meta
21:41 <@matches> It is doing my head in
--- Day changed Fri May 23 2014
11:22 < sulix> Welp. Submitting this version: http://davidgow.net/stuff/LitReviewDavid.pdf
11:23 < sulix> (The introduction has only got more over the top, I'm afraid)
11:48 < sulix> Do you know what is happening/isn't happening RE: Revised project proposals?
12:03 < sulix> Well: Literature review is submitted.
12:03 < sulix> (In person to the coordinator, which is a little bit scary)
--- Day changed Sun May 25 2014
15:42 <@matches> No meeting tomorrow by the way
15:43 < sulix> Ah. Cool. I have like 300 things to do.
15:43 < sulix> Just pushed fixes for all of the compile warnings, btw.
15:43 <@matches> Cool
15:44 <@matches> I want to keep editing my Lit Review :S
15:44 < sulix> I had thought that Float() always returns a "float", but it sometimes returns a double.
15:44 <@matches> Oh
15:44 <@matches> Whoops
15:44 <@matches> Well a double is technically still a float...
15:44 < sulix> (Also, it turns out OpenGL actualy breaks the C++ spec, and is therefore impossible to use without hacks if you have -Werror enabled)
15:45 <@matches> Sigh
15:45 < sulix> It was warning that I was losing precision from float x = Float(blah);
15:45 <@matches> One of the things I want to put in my lit review is a snarky paragraph about how no one actually obeys standards anyway
15:46 < sulix> There are points where you get function pointers as void* pointers, but C++ needs to work on systems where code and data are stored in different bits of memory with different size pointers.
15:46 <@matches> On the other hand no matter how much better I make the lit review no one will read it because I'm being assessed on a conference paper not a dissertation
15:46 <@matches> Ah
15:46 < sulix> So casting any data pointer to a function pointer is apparently illegal.
15:47 <@matches> That's annoying
15:47 < sulix> Fortunately, gcc doesn't complain if you start the line that does it with "__extension__", so that's what we do.
15:47 <@matches> Haha
15:54 <@matches> Ok I am still about 3 days behind on sleep but I guess I should do work
15:54 <@matches> Bye
--- Day changed Tue May 27 2014
12:49 <@matches> We missed the Computable Document Format (CDF) by Mathematica by the way
12:49 <@matches> Wolfram would be offended
12:50  * matches hopes none of the Mathematica fanatics read the lit review
12:50 <@matches> Or this channel
12:54 <@matches> I did have both Mathematica and IPython as a dot point and they got the mighty question mark of confusion over them
12:54 <@matches> Maybe I'll add them in later
12:55 <@matches> Frames does not seem to agree with my assertion that practically anything can be considered a document format :P
12:55 <@matches> Plain text!
12:57 <@matches> So I was looking through last year's Mech/Chem final year conference
12:57 <@matches> Naturally there is nothing remotely like this project in there
12:57 <@matches> :(
--- Log opened Tue Jun 10 13:59:54 2014
13:59 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
13:59 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
13:59 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 3 secs
16:29 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
--- Day changed Wed Jun 11 2014
13:13 <@matches> JVB just asked me if it was possible to have a self updating pdf
13:13 <@matches> I suppose he didn't ask whether it would be easy
13:15 <@matches> As in, one that would download itself if there was a newer version
13:16 <@matches> Technically with the crippled PostScript it would be "No" but with all that stuff in the standard about DRM and "Action Objects" and Javascript and stuff...
13:18 <@matches> Hmm, a webserver running git and a cronjob and requiring authentication may solve his problem
13:18 <@matches> With pdf.js or just relying on browsers to have pdf plugins
13:18 <@matches> Wait why am I solving JVB's problem
--- Day changed Fri Jun 13 2014
16:31 <@matches> So exams have finished
16:31 <@matches> Well my exams have finished
16:32 <@matches> Now I can go back to panicking about the project again
16:37 <@sulix> Excellent: it's your turn to do something impressive for the meeting on Monday, then. :P
--- Day changed Mon Jun 16 2014
14:49 <@matches> Some of this OpenGL stuff doesn't quite add up
14:49 <@matches> Like m_cahed_display.UnBind(); m_cached_display.Blit();
14:50 <@matches> Oh
14:50 <@matches> I see
14:50 <@matches> There is a difference
14:51  * matches -> OpenGL documentation
14:53 <@matches> Right I see
15:03 <@matches> Well, this makes a lot more sense than tpg's "Adventures in VEMS" in #ucc at least
15:18 <@sulix> Well that's an achievement, I guess.
15:18 <@sulix> Also http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2431.pdf
15:18 <@sulix> It's the spec for "nullptr"...
15:20 <@matches> "Pointers are pretty cool. Pointers that are NULL are pretty cool. We address these issues by proposing nullptr" ?
15:21 <@sulix> Haha: Pretty much.
15:22 <@matches> Why not just reserve the word "null"
15:22 <@matches> I could get behind it then
15:23 <@matches> It is not a null reference
15:23 <@matches> But if you ever have a null reference something is horrifyingly wrong
15:23 <@matches> Bah humbug
15:24 <@sulix> They have a page about that where they said "everyone was naming their variables \"null\"".
15:24  * sulix realises he just escaped those quote. Oh dear.
15:24 <@matches> A valid point, which should have lead to "Everyone are morons"
15:24 <@matches> Fun fact
15:25 <@matches> Matlab (like fortran actually) will let you use key words as variable names.
15:25 <@sulix> "It's a feature!"
15:25 <@matches> Question on CITS2401 exam: "Why is 'ii' preferred over 'i' and 'jj' over 'j' for loop iteration?"
15:26 <@matches> Both i and j are the complex number sqrt(-1)
15:27 <@matches> It seems like naming it 'nullptr' instead of 'null' missed an opportunity to stop people naming their variables really confusing things :P
15:30 <@matches> Well I am infinitely wiser about nullptr now but I don't think it will stop me just using NULL
16:15 <@matches> This is slowly starting to make sense
16:35 <@matches> I'm having a bit of difficulty because it's all so optimised for the GPU
16:35 <@matches> I think what we need is an ObjectRenderer class or similar
16:36 <@matches> Have one for each type of object and implement RenderUsingGPU and RenderUsingCPU
16:36 <@matches> I will see what monstrosity I can come up with
16:36 <@matches> But a lot of that code for the circles and rectangles is exactly the same just copied and pasted with different variable names
16:37 <@matches> I think there is an official software engineering term for that sort of thing...
16:46 <@matches> Alright, breaking everything
16:46 <@matches> This will probably take a while
16:47  * matches dreads merges
17:02 <@sulix> Yeah, I was going to basically end up with an ObjectRenderer class, too.
17:02 <@sulix> So I'll leave it to you for now and procrasinate from doing my maths in some other way.
17:07 <@matches> Cool :)
17:52 <@matches> Now I'm not very strict about the whole RAII thing myself, but there seem to be some cases where things can probably just go in the constructor?
17:52 <@matches> I guess we can fight about those later
17:54 <@matches> I guess I can see us wanting to set m_render_inited to false and have it automatically recreate everything, maybe, but I can't see a case where we will want to recompile the shaders, so I am going to put the shader initialisation in the constructors
17:54 <@matches> I have gone mad with power
17:54 <@matches> Maaad
20:30 <@matches> This ObjectRenderer is like a two headed hydra
20:31 <@matches> I thought about using just the ibo and vbo and getting the indices out of it, but that's a bit terrible
20:31 <@matches> So it will have an ibo for the GPU and an array for the CPU
20:35  * sulix thinks this makes sense.
21:47 <@matches> Good news! I have things on the screen. Bad news. They are still on the GPU and they are wrong.
21:49 <@matches> More coffee required...
21:58 <@matches> Not sure if code wrong or fglrx having an existential crisis
22:04 <@matches> Unrelated to the segfaults of doom, but I just realised that there's all this interest in using GPUs for scientific computation, and everything seems to point to them having vastly inferior floating point computation to a CPU, which is a bit disconcerting
22:05 <@matches> I imagine the OpenCL libraries etc actually use the IEEE floating point capabilities? I hope?
22:05  * matches files under "beyond the scope of project"
22:06 <@sulix> If you commit code I can test it on non-fglrx if that'll help.
22:06 <@matches> I'd rather not commit it just yet, I am 90% sure it is something I have done wrong and don't want to shame myself by committing broken code
22:06 <@matches> It'd be like vomiting all over the codebase
22:07  * sulix is pretty sure half of his commits broke something.
22:29 <@matches> Ok I committed stuff that should in theory work with the test pattern again
22:30 <@matches> Using new and improved ObjectRenderer classes
22:30 <@matches> For some definition of improved
22:30 <@matches> It doesn't actually use the CPU yet
22:30 <@matches> It'll get there
22:33 <@matches> You can go and add your MandleBrotSetRenderer now though :P
22:36 <@sulix> Cool.
22:37 <@sulix> The circles do trigger that intel driver bug again, though...
22:38 <@matches> Ah damn
22:38 <@matches> Would making CIRCLE_FILLED the first ObjectType fix that?
22:38 <@sulix> It does.
22:38 <@sulix> (I just checked)
22:38 <@sulix> Yay intel!
22:39 <@matches> Haha
22:49 <@matches> Hey, does our rendering approach completely break compositing?
22:49 <@matches> Render all circles
22:49 <@matches> Then render all rectangles...
22:49 <@matches> There's no depth...
22:49 <@sulix> Um, maybe.
22:49 <@matches> :P
22:49 <@matches> I was just worrying about how to make compositing work using the CPU
22:49 <@matches> and then I realised it won't work using the GPU as it is either
22:50 <@sulix> If we're not doing alpha-blending, we could just add a z-coordinate and use the z-buffer.
22:50 <@sulix> Otherwise, they need to be sorted if they intersect.
22:50 <@matches> Let's not worry about this for now...
22:50 <@matches> Even though I spent a rather significant part of my lit review explaining how awesome compositing is
22:51 <@matches> I guess it doesn't matter, clearly the lit review was not intended for anyone to actually read
23:42 <@matches> I suspect RenderPixels doesn't work
23:45 <@sulix> This may be the case.
--- Day changed Tue Jun 17 2014
01:05 <@matches> Behold the magnificence of CPU based rendering
01:06 <@matches> In which we pass a massive pixel array to the ObjectRenderer's and just save it to a BMP
01:06 <@matches> Because OpenGL
01:06 <@matches> I'll probably fix it later
01:11 <@matches> Whoops seg faults ahoy
01:12 <@matches> Wait I swear it wasn't segfaulting before I commited that
01:19 <@matches> It segfaults sometimes depending on where you have the view. If you just have one circle and zoom in you can see the amazingly less jagged looking lines.
01:19 <@matches> That, is a certified result
10:13 <@sulix> I got the CPU rendered version to show up on the screen.
10:14 <@sulix> RenderPixels was pretty broken.
10:38 <@matches> Nice
10:39 <@sulix> I think the segfaults are it trying to draw outside of the display.
10:39 <@matches> Yeah
10:39 <@sulix> I haven't managed to zoom in too much yet.
10:39 <@matches> My clipping is probably wrongish
10:40 <@matches> fonttex_frag.glsl? Fear
10:40 <@sulix> Yeah, the "basictex_frag" file did a bunch of pretty font-specific things.
10:40 <@matches> Ah
10:43 <@sulix> The CPU renderer also shows some random lines when there are no outlines on the screen.
10:43 <@matches> Is it just me or does it look slightly nicer on the CPU when zoomed out a bit
10:44 <@matches> Well it looks different
10:44 <@matches> I can't quite work out whether it looks nicer or worse :P
10:44 <@sulix> Okay, it doesn't segfault if the rectangle outlines are disabled.
10:45 <@matches> Ah
10:45 <@matches> Yeah it is setting top/bottom/left/right outside the pixels
10:45 <@sulix> I think there are just some slightly different edge-case rules when zoomed out.
10:47 <@matches> With my skills at writing renderers I should be working on the fglrx drivers
10:47 <@matches> :P
10:47 <@sulix> Things vanish if you zoom in too much, too.
10:48 <@matches> Blame it on floats
10:49 <@matches> The CPU renderer is using a width of 1 pixel less than it should be
10:49 <@sulix> Why are the floats sinking? :P
10:49 <@matches> That's unrelated
10:49 <@matches> It's probably an integer rounding issue somewhere
10:49 <@matches> When the view gets big something goes to zero
10:50 <@matches> The CPU renderer transforms everything to pixel positions and then renders using those
11:02 <@matches> The GPU renderer occassionally leaves off the corners of things
11:02 <@matches> I never noticed before
11:02 <@matches> Anyway I think the segfaults are fixed
11:03 <@matches> Looking at the mysterious disappearances next
11:04 <@matches> It's integer overflow!
11:04 <@matches> Facepalm
11:05 <@sulix> Is it int64_t time?
11:05 <@sulix> Or magic huge bigint time?
11:05 <@matches> No I don't think that's necessary
11:06 <@matches> If the transformed width is smaller or larger than the width of the screen you can surely just ignore it
11:06 <@matches> Well, depending on what you are drawing
11:08 <@matches> Well it does matter unless you do some clever maths
11:08 <@matches> The clever maths was your part of the project...
11:09 <@matches> So I will just make them int64_t for now
11:50 <@matches> Pushe
11:50 <@matches> *d
11:50 <@matches> I should probably just make all the coorinates into Real instead of int64_t actually
12:03 <@sulix> Wow: this is pretty awesome.
12:03 <@sulix> I still get the artefacts, but I have to zoom in a lot more.
12:03 <@matches> Haha
12:04 <@sulix> Also, the CPU rendering artefacts and the GPU rendering artefacts are pretty similar on my machine, so it looks like it's just precision causing them.
12:04 <@matches> That is nice
15:20 <@matches> I'm trying to do a performance graph. Gnuplot doesn't like it much
15:20 <@matches> Well actually it's python's crappy interface to gnuplot that doesn't like it
15:23 <@matches> ... tempted to implement the performance graph in ipdf...
15:23 <@matches> Just keep adding circles to the document
15:24 <@matches> So meta
15:25 <@matches> We need a cool performance graph-y thing
15:26 <@matches> I think doing it in OpenGL is going to be the least shitty way actually
15:26 <@matches> This is a wheel that's probably been invented but it was invented wrong
17:11 <@matches> I've got a performance graph sort of working
17:11 <@matches> It almost looks like we are doing real science!
17:13 <@matches> I think we'll need to put some effort into our data analysis though because it's extremely noisy
17:13 <@matches> Smoothing averages or something
17:13 <@matches> Smoothing averages are the best
17:14 <@matches> They make any data look amazing
17:15 <@matches> Anyway, CPU rendering is only worse than GPU rendering when you force re-rendering
17:16 <@matches> So well done with the amazingly efficient cached frame buffer
17:18 <@matches> We can probably make it draw every frame both on the CPU and GPU to compare them in real time
17:18 <@matches> The possibilities are limitless!
17:19 <@matches> Graphs graphs graphs!
17:20 <@matches> Also I did end up using Gnuplot and python (sorry) but I made it slightly less shitty
17:27 <@matches> I have pushed things
17:27 <@matches> Also we probably don't need all three of those ways to measure performance
21:00 <@sulix> I got the graphs working on my laptop: very nice.
21:00 <@sulix> I can see how more GPU time is used with GPU rendering and more CPU time with CPU rendering quite well, actually.
21:59 <@matches> So the objects all being in one structure of arrays is sort of inconvenient because the size of objects has to be constant
21:59 <@matches> Also the size of Real has to be constant
22:03 <@matches> I guess we could have union {Rect rect, Bezier bezier} and do rectangles and Beziers in the same thing but that is slightly terrifying
22:04 <@matches> But there's still the problem of Real because as soon as Real becomes arbitrary precision it will start allocating memory and not be fwrite/fread'able
22:04 <@matches> :S
22:05 <@matches> You'll still want the struct of arrays because that will make view reparenting much easier
22:05 <@matches> Gah
22:06 <@sulix> I'm tempted to just split it by type: Have an array of Rects, an array of Béziers, an array of Circles, etc.
22:06 <@matches> Yeah but you need to store an "indexes" array as well
22:06 <@matches> But that might be the least terrible
22:07 <@matches> Yes that should work
22:07 <@matches> Our fwrite/fread is still doomed though
22:07 <@matches> When shit gets Real
22:07 <@sulix> Yeah, you'd need some indices one way or another.
22:08 <@sulix> And yeah, we'll need a massive "ConvertWhateverRealIsStoredInTheFileToWhateverRealIsDefined" function or something.
22:08 <@matches> That will totally be its name
22:08 <@sulix> (Some old compilers had function name limits... I wonder if modern gcc has)
22:09 <@sulix> (There is but one way to find out!)
22:09 <@matches> We don't need an array of circles/ellipses since we get those for free with Rect. Unless you want circular arcs as well as bezier curves
22:10 <@matches> Which you probably will? So you can approximate beziers
22:10 <@matches> Anyway I'll worry about adding Beziers first and once we've worked that out others should hopefully be easier
22:11 <@matches> I was sort of thinking it would be good to be able to define groups of objects as a special object type
22:11 <@matches> Then you can make paths out of your beziers
22:11 <@matches> But they won't be fixed size
22:12 <@matches> Anyway I will see if you have magically solved the problem for me in the morning :P
22:14 <@sulix> I wouldn't count on it...
--- Day changed Wed Jun 18 2014
16:50 <@matches> Behold, the glory of Beziers and Bresenham!
16:50 <@matches> Breseniers I shall call them
16:54 <@matches> I'm getting a very strong vibe of "Reinventing graphics technologies from the 1990s" at the moment
16:55 <@matches> I should probably look at floating point some more
16:55 <@matches> And reinvent numerical computation technologies from the 1980s
16:56 <@matches> We need a GPU renderer for the Beziers, and we need to fix save/load to not assume everything is a fixed size, and ...
16:56 <@matches> Argh
16:56 <@matches> All the things
17:00 <@matches> Maybe I'll multithread the CPU rendering too, just to make things more difficult :P
22:48 <@sulix> So I got some béziers rendering on the GPU.
22:48 <@sulix> They're not the ones in the document, and they're not in the right spots, though.
23:12 <@sulix> First 3 béziers are rendering properly on the GPU, then we get corrupted memory or something.
23:14 <@sulix> Ah: I see, I need some way of uploading which bézier IDs are being used.
23:41 <@sulix> Okay, Béziers now render on the GPU as well.
23:43 <@sulix> The code is a little bit ugly, and for that I am sorry, but blame the fact that the GL feature that makes this nice is only about a year old and so nothing supports it.
23:43 <@sulix> So we're basically uploading all of the raw document data into a huge texture.
23:47 <@sulix> (If you ask me, the GPU ones also look slightly nicer, though that's probably a bug)
--- Day changed Thu Jun 19 2014
13:55 <@matches> From those papers I was under the impression just rendering a bezier on a GPU was an impressive feat, so well done :P
13:57 <@sulix> (It's basically just a direct port of your CPU implementation, tbh)
13:59 <@matches> When I zoom out the GPU ones look nicer, there's probably something wrong with my Bresenham implementation
13:59 <@matches> Although it was mostly shamelessly copied from "Computer Graphics"
13:59 <@matches> Except they were like "Here it is for 0 < m < 1, the rest can be done by symmetry"
14:02 <@matches> The lines definitely have gaps on the CPU, and they also seem too thick as you zoom out
14:02 <@matches> Having said that, I don't think the GPU starts at x0,y0
14:03 <@matches> Anyway I'm going to implement a Rational number type and see if anything exciting happens (that's how you do research right?)
14:06 <@matches> Fortunately I sort of did most of this for one of the codejam problems (where it turned out I didn't really need Rational numbers but I thought I did)
14:20 <@sulix> Fixed the missing bit off the end.
16:43 <@matches> I suspect Rationals are either not a very good idea, or there is a bug in one of my fundamental operations
16:43 <@matches> +, -, *, / are hard
16:56 <@sulix> Is it at least a pretty bug?
16:59 <@matches> Um...
16:59 <@matches> No
17:00 <@matches> It seems buggy for anything other than the {0,0,1,1} starting view
17:14 <@matches> I suspect it's the expf in the mouse wheel scrolling
17:14 <@matches> Since you know, exp is definitely not a rational number...
17:15 <@matches> Hmm, but it shouldn't matter because it will just convert to the nearest rational number
17:16 <@matches> ie: p = (int64_t)(whatever*1e10) q = (int64_t)1e10
17:28 <@matches> Oh
17:28 <@matches> Oh
17:28 <@matches> Head -> Desk
17:28 <@matches> Rational & operator*=(const Rational & r) {this->operator=(*this*r); return *this;}
17:28 <@matches> Rational & operator/=(const Rational & r) {this->operator=(*this*r); return *this;}
17:29 <@matches> Rational & operator-=(const Rational & r) {this->operator=(*this+r); return *this;}
17:29 <@matches> I think the worst part is that I actually said "It is probably a bug in my +,-,*,/
17:29 <@matches> And it still took me this long to notice
17:30 <@matches> The second worst thing is I've made that sort of mistake like 1000 times before
17:30 <@matches> The third worst thing is I am recalling that article where the guy says "At least plus and times are sort of the same thing"
17:30 <@sulix> Feel the power of copy and paste flowing through you.
17:32 <@matches> Well let's not celebrate just yet, the view still goes to shit. Just slightly slower :P
17:33 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: NaNpdf
17:33 <@matches> Our document supports a view of {-inf,-inf,nan,nan} thus making it truly infinite precision
17:34 <@sulix> I had that happen a lot when I was writing the original zoom code.
18:19 <@matches> So I suspect that Rationals are just a really shitty number representation :P
18:20 <@matches> Specifically, you get integer overflows really really fast
18:20 <@matches> And if you are going to have a Rational that's BigInt / BigInt you may as well just have a BigFloat
18:21 <@matches> The ancients were probably right.
18:21 <@matches> When they decided not to use rationals.
18:23 <@matches> I guess floats are rationals technically, I mean the representation using P/Q
18:23 <@matches> I kind of wish I'd done some pure maths here...
18:23 <@matches> Or paid more attention in second year
18:28 <@matches> At least I sort of have conclusive evidence that rationals suck. As opposed to "it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain"
19:00 <@sulix> Floats are not rationals.
19:00 <@sulix> Not exactly.
19:01 <@sulix> Something which can be stored in a finite amount of space as a rational cannot always be stored in a finite amount of space as a float, but not vice-versa.
19:01 <@sulix> e.g.: 1/3
19:04 <@sulix> Basically floats = rationals where the denominator must be a power of two.
19:05 <@sulix> (Of course, these are all the same in the limit, but the limit of a cauchy sequence of rationals gives the reals, so the point is kinda moot, there, anyway)
19:18 <@matches> Yeah floats are a subset of the rationals I think I meant
--- Day changed Sat Jun 21 2014
16:22 <@matches> So I got a new smartphone today... I'm having fun trying to zoom in on things
16:24 <@matches> Actually the zooming isn't annoying so much as the needing to pan around to view all the text in a pdf
16:25 <@matches> This is what I get for buying the cheapest phone with the lowest resolution they had :P
16:26 <@matches> I didn't want to get one more expensive than my old one because I'm still convinced I will get around to fixing it one of these days
16:26 <@matches> Or months. Or years. But eventually.
--- Day changed Mon Jun 23 2014
11:51 <@matches> The meeting happened at ~11:30
12:49 <@sulix> Oh damn. I thought there wasn't going to be one today.
12:49 <@sulix> What did I miss?
13:04 <@matches> Basically I told him what we'd done
13:05 <@matches> Which was rendering on CPU or GPU, and Beziers (but only degree 2)
13:06 <@matches> And I implemented Rationals but they are terrible, so he sent me some code from an ACM competition about approximating things with Rationals
13:13 <@sulix> Some javascript guy is trying to convince people that the only numeric data type should be some custom 64-bit decimal thing.
13:13 <@sulix> A lot of people have started quoting Kahan at him.
13:20 <@matches> Haha
--- Log closed Tue Jun 24 16:07:29 2014
--- Log opened Tue Jun 24 16:17:39 2014
16:17 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
16:17 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
16:17 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 15 secs
--- Day changed Wed Jun 25 2014
21:41 < matches> So... if we need to put a HTTP server in IPDF I've got us covered...
21:44 <@sulix> You terrify me.
21:45 < matches> I still have to work out Websockets
21:45 < matches> They are silly
21:46 <@sulix> I take it they aren't compatible with regular sockets.
21:46 < matches> Well you use a TCP socket, but they aren't just plain text
21:46 < matches> There's a protocol on top of it
21:46 < matches> It's wired
21:47 < matches> *wierd
21:47 < matches> There are frames and things
21:47 < matches> And copious amounts of base64 encoding the SHA1 hash of a string prepended to a magic string
21:48 < matches> Apparently this makes it more secure
21:48  * sulix looks doubtful.
21:48 <@sulix> I could understand it being more secure if they actually encrypted things.
21:48 < matches> They have wss:// as well which is just the same thing through ssl
21:48 < matches> Yes it doesn't make sense
21:49 <@sulix> But plain "boring" TCP has been used since (I am assured) the beginning of time and there are still one or two things that use it which are not currently being hacked into.
21:49 < matches> Haha
21:49 < matches> I'd like websockets so I can control my robot via my phone through its web browser...
21:50 < matches> I can probably do that without websockets but it will also be useful for humphrey the rabbit
21:50 <@sulix> Surely with plain old TCP you could control your robot via telnet, which is more awesome and just as user friendly.
21:51 < matches> :P
21:51 < matches> It will have a webcam image though
21:51  * sulix mutters "ASCII art" under his breath.
21:52 < matches> I figure if I implement everything in C++ it will be less "Webby"
21:52 < matches> And more segfaultastic
21:52  * sulix has a new favourite word.
--- Day changed Thu Jun 26 2014
14:58 < matches> I think the WebSocket RFC put this "Framing" business in just to confuse people
14:58 < matches> My RFC Compliant* WebSocket server just sends the entire message in a single frame
14:59 < matches> Doesn't TCP already do framing or something
15:00 < matches> I mean, they specifically allow for frames with up to 2^63 bytes
15:00 < matches> Sorry, bits not bytes
15:02 < matches> So server -> client is pretty much TCP but you stick some stupid frame guff on the message
15:02 < matches> client -> server involves... "masking"
15:02 < matches> There are several long paragraphs on it
15:10 < matches> I'm going to pretend this is related to precision
--- Day changed Wed Jul 02 2014
17:30 < matches> I put the code repository on github
17:32 < matches> This is where a more hip and cool person would say something like "#yolo" but I prefer to wonder how I got 26K of lines and you have 65K...
17:32 < matches> "How many lines of code does it take to draw a rectangle?" 91000
--- Day changed Fri Jul 04 2014
12:59 < matches> Found my rational bug
13:00 < matches> ...
13:00 < matches> Copy paste strikes again
13:00 < matches> My operator/ looked suspiciously similar to operator+ -_-
13:00 < matches> -____-
13:02 < matches> Not sure how it got like that, it was definitely working at one point
13:02  * matches should probably use git properly
13:12 < matches> Pushed it
13:21 < matches> So yeah, it should work fine until you zoom
13:21 < matches> Then crazy things happen
16:44 < matches> I think all the references you added at the last minute break my litreview
16:45 < matches> (he says several months later :P_
21:00 <@sulix> Question: in Rational::Simplify(), why is (-P)/(-Q) becoming (-P)/(Q) rather than P/Q?
21:01 <@sulix> Shouldn't P = -P here? http://git.ucc.asn.au/?p=ipdf/code.git;a=blob;f=src/rational.h;h=41cce09078b4e96eb17a6bb6e28478ea64637b57;hb=HEAD#l74
21:02 <@sulix> Also zoom can be improved (but not totally fixed) by reducing precision when overflow would be possible.
21:19 < matches> Yeah, that's the idea of using the Stern Barcot tree Tim was talking about
21:20 < matches> Which I still need to read about
21:20 < matches> Also yes P should be -P because I am just that amazing at maths
21:22 < matches> In other news assembly happened
21:22 < matches> http://git.ucc.asn.au/?p=ipdf/code.git;a=blob;f=src/tests/add_digits.s
21:22 < matches> Which no doubt has terrible bugs in it :P
21:23 < matches> It was a bit confusing how passing and returning arguments with x64 was completely and utterly different from x86 and almost every tutorial is from at least ten years ago talking about x86
21:24 < matches> x64 is actually much easier though
21:25 < matches> At least, I think they are different, I didn't have to mess with the stack which seemed to be a thing with x86 and also that motorolla language we used in first year
21:25 < matches> Just got all the arguments in a bunch of registers
21:31 <@sulix> I think I just worked out why you have 16 "inc" instructions, and am loving it!
21:32 <@sulix> inc doesn't change flags!
21:32 < matches> I wonder if it would be faster to just store the carry flag in a register though
21:33 < matches> Actually probably not because there'd be branches involved
21:33 < matches> Hmm
21:33 <@sulix> Traditionally, mucking about with flags is slow.
21:33 < matches> Yep cool
21:34 < matches> I've got the AMD64 ABI
21:34 < matches> Chapter 2 is a good one
21:34 < matches> "Software Installation"
21:35 < matches> "This document does not specify how software must be installed on an AMD64 architecture machine"
21:35 < matches> End chapter
21:35 <@sulix> Just a thought, can use use the lea instruction instead of all of those incs.
21:37 <@sulix> Like lea rsi, [rsi+8h]?
21:37  * sulix ponders.
21:38 < matches> Maybe, my assembly is very rusty and was based on those ELEC1301 labs in the first place...
21:38 < matches> I don't even remember if they had lea
21:39 <@sulix> (Also I just got a message from KDE: "could not launch a process. perhaps you have reached the limit of running processes")
21:39 < matches> :S
21:40 < matches> When did you last reboot?
21:40 <@sulix> This morning, actually.
21:40 < matches> Integer overflow in PID?
21:40 <@sulix> It looks like it was an out-of-memory problem.
21:40 <@sulix> On a related note, the intel instruction set documentation is a 3 and a half thousand page pdf.
21:41 <@sulix> and firefox has a PDF viewer written in javascript.
21:41 <@sulix> ...that runs by default.
21:44 < matches> Hahaha
21:44 < matches> Yes, pdf.js is apparently the best thing since sliced bread...
21:45 < matches> I'm having some difficulty with lea, possibly the syntax
21:47 < matches> "lea (%rsi+8), %rsi" is wrong
21:48 <@sulix> Yeah, gcc's assembler uses whacked syntax.
21:48 < matches> I thought it was just () instead of [], add % to all the registers, and swap destination and source
21:48 <@sulix> http://git.ucc.asn.au/?p=ipdf/code.git;a=blob;f=src/tests/add_digits.s;hb=HEAD
21:49 <@sulix> They replaced the arithmetic operators with strange things, too.
21:49 < matches> Riight
21:49 < matches> Thanks
21:49 < matches> So 8(,%rdi,1) means [rdi+8]
21:49 < matches> That is dumb
21:49 <@sulix> I'm not sure if it's worth using nasm or the ".syntax intel" directive.
21:51 < matches> Hopefully there won't be too much more assembly to write...
21:51 <@sulix> Technichally lea (and other memory addressing instructions) take the form "[register+register*(1,2 or 4)+(number)]" in intel and "number(%register,%register,(1,2 or 4))"
21:51 <@sulix> in gcc
21:51 < matches> ok
21:51 < matches> Well once I know the syntax I can cope with it
21:51 < matches> But all the documentation being written in a different syntax doesn't help :P
21:52 <@sulix> Yeah, there are a lot of people who hate gcc syntax, which was an (unsuccessful) attempt to make assembly for different machines more consistent)
21:52 < matches> I decided to go with it because I vaguely remembered your commander keen patches looked like they were in gcc syntax :P
21:53 <@sulix> Hah: they were in "ckpatch" syntax.
21:53 <@sulix> And were just the final output bytes.
21:53 < matches> The memory can play strange tricks...
21:54 <@sulix> I used the "debug.com" utility that came with dos to assemble them, which let you write assembly to arbitrary memory.
21:54 <@sulix> and then read the contents of that memory to see what it assembled down to.
21:55 < matches> So, I need subtraction and multiplication but not division to implement arbitrary rationals
21:55 < matches> I'll try sort those out tomorrow
21:56 < matches> I'm pretty sure I'm doing better than at least one arbitrary integer representation
21:56 < matches> Which had a int32_t word and int64_t "double" word
21:56 < matches> So they could tell if they had a carry by doing the additions using double words
21:57 < matches> The code in C was longer than add_digits is in assembly
21:57 < matches> Although to be fair it might actually work on things that aren't amd64
21:57 <@sulix> Well, the good news is that there's an "sbb" instruction like "adc"
21:57 < matches> Excellent
21:58 <@sulix> The bad news is that multiplication is harder.
21:58 < matches> Yeah, at least I don't need division though
21:59 < matches> Although converting it to a string will be annoying
21:59 <@sulix> IIRC, the IMUL instruction gives an output twice as long as the inputs, to prevent overflow.
22:00 <@sulix> Converting to a string won't be so bad if you get division done.
22:00 <@sulix> And you can always just implement multiplication and division by slow recursive addition/subtraction.
22:03 < matches> There's a bunch of papers on number representations that use things that aren't floats or rationals from a quick look
22:04 < matches> I guess I just need to implement as many things as possible and compare them all
22:04 < matches> Seems easy enough...
22:04 < matches> (Famous last words)
--- Day changed Sat Jul 05 2014
11:09 < matches> Well... subtraction took me two seconds
11:09 < matches> Should probably have just done it last night
11:09 < matches> I got distracted
11:09 < matches> By someone actually using my websocket library
11:09 < matches> Does this mean I'm officially an open source developer now
11:09 < matches> I didn't even give it a license :S
11:11 < matches> Hmm
11:12 < matches> Multiplication...
11:12 < matches> It is tempting to just use a for loop and call the += operator...
11:40 < matches> I'll do that for now I think
11:41 < matches> Once += actually works
11:41 < matches> Turns out I will definitely need division also
11:42 < matches> I was looking at the rationals going "There are no divisions here!"
11:42 < matches> But there are
11:42 < matches> In the gcd
11:42 < matches> Mind you maybe I don't need to call gcd if I have arbitrary integers :P
11:42 < matches> Just use all the memory
12:39 < matches> Ok for loop for multiplication is not easy
12:39 < matches> Bah
12:39 < matches> Having to actually learn assembly properly
12:40 < matches> I mean I could use a for loop but it would have to use an Arbitrary integer and take a very long time...
12:47 <@sulix> There's no need to have a for loop index > 64bit because there will never be enough memory for an integer that big.
12:47 < matches> True
12:54 < matches> Putting "_asm" in filenames so that our Makefile can do the .s files is kind of irritating
12:54 < matches> Would naming them .cpp work? That would be even more irritating though!
12:54 < matches> Oh well it compiles
12:58 < matches> I bet it turns out 128 bit integers would have been more than sufficient for any zoom range people could feasibly get to by scrolling
13:15 <@sulix> I'm told 256-bit integers can represent the visible universe to the width of a proton or something.
13:45 < matches> I might put a maximum length in once this works
13:45 < matches> So I'm not doing a Java
13:46 < matches> Where 1/3 becomes "Runtime Exception!"
13:46 < matches> That's with BigDouble not BigInt but whatever
14:00 < matches> I must admit, assembly is pretty nice for this sort of thing
14:00 < matches> At least, the inner operations
14:00 < matches> Not for managing the memory
15:29 < matches> Alright. We have an Arbint class that is equivelant to an int64_t when it only has one digit.
15:30 < matches> I'm not sure how to test that extra digits function correctly
15:30 < matches> Other than just looking at a few cases and going "Yep that looks right" :S
16:40 < matches> Well... somewhere along the way I lost kcachegrind and now I seem to have to run dist-upgrade to get it back
16:41 < matches> Currently 10% of the way through upgrading tex-live...
16:41 < matches> The mystery of just how shitty the Arbints are will have to wait
16:42 < matches> Well it's clear they are shitty but I suspect there is a bug in division
16:42 < matches> Maybe I should actually read my code
16:42 < matches> Blargh
16:47 < matches> Ok constructing a rational takes infinite time
16:51 < matches> Ah, 1 % 1 == 1
16:51 < matches> That is definitely not correct :P
17:56 < matches> Oh my goodness I just rendered a frame
17:56 < matches> On the GPU...
18:00 <@sulix> Hmm...  {add,sub}_digits_asm.s are missing from git.
18:05 < matches> Really
18:05 < matches> Whoops
18:07 < matches> There you go
18:07 < matches> Addition, subtraction, multiplication should be fine, I need to actually do division properly
18:08 < matches> Also probably pow at some point
18:08 < matches> Since pow still just casts things to doubles
18:22 <@sulix> It works!
18:22 <@sulix> (Eventually)
18:24 < matches> Haha
18:24 < matches> Of course it's still in the single digit range
18:24 < matches> Or did you manage to wait long enough to zoom a bit
18:25 < matches> I'm sure I can make this division better if I use some kind of binary searchish type algorithgm
18:25 < matches> I could look up the proper algorithm too I guess
18:25 <@sulix> Yeah, I was thinking binary search.
18:26 <@sulix> You'd want a decent bitshift implementation.
20:32 < matches> Yeah it is more difficult than I thought
20:33 < matches> I'm going to need "shift_digits" assembly functions
20:33 < matches> C style bit shifting has too many wierd edge cases
20:36 < matches> 0x7000000000000000 >> 3 == 0x0e00000000000000 ?
20:36 < matches> There are more bits set in the second number than the first!
20:38 < matches> And unlike multiplication where it fills an extra register for you, you just lose the extra bits with shr and shl :S
20:39 < matches> Except for a carry
20:39 < matches> So I'd have to do a loop one bit shift at a time
20:39 < matches> Blergh
20:40 < matches> I shall resume my epic battle with primary school level mathematics tomorrow
--- Day changed Sun Jul 06 2014
00:32 <@sulix> long division of an arbint by a uint64 worksish.
09:47 <@sulix> long division of an arbint by a uint64 now actually works and is less obviously badly designed
10:32 < matches> Thanks...
10:33 < matches> In other news I seem to have broken X again
10:34 <@sulix> Oh no!
10:35 < matches> We need an ASCI renderer...
10:36 <@sulix> That can not possibly end badly.
10:40 < matches> shouldn't be too hard...
10:40 < matches> Lets see if reinstalling fglrx works
10:41 < matches> I need to add that to a boot script :S
10:42 < matches> uhoh installation failed
10:48 <@sulix> Hmm... enabling optimization makes Arbint segfault.
10:49 < matches> You should probably make quadtrees
10:50 < matches> Although I admit you're better at Arbints than me :P
10:50 <@sulix> Yeah... I should.
10:50 <@sulix> But segfaults...
10:51 < matches> Yeah somewhere in std vector I had some as well
10:51 < matches> I think I might change to a custom dynamic array
10:52 < matches> Then fast copying is easier
10:52 <@sulix> Yeah, it's segfaulting in std::swap somewhere, I think.
10:52 < matches> I'll fix it when I have X
10:53 < matches> Or an ascii renderer...
10:54 < matches> Probably more realistic at this stage
10:55 <@sulix> I'm pretty certain there's a unicode character for "face of disapproval due to fglrx bugginess".
10:56 < matches> Yeah but when you try and render it you get a seg fault
11:24 < matches> Woo, xvesa
11:26 < matches> I see what you mean about fglrx being hard to remove
11:58 <@sulix> So: quick profile. 98% of frame rendering time is spent in Arbint::Division.
11:59 < matches> Yeah
12:00 < matches> I *was* trying to install kcachegrind you know
12:00 <@sulix> The vast majority of that time is spent in malloc and free.
12:01 < matches> Well copy constructing an Arbint requires copy constructing the vector
12:01 < matches> I'll investigate
12:01 < matches> Now I have X again
12:01 < matches> Go make a quad tree
12:02 <@sulix> Also, should add_digits clear the carry flag at the beginning?
12:02 < matches> Hmm
12:02 < matches> Probably
12:02 < matches> Yeah
12:09 < matches> I suspect having a copy-on-write Arbint won't help as much as having a non-terrible division algorithm so I'll try fix that first
12:09 < matches> But copy-on-write Arbint shouldn't be too hard
12:09 < matches> Oh unless the original changes
12:10 < matches> Yeah it would be hard
12:10 < matches> I'm sure I did something like it before
12:10 < matches> Back when I actually made my own data structures instead of just using std::vector
12:15 <@sulix> My custom vector class: http://davidgow.net/stuff/DynamicArray.h
12:15 <@sulix> Probably won't compile without a bunch of other files, though.
12:16 < matches> I think I have several, in different versions of neurosis
12:16 < matches> Which was never under git
12:16 < matches> Some of them were prone to segfaults though
12:17 < matches> So, will you have some kind of quad-tree-y thing by monday? :P
12:17 <@sulix> Mine works, but doesn't call constructors or destructors, so it's only really useful for ints/floats/pointers or structs thereof.
12:18 <@sulix> I have a "struct QuadTree".
12:18 <@sulix> (You can't do anything with it, but the basic idea is there)
12:20 < matches> My shifting operators might not have been as fith as I thought last night
12:20 < matches> Since 7 and e do actually have the same number of bits
12:21 < matches> I'm not sure where that came from
12:21 < matches> Ah dammit
12:21 < matches> Cannot find -lGL
12:22 <@sulix> Try just removing that from the Makefile
12:22 <@sulix> I think when I GL-3'd everything I made it load libGL at runtime.
12:23 < matches> Well it will compile but I get glx errors
12:23 < matches> I get similar errors running glxinfo though...
12:24 < matches> Odd
12:26 <@sulix> I think you still have some of fglrx breaking things.
12:26 <@sulix> It replaces the system libGL.so
12:26 < matches> I installed mesa's stuff
12:27 <@sulix> You need to also get the version of libGL that runs as part of the X server, IIRC.
12:28 < matches> I'll try some apt-get --reinstalls
12:29 < matches> I think most of my problems were that debian was going "You don't have a graphics driver, here, have one" and then things were breaking and reinstalling fglrx would give me graphics but leave me with a partially installed debian driver as well :S
12:30 < matches> Well ok
12:30 < matches> most of my problems were fglrx
12:30 <@sulix> I remain sceptical that installing fglrx by hand will ever cause anything that is not pain.
12:30 < matches> Well it worked better than the open source drivers for a very long time
12:30 < matches> It all ended in tears and segfaults though
12:32 < matches> Also it worked better than the non-free fglrx package in the debian repos which always ended in tears and segfaults
12:33 <@sulix> I use the non-free nvidia package, which works fine, even if it is horribly outdated.
12:34 <@sulix> I'm scared of the sheer amount of ripping up the rendering code getting quadtrees working will take.
12:39 < matches> Haha
12:40 < matches> It might be easier to do the CPU rendering in quad trees first?
12:40 < matches> I'm not quite sure how you'll do it
12:41 < matches> CPU rendering at least gives you direct control over the rendering target as a pixel buffer
12:41 < matches> GPU rendering is a bit shady (ho ho)
12:41 <@sulix> ...
12:42 <@sulix> That was terrible, yet accurate!
12:42 < matches> With the CPU rendering we're already passing the objects list, view, and target bounds
12:42 < matches> So maybe you can adapt View or something to be quad-tree-ish
12:43 < matches> Good luck
12:44 <@sulix> Yeah, the current plan is to adapt the rendering stuff to accept a "first object id" and "last object id", and then only render those.
12:47 < matches> Hmm, you could call RenderUsingCPU with a different target pixel buffer for each part of your quad tree or something
12:48 < matches> Oh well, hopefully I can adapt whatever you do into RenderUsingASCII :P
12:49 < matches> I don't need GLX working to try and fix division but I'd really like to have GLX working
12:49 < matches> Sigh
13:12 < matches> I'm making progress, instead of reporting an invalid operation glxinfo segfaults now
13:13 < matches> So I have the wrong libraries or something... how to get the right ones...
13:32 <@sulix> Woo. I got it compiling again!
13:32 <@sulix> And the rendering is only half-wrong.
13:33 < matches> Nice
13:33 < matches> Manually deleting anything on my system with fglrx in it...
13:34 <@sulix> Someone really needs to write an "fglrx removal guide".
13:34 < matches> I'm not sure why reinstalling the radeon driver and mesa isn't actually giving me a libGL
13:34 < matches> At least
13:34 < matches> I suspect it is just leaving the existing broken one
13:36 <@sulix> So it turns out that *2 I don't understand is important.
14:01 < matches> Ok
14:01 < matches> I have glxgears
14:01 < matches> An epic achievement
14:01 < matches> I had to go back to fglrx but at least this time its the debian packaged version
14:02 < matches> The radeon driver seems to work better for stuff that isn't glx
14:03 < matches> Which is pretty cool but I kind of like glx actually working
14:11 < matches> Ok... time to fix division
14:11 < matches> Finally
14:11 < matches> No wait time for coffee
14:11 < matches> Then time to fix division
14:24 < matches> Did you test the div_digits function at all?
14:25 < matches> # We want to point to the end of the buffer (LSB)
14:25 < matches> Aren't I doing it the other way around...
14:25 < matches> I'll test it
14:28 <@sulix> With long division you do things in the opposite direction to addition.
14:29 <@sulix> I tested it with some simple things and it worked.
14:34 < matches> Hmm
16:35 < matches> Well the good news is that division is faster now
16:35 <@sulix> Cool!
16:36 < matches> The bad news is that I can't see anything
16:36 < matches> Even when GPU rendering
16:36 < matches> Also segfaults
16:36 <@sulix> I've just pushed some initial quadtree-enabling breakage.
16:36 < matches> I didn't work out how to apply the div_digits to a multi digit number either
16:36 <@sulix> Yeah, I thought about that, then went to bed.
16:36 < matches> I might convert the current algorithm which is all based on bit shifting
16:36 < matches> To assembly
16:37 < matches> But maybe not
16:37 < matches> Actually being able to see something render would be good even if it were slow
16:37 < matches> Then I can think about making it faster
16:38 <@sulix> The old one had all of the beziers connected for no readily apparent reason.
16:38 < matches> I have a tester called "Arbitrary Rationals" (arbrationals.cpp) which sounds like some kind of political party
16:39 < matches> A rather indecisive political party
16:39 <@sulix> That's amazing.
16:48 < matches> Ah, I might be having trouble with the sign of things, hm
16:49 < matches> Rational 15625/288230376151727369 (0.000000) is not close enough at representing 1.000000 (1.000000 vs 0.001000)
16:49 < matches> That doesn't look like a sign problem...
16:52 <@sulix> I admit, 15625/288230376151727369 is not really similar to 1.
16:54 < matches> So, somewhere along the way Arbint(1e6) became 15625 and Arbint(1e6) also became 288230376151727369 ?
16:54 < matches> Uninitialised things?
16:54 < matches> Constructing from int64_t seems fine
17:00 < matches> That amazing moment when it works perfectly and then you realise that's because you compiled with reals as doubles and not rationals
17:00 <@sulix> Ha: I've done that a few times.
17:19 < matches> Maybe I shouldn't have pulled your latest commit
17:19 < matches> Now I have two problems :(
17:22 < matches> Meeting tomorrow
17:22 < matches> "So how much progress have you made?"
17:22 < matches> "Segfaults are up 100% to a record high!"
17:26 < matches> Oh ok
17:26 < matches> I'm not sure if this is new
17:26 < matches> But if there is nothing in the document the GPU rendering doesn't like it
17:27 <@sulix> Hmmm... there might be some issues with that.
17:28 < matches> Ok
17:28 < matches> Rectangle renders
17:28 < matches> With arbitrary rationals
17:28 < matches> In the default view
17:29 <@sulix> Ooh!
17:31 < matches> I'm going to commit this even though it's totally broken
17:32 <@sulix> Things being broken hasn't stopped me from committing them.
17:35 < matches> I love this though
17:35 < matches> When you activate CPU rendering
17:36 < matches> You get like a billion errors from Rational<Arbint>::CheckAccuracy
17:36 < matches> And then the Bezier appears!
17:36 < matches> Magically!
17:36 < matches> I guess I shouldn't rule out a bug in CheckAccuracy :P
17:36 < matches> Although zooming will definitely cause a segfault
17:38 <@sulix> I tried running the really slow version under valgrind, but that turned out to be a bad idea.
17:39 < matches> I've pushed the slightly less really slow version
17:39 < matches> That is still really slow
17:39 < matches> I can't install kcachegrind
17:39 < matches> It is really annoying
17:40 < matches> There aren't any valgrind analysis things that don't require the entirity of KDE are there?
17:40 < matches> Or should I just learn how to read the raw output files
17:40 <@sulix> Cool: it works.
17:41 <@sulix> (I dunno, I just use KDE :P)
17:41 <@sulix> You can try "perf" or "oprofile".
17:41 < matches> Well I can't even install KDE :S
17:41 <@sulix> They're terminal-based.
17:41 <@sulix> Well, perf is, at least. There's a gtk+ oprofile gui.
17:41 <@sulix> They both measure the entire system by default though.
17:43 <@sulix> Rational::Simplify is ~54% of time (w/ GPU rendering) with the new build, according to callgrind.
17:50 < matches> I'm a little confused by some of the outputs of Rational::CheckAccuracy given that it does actually seem to render the bezier properly on the CPU
17:50 < matches> I think the segfault might be related to my (ab)use of things like memcpy on std::vector::data()
17:52 < matches> Also I think I've fixed my dependency hell
17:52 < matches> Well
17:53 < matches> Depending on how this turns out I will end up with the entirity of KDE hopefully including kcachegrind, or I will end up with no X again
17:53 < matches> And much swearing will ensue
17:54 <@sulix> Yeah, it segfaults immediately if you enable optimization level 2 or higher.
17:55 < matches> Hm
17:56 < matches> I'll probably get rid of std::vector then
17:57 <@sulix> The problem I'm seeing is in the vector<Bezier>::push_back() bit, so who knows what is going on.
17:58 < matches> Oh that's odd
17:58 <@sulix> Okay, don't run it in valgrind.
17:58 <@sulix> I'm getting about 200 "uninitialized values" a second in the nVidia driver.
17:58 < matches> But I just installed kcachegrind!
17:59 <@sulix> (Oh wait, that was with REAL=double)
17:59 < matches> Haha
18:00 < matches> Wait, vector<Bezier>::push_back causes problems even with REAL=double :S
18:00 <@sulix> Nah, the nVidia driver seems to.
18:01 <@sulix> I've now compiled again with REAL=5 and I'm getting a number of invalid reads off the end of the vector<digit_t> in GetBit()
18:02 < matches> Division
18:02 < matches> Oh
18:02 < matches> oooh
18:02 < matches> > -> >=
18:02 < matches> ...
18:03 <@sulix> Well, my first attempt to fix it just broke rendering.
18:04 <@sulix> Ah, yep, I see it.
18:05 < matches> I think I need to do less memcpy/memseting and more std::vector::operator= -_-
18:05 < matches> I mean, they implemented it for a reason
18:05 <@sulix> So, with that change it no longer segfaults!
18:05 <@sulix> (It corrupts memory and throws an exception instead)
18:05 < matches> Woah
18:06 < matches> I changed Arbint operator= to use std::vector operator=
18:06 < matches> And now I get a filled circle on top of my bezier...
18:07 < matches> Ok, I will rewrite Arbint to just rely solely on std::vector operations
18:08 < matches> That might slow it down but it's impossible to test that the maths works properly with all these memory errors
18:09 <@sulix> Should you be using m_sign more often?
18:09 <@sulix> It seems to be "forgotten" in a number of places...
18:10 <@sulix> Hmm... everything looks like it's working at the moment, actually.
18:10 < matches> What else did you change?
18:10 < matches> Try zooming
18:11 < matches> That will break it
18:11 <@sulix> Zooming seemed to work, actually.
18:11 < matches> Are you sure you compiled with REAL=5
18:11 < matches> The sign is a bit wierd
18:12 <@sulix> It works for a little bit, then the view bounds suddenly become huge.
18:12 < matches> Haha
18:12 <@sulix> For no reason, the y coordinate jumps to 10^8.
18:13 <@sulix> Also after you've zoomed, sometimes translating goes in the wrong direction or is otherwise broken.
18:15 < matches> That might be related to m_sign...
18:15 < matches> The joys of implementing your own number representation
18:16 <@sulix> Trying to "fix" the sign fixed zoom, but broke translation even more.
18:18 <@sulix> Also: best representation of 1 ever: 9223372036854775807/9223372036854775807
18:18 < matches> Hahaha
18:18 < matches> Oh
18:18 < matches> I think I commented out a Simplify() somewhere :P
18:18 < matches> No
18:18 < matches> I didn't
18:18 < matches> Hmm
18:19 < matches> Well I am going to push some minor changes
18:20 <@sulix> Also: T g = gcd(T(llabs(P)),T(llabs(Q)));
18:20 <@sulix> Is that "llabs" truncating everything?
18:20 < matches> ...
18:20 < matches> Probably
18:20 < matches> !
19:05 <@sulix> Well, my attempt to write a templated abs() function that worked for Arbint may have worked, but it crashed X before I could find out.
19:05 <@sulix> I do not want to know how that is possible.
19:05 < matches> Heh, I was trying to do that before dinner
19:06 < matches> I just got segfaults
19:08 < matches> Oh 
19:08 < matches> I see
19:08 <@sulix> I suspect the best thing for me to do is to just stash all of my changes and break some more quadtrees.
19:08 < matches> Yeah
19:08 <@sulix> But first I'll have to get X working again.
19:08 < matches> The problem with overriding llabs is that the constructor for Arbint calls llabs...
19:08 < matches> And Arbint has a constructor from int64_t...
19:09 < matches> So as soon as you implement llabs using Arbint it will call itself for eternity
19:09 <@sulix> I made a new function called "real_abs" (because "i_went_to_the_gym_now_look_at_my_abs" was too long) and just used that.
19:09 < matches> Bahaha
19:10 <@sulix> Then X started using 100% of my CPU and nothing responds to anything.
19:10 < matches> :S
19:10 <@sulix> The mouse cursor still moves, but everything else is a black screen.
19:11 <@sulix> Excellent, "sudo pkill -9 Xorg" has made everything work again.
19:12 <@sulix> (And even fixed an unrelated problem, which is good but worrying)
19:17 <@sulix> Note to self: if something crashes X when you run it once, don't run it again after fixing X.
19:18 < matches> Haha
19:18 <@sulix> Now to try it for a third time.
19:18 < matches> I've got an abs working
19:18 <@sulix> Ah, excellent.
19:19 <@sulix> Does it make things better? Worse? The same but slower?
19:19 <@sulix> Crash X?
19:20 < matches> It doesn't crash X but I think I have an infinite loop in gcd now
19:21 < matches> I should probably work out why X/X for really big X is not simplifying to 1/1
19:43 < matches> So it turns out it's a pretty good idea to have a tester that actually tests lots of different numbers with every single operation
19:43 < matches> As opposed to
19:43 < matches> "1/2 == 0.5" yep looks good she'll be right
19:43 < matches> One could say
19:43 < matches> There are *signs* of serious problems
19:44  * matches puts on sunglasses
19:44 < matches> No wait I got the order wrong
19:44 < matches> Oh well I wasn't cool enough to watch that show anyway
20:18 < matches> So now I have a tester that actually tests things
20:18 < matches> I just need to blindly fumble around with m_sign until all the tests are passed!
20:18 < matches> Right?!
20:26 < matches> Heh, it's amazing how many errors fixing the sign in Division prevents
20:27 < matches> Well amazing until you realise that every single Rational calls a division at least once
20:44 <@sulix> Hmmm... there seem to be a lot of cases where we get things becoming 1 (randomnumber/randomnumber) instead of what they should be, according to CheckAccuracy.
20:46 < matches> Yeah
20:46 < matches> It should work nicer nowish
20:46 < matches> At least, the tester works most of the time...
20:46 < matches> It still randomly fails sometimes
20:46 <@sulix> Yeah, it's working much better.
20:46 < matches> Now 12% of the time is in std::vector::size()
20:46 <@sulix> All of the things I've seen have been to do with subtraction in ScaleAroundPoint()
20:47 < matches> Ah
20:47 < matches> Wait I haven't pushed the 12% in std::vector::size yet
20:47 < matches> tl;dr I was allocating one extra digit every single addition operation and then deleting it if it wasn't used
20:48 < matches> Because I am just that good :P
20:48 < matches> I suspect the Arbint is going to break when it actually does need to resize itself
20:49 < matches> But for now I will settle for "At least as good as an int64_t"
20:49 < matches> * But slower
20:49 <@sulix> I'm curious as to why digit_t is int64_t and not uint64_t.
20:49 < matches> Oh it is uint64_t now
20:49 < matches> It was int64_t mainly because geany doesn't syntax highlight uint64_t
20:50 <@sulix> Ah.
20:50 < matches> Then I realised being int64_t instead of uint64_t broke the shift operators
20:50 < matches> Because they try to preserve the sign
20:50 <@sulix> Shift on signed ints is undefined behaviour, IIRC.
20:51 < matches> Yeah I was considering writing the shift in assembly but its easier to handle the underflow/overflow into the next digit in C
20:52 < matches> Zooming is still incredibly slow
20:54 < matches> In fact it is infinitely slow
20:54 <@sulix> I once waited about 10 minutes and did get another frame.
20:54 < matches> In fact the Arbint appears to want to grow an infinite number of 0L digits
20:55 <@sulix> Ah ha! I have realised why CheckAccuracy is only throwing errors on "-".
20:55 <@sulix> The CheckAccuracy calls for everything else have been commented out,
20:55 < matches> They should all be commented out so I can use tests/realops.test instead
20:57 < matches> 23 / 12000 operations failed... doesn't seem too bad...
20:58 <@sulix> Keep in mind that == isn't precise as it casts to doubles.
20:58 < matches> You get more like 40 out of Rational<int64_t>
20:58 < matches> Yeah they are "equal" if it is within 1e-1 :S
20:58 < matches> I'm searching for the more totally catastrophic failures like the wrong sign first :P
21:20 < matches> Ok tomorrow I might just try using boost arbitrary integers or something
21:28 <@sulix> All of the failures I'm getting are with "/="
21:28 <@sulix> Except one, which was only just outside the error bounds, so probably the doubles' fault.
21:30 < matches> I was restricting the test values somewhat though
21:30 < matches> (With rand()%100 + 1)
21:33 <@sulix> You do know that the Rational<Arbint> -> double conversion is totally broken if either P or Q have > 1 digit.
21:33 < matches> Yeah I noticed that
21:37 <@sulix> Oh man, re-enabling the operator double on Arbint totally breaks things.
21:40 < matches> Yeah don't touch it
21:40 < matches> Basically touching anything will totally break something else
21:40 < matches> :S
21:40 < matches> I should probably sleep some more before attempting to fix things
21:40 <@sulix> The other bug I just found is that Arbint didn't have the unary "-" operator, so writing "-P" would silently cast to int64_t.
21:41 < matches> Ah ok
21:41 < matches> I thought unary - was equivelant to "0 - x" but I suppose that doesn't make sense
21:41 <@sulix> Nah, it has to be written explicitly.
21:44 <@sulix> Okay, I think I've got realops.test down to 0 errors with Arbint.
21:45 < matches> Well you're doing better than me
21:46 <@sulix> I'm running it with a huge number of tests now.
21:47 <@sulix> 85.95% of my entire computer's processing time is in IPDF::Rational<IPDF::Arbint>::operator/=
21:48 < matches> Can you push what you have?
21:48 <@sulix> Yeah, I will in a second.
21:48 <@sulix> It's basically a lot of hacks.
21:49 <@sulix> CPU rendering is broken, though.
21:49 < matches> There were cases where it would grow an infinite number of digits; did you fix those?
21:49 <@sulix> Probably not: it still gets very, very slow zooming.
21:51 < matches> Yeah there's something wrongish it shouldn't need extra digits so fast
21:51 <@sulix> Pushed now.
21:52 <@sulix> Now to look at the diff and see what I actually changed.
21:53 < matches> Oh
21:54 < matches> Simplify call in Rational operator= is good
21:56 < matches> I think I fixed some more bugs but I also introduced an infinite loop so...
21:57 < matches> How is the quad tree bit going :P
21:57 <@sulix> Yeah, about that...
21:58 < matches> Remember Arbints don't have to work for quad trees to work :P
21:58 < matches> Or do they
21:58 <@sulix> In theory, no.
21:58 <@sulix> In practise, it probably depends on how one defines "success".
21:59 < matches> I think we need to design a test pattern where you actually want to zoom forever
21:59 <@sulix> Highly theoretically, I'm pretty certain the QuadTree basically ends up isomorphic to the Arbint.
21:59 < matches> Seems legit
21:59 < matches> Can you prove it?
21:59 < matches> That would be a useful result
21:59 <@sulix> Yes*
22:00 <@sulix> *hopefully
22:00 < matches> I'm afraid most of my "theory" is based solely on intuition at this point :S
22:00 < matches> Well the division algorithm came from wikipedia but division isn't as intuitive as the other operations
22:01 < matches> Actually if I can fix all these other stupid bugs I'll try my binary searchish division idea
22:01 <@sulix> Yeah, I spent a while racking my brain for long division, and then only managing to work it out for dividing by a single digit.
22:02 <@sulix> That's really, really easy in asm, as well, which is nice, but not quite as useful as I'd hoped.
22:02 < matches> It's pretty useful; we can still have a "if div.m_digits.size() use the assembly function"
22:02 < matches> * size() == 1 that is
22:02 <@sulix> Wikipedia mentioned doing newton-raphson for division, which is a terrifying thought.
22:02 < matches> Haha
22:03 < matches> So I've got Arbint::Shrink() calls pretty much after every operation now for no apparent reason
22:04 <@sulix> Does it help?
22:05 < matches> On the 551st test Shrink has been called 4 times in a row and then something after that causes an infinite loop
22:05 < matches> I can't work out what it is
22:05 < matches> I have a GrowDigit that spams Debug messages now
22:05 < matches> So its not that
22:05 < matches> It's silent
22:05 < matches> Let's see what callgrind has to say
22:06 < matches> A few minutes should be enough for it to be obvious right
22:07 < matches> I think the division loop runs forever
22:07 < matches> Bugger
22:08 < matches> Wait that doesn't make sense there's only 1 digit
22:08 < matches> Blargh
22:17 <@sulix> So using the asm version when possible makes realops.test 20x faster, but there were a couple of failed tests.
22:18 <@sulix> I'm not sure if they're new or not, because I was able to run many more tests.
22:20 <@sulix> Also, I think I've found your infinite loop.
22:23 <@sulix> Okay, maybe I've just obfuscated the code some more.
22:24 < matches> Infinite loop is due to subtraction bug
22:24 < matches> I'm pretty sure
22:24 <@sulix> Yeah, pushing a "fix"
22:26 <@sulix> Pushed, but think I might have found a bug in the fix.
22:26 < matches> Ok
22:27 < matches> (0,0) - +(16292953875657448384,1) = -(16292953875657448384,2) seems wrong
22:28 <@sulix> Pish! Nothing could be more beautiful.
22:28 < matches> It's pretty hard to debug with such huge numbers :P
22:31 <@sulix> Try this...
22:31  * sulix pushes.
22:32 < matches> What does that do...
22:33 < matches> oh
22:33 < matches> You negate the entire thing and add one
22:33 < matches> Seems legit
22:33 <@sulix> So "two's complement" negatives mean that -A == flip all bits of A and add 1.
22:33 < matches> Yeah
22:34 <@sulix> There seems to be a bug in the asm div_digits though.
22:35 < matches> I'm taking that out until I know the main algorithm works :P
22:35 < matches> Silly I spent so much time wondering why division was broken without checking subtraction
22:36 < matches> After I spent all that time thinking I was so clever for doing division using bit shifts and subtractions
22:37 <@sulix> It still takes forever.
22:37 <@sulix> (Zooming in, that is)
22:37 < matches> Nah there's still a bug
22:37 < matches> You're running with an older version of realops test
22:37 < matches> Hang on
22:37 < matches> I will push things
22:38 < matches> Trying to avoid a merge...
22:38 <@sulix> And I will get a drink.
22:44 < matches> So if you run enough tests you eventually get a bunch of SubBasic spam
22:45 < matches> Which is actually occuring due to "<" operators
22:45 <@sulix> Yeah: I'm going to add a bunch of hacks to "<" at some point.
22:45 < matches> Which are in the Division loop ( >= is implemented in terms of <)
22:45 < matches> Don't add the hacks until subtraction works!
22:46 < matches> I don't want to optimise it yet
22:46 < matches> Otherwise all the optimisations hide the bugs
22:47 < matches> Time for a tester that just does subtractions I think
22:48 <@sulix> It might be worth adding a bunch of SDL_assert_paranoid()'s everywhere that check that (a - b)+b == a and similar on every - call.
22:49 < matches> Most of the tested numbers can be represented in a single digit which is causing problems
22:50 < matches> With finding the bugs in the multi-digit algorithm
22:52 < matches> For small enough multi digit Arbints testing against doubles might work?
22:52 <@sulix> Maybe.
22:53 <@sulix> You'd lose enough precision that it's not worth it for anything > 2 digits, I'd say.
22:53 < matches> Yeah, 2 digits should be enough to make sure the algorithms actually work though
22:54 < matches> 2 digits in one operand and 1 in the other (which will resize itself to have a leading zero if necessary)
22:55 < matches> At some point I am going to have to use a library for Arbints and compare ours to it
22:55 < matches> But I kind of want ours to work properly before bringing in an external one
22:56 < matches> When I try floats I might just bring in the external library :P
22:56 <@sulix> Two questions:
22:57 <@sulix> 1. What is "borrow" supposed to be? Is it the "carry" or the "result has changed sign" or something else?
22:57 <@sulix> 2. What do you think of replacing Sub() with Add() + Negate()?
22:59 < matches> borrow's like carry (I'm using subtract with borrow in asm) it should get subtracted from the next digit, and if at the end it is still set then it means your result is less than zero
22:59 < matches> and 2 sounds like an excellent idea
23:00 <@sulix> Okay.
23:00 <@sulix> 'cause there's a separate "carry" flag and "sign" flag, so I wasn't sure.
23:01 < matches> subtract actually working would be slightly faster than add and then negate I think
23:01 <@sulix> I'm not 100% sure if all the code is using m_sign as the sign or if some of it is trying to use 2's complement, which isn't really possible with arbints.
23:03 < matches> When I was testing the subtraction code I was using int64_t instead of uint64_t and it seemed to work :S
23:04 < matches> I should check whether sbb does unsigned or signed subtraction
23:04 <@sulix> Both, I think.
23:04 <@sulix> 2's complement makes them the same, which is why it's so nice.
23:04 <@sulix> But it requires a fixed number of bits to work.
23:09 < matches> Whoops now the bit shift tester runs forever as well
23:13 < matches> Oh no it doesn't
23:13 < matches> It just exceeds the limit on GrowDigits
23:14 < matches> Phew
23:14 < matches> Bit shifting works at least
23:14 < matches> Or at least it is consistently broken
23:14 < matches> (a >> X) << X == a
23:14 < matches> But == could be broken
23:14 < matches> NOTHING IS SAFE
23:14 < matches> When you are writing your own number represntation :(
23:15 <@sulix> Idea: 2's complement subtraction will make -ve numbers have an "infinite" number of 1s at the front, so would that be infinite looping, trying to continually add digits with 1s.
23:15 < matches> Operator overloading is amazingly powerful and yet it seems like the best way to make seemingly sane code do batshit insane things
23:15 <@sulix> I think the answer is "no: we're always trapping it and converting it" but am not sure.
23:16 < matches> Our subtraction doesn't take forever
23:16 < matches> The issue is when the result would be less than zero
23:16 < matches> Hang on let me make another tester
23:17 < matches> Well, I'll put it in the arbint tester instead of the real tester
23:18 < matches> Since it's pretty clear the bugs are in arbint not rational<arbint> itself
23:18 < matches> Although there might be bugs in rational<T> as well
23:18 < matches> But we'll squish those when we get to them
23:18 < matches> Also quad trees are they a thing yet?
23:20 <@sulix> "The quadtrees aren't in the code, they were in your heart all along."
23:21 < matches> Haha
23:21 < matches> Tell that to Tim :P
23:21 < matches> Ok (45,10) - (128,0) = -(83,18446744073709551605)
23:21 < matches> But I'm pretty sure it should be -(83,9)
23:21 < matches> + even
23:22 < matches> (The least significant digit is first)
23:23 < matches> Actually the plot thickens
23:23 < matches> +45,10 - +128,0 = +18446744073709551533,9
23:23 < matches> +45,10 - +128 = -83,18446744073709551605
23:23 <@sulix> What is 0 + -1?
23:24 < matches> +0 + -1 = -1
23:24 <@sulix> I am pleased to hear that.
23:25 < matches> +0 - +1 = -1
23:25 <@sulix> -1 + 2?
23:25 < matches> Now you're getting tricky...
23:25 <@sulix> (As a maths major, I should know this)
23:25 < matches> -1 - +2 = +1
23:25 < matches> They're all single digit though
23:26 <@sulix> Do you mean -1 + +2 = +1?
23:26 <@sulix> Otherwise I'm slightly concerned.
23:26 < matches> Uh yeah
23:26 < matches> Sorry I have to change both the Arbint c(a + b) and the Debug
23:26 < matches> Before copy pasting
23:27 < matches> So I guess I should calculate if 45 + 10*2^64 - 128 == 18446744073709551533 + 9*2^64
23:31 < matches> Expletive grenade
23:31 < matches> I started Mathematica 
23:31 < matches> fglrx segfaulted
23:31 < matches> startx
23:32 < matches> -bash: /usr/bin/startx: No such file or directory
23:32 < matches> Also now I am getting zenity int3 error messages all over the bottom line of my terminal
23:33 < matches> Whyyy
23:33 <@sulix> That's terrible.
23:33 < matches> Why does this computer persecute me so
23:34 < matches> I gave it a good life
23:34 <@sulix> You should ask frames how he runs mathematica on the command line.
23:34 < matches> I fed it lots of AC power
23:34 < matches> I replaced that keyboard that I broke
23:34 < matches> I only spilled coffee on it once
23:34 < matches> I *tried* to use the drivers that weren't fglrx
23:35 < matches> I give up, see you tomorrow. Try not to totally rewrite all the Arbint code :P
23:35 < matches> I think the subtraction might actually work except for the resizing bit
23:35 <@sulix> Nah, I'm calling it a night here too.
23:36 <@sulix> I tried replacing the carry bit with the sign bit and all went to hell there, so I'm inclined to agree with you.
23:37 < matches> Well using my calculator I get something with a 184 ish at the start and too many digits to display
23:37 < matches> Hence the mathematica disaster
23:40 < matches> Oh well, I got startx back by installing "xinit" so that's something
23:41 < matches> I guess apt decided to remove it as part of apt-get autoremove in its infinite wisdom
23:41 <@sulix> I have decided to never call apt-get autoremove.
23:42 <@sulix> If at any point there are too many old packages for me to get things done, I'll just reinstall the OS entirely.
--- Day changed Mon Jul 07 2014
08:40 < matches> I try to avoid it, but sometimes apt won't let me do anything because it would break some dependency
08:40 < matches> Although usually even after I run autoremove it complains
08:41 < matches> Had to use aptitude to fix my "You can'd have kde-runtime!" issues
08:45 < matches> Anyway wolfram alpha says that example +45,10 - +128 == +18446744073709551533,9
08:45 < matches> is correct
08:45 < matches> Checking the algorithm using 8 bits it should work too
08:46 < matches> So it works as long as you supply the leading zeros...
08:46 < matches> (On that particular case...)
08:48 < matches> I hope it's not interpreting Arbint(128L) as Arbint(128u, ...)
08:48 < matches> Nope sanity seems to prevail there
08:50 < matches> Ah
08:50 < matches> Ok
08:50 < matches> First bug of the day: The subtracted argument needs to be resized
08:50 < matches> As I am doing (45,10) - (128)
08:59 < matches> :O
08:59 < matches> I passed the realops test
09:00 < matches> And it's also a lot faster now!
09:00 < matches> Probably because the subtraction bug meant it was spending a long time in division to get the wrong result
09:01 < matches> Yeah it should have been obvious division can't have been that slow for numbers starting at 64 bits since it does at most as many iterations as the number of bits
09:01 < matches> Oh well
09:02 < matches> Should probably not celebrate just yet, now the bezier looks really wierd again
09:04 < matches> Ok
09:04 < matches> Actually compiling with Real == Rational<Arbint> might be a better test
09:04 < matches> But it still passes
09:05 < matches> In particular it passes with Arbints where int64_t fails horribly
09:05 < matches> So something is right
09:05 < matches> Just not all of it...
09:08 < matches> The GPU rendering seems to workish
09:09 < matches> We really quickly end up with Arbints of size 30 digits or so :S
09:09 < matches> Which is big enough to give an overflow in doubles I think
09:10 < matches> Rational::ToDouble can probably be written as double(integer division) + Rational(remainder, quotient).ToDouble()
09:10 < matches> (With some things to stop it recursing infinitely)
09:20 < matches> Or even double(integer division) + double(remainder)/double(quotient)
09:20 < matches> I don't think any recursion is needed
09:22 < matches> Oh, there's a "pow" call that is probably broken
09:24 <@sulix> Yeah, I feel the growing quickly is just a fact of life.
09:25 <@sulix> Perhaps changing the zooming to avoid coprimes or something.
09:27 <@sulix> I'm pretty certain that about 3 seconds of zooming is enough to make us need precision and range to match measuring the size of the visible universe in Planck lengths, too.
09:28 <@sulix> "New biggest Arbint of size 173"
09:28 <@sulix> and counting...
09:34 < matches> haha
09:34 < matches> There are more issues I spotted with add and subtract
09:34 < matches> Basically you have to add the leading zeros - all of them
09:35 < matches> My patch only simulates adding one leading zero
09:35 < matches> Actually maybe I don't need to add them all, just enough until the borrow becomes zero
09:36 < matches> But whatever
09:36 < matches> If you're left with a borrow you can't assume that subtracting it from the next digit won't cause a borrow as well
09:37 < matches> Realops is not a good enough tester
09:42 <@sulix> Surely if there's borrow bit, subracting it from zero will always give another...?
09:42 < matches> You only need as many as there are digits in your number
09:42 < matches> At most
09:42 < matches> If you still have a borrow at the end
09:42 < matches> That means the result is negative
09:43 <@sulix> Yeah, that's what I thought: you need to cap the number of digits you add.
09:44 < matches> The problem was the algorithm before didn't finish all the borrows
09:44 < matches> eg: 100 - 2 would have become "-8"
09:44 < matches> Because 2 only has one digit
09:44 <@sulix> My powers of mathematics tell me that that is not quite correct.
09:45 < matches> What, that our algorithm was wrong?
09:45 <@sulix> No, that 100-2 is not -8
09:45 < matches> Yes
09:45 < matches> Yes that's the problem :P
09:46 < matches> So basically the two numbers need to be the same size but since we have a constant argument I'm sticking in a "borrow_digits" vector if there is a borrow
09:46 < matches> Addition also needs it for carry
09:46 < matches> Damn
09:47 < matches> I'd hoped that might fix the beziers not looking like beziers on the CPU bug
09:50 <@sulix> I've pushed code to clear the carry/borrow flag before adding/subtracting.
09:50 <@sulix> I don't think any bug is triggered, but there was the potential for off-by-one errors.
09:52 < matches> Argh no
09:52 < matches> Merge
09:53 < matches> Yeah I'm pushing a fix for bugs that I don't think we've seen (yet)
09:54 <@sulix> Out of curiosity, I tried removing the Simplify() calls from Rational.
09:54 <@sulix> Relatedly, I've coined the term "NaN soup"
09:54 < matches> Oh, clearing the carry/borrow flag might actually fix a bug with the code I just committed
09:54 < matches> No wait it won't
09:55 < matches> Eh it's still kind of dangerous to assume it isn't set to start with
09:55 <@sulix> I think the flag was probably already cleared by the code the compiler generated, but that might not be the case if it's optimized.
09:55 < matches> One of my early attempts had inline adc instructions in a for loop
09:56 < matches> Which failed miserably because the for loop was clearing the carry flag :P
09:57 <@sulix> For some reason "*=" segfaults if optimization is enabled, but I don't know why.
09:57 < matches> Yuk
09:58 <@sulix> Somehow we end up with "mul" as a null reference.
09:58 < matches> Rataional::*= or Arbint?
09:58 <@sulix> Arbint
09:58 <@sulix> (So, also rational)
09:58 <@sulix> Valgrind isn't picking anything up.
09:58 < matches> null references are the worst
09:59 < matches> Since I'm pretty sure the point of a reference is that it is never null...
09:59 < matches> I'm sure this doesn'
09:59 < matches> t stop people from deliberately creating null references
09:59 < matches> And also checking that they are not null
10:02 <@sulix> Tried compiling with clang. Nope.
10:02 <@sulix> Apparently not even #include <iostream> compiles with clang.
10:02 < matches> It might be worth implementing a non assembly version of those functions
10:03 <@sulix> Yeah, that's always a good idea.
10:03 <@sulix> The assembly ones are more fun, though.
10:16 < matches> Hmm I should probably head towards the meeting
16:23 < matches> I have pushed a Gmpint wrapper thing
16:23 < matches> It mimics Arbint as closely as possible.
16:24 < matches> Well by that I mean I just wrapped all the calls to mpz_add() etc in operators
16:24 < matches> It doesn't have all of Arbint's more esoteric functions
16:24 < matches> If we need bit shifts I think I can add them
16:27 < matches> So, writing stuff...
16:28 < matches> Running arbint_vs_gmpint.test in valgrind takes a fair while
16:28 < matches> We will have the definitive answer of just how terrible our multiplication is compared to the Professional (TM) implementation
16:29 < matches> I do have some good news, I think our string conversion might be better
16:29 < matches> Well if you ignore the division
16:31 < matches> *= is about 11 times slower
16:32 < matches> Most of that is in std::vector::resize()
16:32 < matches> But even just mul_digits is greater than the entire Gmpint::operator*=
16:32 < matches> The plot thickens as I try division
16:32 < matches> Which is a good opportunity to get food because it will probably take an hour
16:34 < matches> Note: Don't disable Debug messages if you want time to get food :(
16:35 < matches> And division is just under 100* slower
16:36 < matches> No
16:36 < matches> 1000*
16:37 < matches> So... if we change Rational<Arbint> to Rational<Gmpint>...
16:41 < matches> We still get {nan,nan,nan,nan} eventually but it is generally less shoddy
16:50 <@sulix> Cool: looking at this now.
16:50 <@sulix> I'm digging through the gmp source code as well.
16:51 <@sulix> They have a similar "divide by single int64_t" optimization.
16:51 <@sulix> Also their code is 90% preprocessor macros.
16:51 < matches> Welp
16:51 < matches> At least we have a readable Arbint
16:52 < matches> I don't know what use a readable but slow implementation is
16:52 <@sulix> Ah: I see what they're doing: this is quite clever, particularly from a pure maths point of view.
16:52 <@sulix> They've got a natural number implementation, and have then built their integer representation around that.
16:53 <@sulix> The natural numbler implementation is just a huge set of directories with different assembly implementation.
16:53 <@sulix> So there's an "x86_64" directory, and in that there's a bunch of assembly + a bunch of directories with optimized versions for different individual processor models.
16:55 <@sulix> Also their assembly has lots of ASCII art comments.
16:56 <@sulix> and macros.
17:07 < matches> Yeah "just use GMP" is probably the answer
17:08 < matches> Their Makefiles are pretty intimidating
17:22 < matches> I like that they seem to store the sign as part of the size
17:22 < matches> If something has a negative size it is negative and has |size| digits
17:34 < matches> I guess I will try and write some sort of report about how we implemented Arbitrary Integers but they are terrible compared to existing implementations :P
--- Day changed Thu Jul 24 2014
14:44 < matches> So I was going to work on the project but existential dread
14:45 < matches> About whether my major exists
14:45 < matches> Do I exist?
14:49 <@sulix> Are you thinking? Because cogito ergo sum.
14:50 < matches> I'm not sure I was thinking when I picked this major...
14:50 <@sulix> I did some project code yesterday and then a bug I thought I'd fixed reappeared so I got distracted failing to fix that.
14:50 < matches> Haha
14:53 < matches> Should I upset everyone and recommend freshers for wheel again...
14:54 <@sulix> I'm all for it, but I think the consensus was that we need to make them actually do wheel-y projects first.
14:55 < matches> That seems kind of hypocritical though
14:55 < matches> Because nearly none of active wheel has actually done wheel-y projects
14:55 < matches> Certainly not before getting on wheel
14:56 <@sulix> My current random guess is that the problem is that people used to fix the desktops and stuff, and now everyone has their own laptops to break.
14:56 < matches> But I'll be quiet or people might decide I need to be removed due to lack of doing useful things
14:56 < matches> Yeah
14:56 < matches> That too
14:57 <@sulix> I'll definitely bring it up at the meeting.
15:02 <@sulix> So which CoderDojo forms do I need to fill out?
15:02 < matches> Ooh!
15:02 < matches> http://coderdojowa.org.au/volunteer
15:02 < matches> This one
15:03 < matches> But now you've said that I'm already adding you to the mailing list...
15:04 < matches> There's a thing on Saturday in 2.01 in CS at 12:00pm
15:04 < matches> I hope people actually show up because we are pretty short on presenters
15:04 <@sulix> Yeah, I've got a programming competition then. I'm trying to work out how much of the schedule for the competitions exists.
15:06 <@sulix> Okay, apparently there are programming competitions every saturday in August, which will be fun.
15:07 <@sulix> Although half of them are "details TBD," which sounds ominous.
15:07 <@sulix> Also there is a round 2 and a round 4 but no round 3.
15:11 <@sulix> Okay: it looks like the only weeks I don't have programming competitions on are the last 3 on the form.
15:13 <@sulix> Also I suspect they're running out of names for the programming competitions, because this Saturday's is called the "South Pacific Winter Programming Carnival".
15:21 < matches> Haha
15:27 <@sulix> Form submitted. Sorry for the snarkiness.
15:40 < matches> Brilliant
15:40 < matches> You can do a C or C++ workshop or something :P
15:40 < matches> Or just talk about Commander Keen that'll work
15:40 < matches> Or "Why Javascript is awful and you should forget all the lessons"
15:42 <@sulix> "Intro to DOS programming." :P
18:38 < matches> I did a sort of half hearted attempt at writing more about Arbints
18:39 < matches> Maybe I'll try put fonts in
18:39 < matches> That seems vaguely like not what I am supposed to be doing right now :P
18:43 < matches> There's that virtual FPU sitting there doing nothing
18:43 < matches> That I promised to do things with in my lit review
18:43 < matches> That Tim is marking
18:43 < matches> When I haven't actually done anything with it and he knows it...
18:44 < matches> I can't help but feel like we need a more impressive thing to zoom in on
18:44 < matches> Or even a way to draw things once we have zoomed in
18:46 < matches> Does "We implemented Arbitrary Precision Integers but GMP did it better" count as research?
19:13 < matches> Do we have a memory leak?
19:13 < matches> I've been running it for a while and things are slowing down
19:25 <@sulix> matches: With GMP or just doubles?
19:27 <@sulix> My quick check has us not leaking memory with doubles.
19:27 <@sulix> Well, X leaks memory and the nVidia driver leaks memory, but we're fine.
19:35 < matches> I was actually running with singles :S
19:35 < matches> See push to documents repo
19:35 < matches> There is a pdf
19:35 < matches> I did a thing
19:38 < matches> I'm basing the assumption that x86-64 is IEEE compliant on the fact that it passed the "paranoia" program
19:39 <@sulix> Yeah, x86_64 is IEEE compliant.
19:39 <@sulix> x86_32 is "mostly" IEEE compliant if I recall.
19:41 < matches> Well a picture tells a thousand words
19:41 < matches> So I think I wrote 8000 words today
19:41 < matches> Progress!
19:43 <@sulix> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/tree/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_defines.h?id=9d6166880da83887e3246fb4498c3a07d979cc3b#n162
19:43 <@sulix> I'll see if I can find where they actually set it to non IEEE.
19:43 < matches> Oh I was going to say fglrx did different things to nVidea but as I don't have nVidea that's difficult to do
19:45 <@sulix> Although there's this: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2013-July/041555.html
19:45 <@sulix> Yeah, nVidia, Intel and fglrx all seem to do different things.
19:45 <@sulix> fglrx does the strangest things.
19:45 <@sulix> nVidia does the most consistant things.
19:45 <@sulix> Intel sits nicely in the middle.
19:46 < matches> If we can get four screenshots of the different things at the same view bounds that might be useful
19:47 < matches> Also working out more about what the jagged edges implies about the precision/rounding might be helpful
19:47 < matches> All I've got is "This is clearly not a circle"
19:48 < matches> So it's still doing that with the quad trees enabled, so I assume the quad trees aren't amazingly quadifying everything yet :P
19:48 <@sulix> The quadtrees are basically doing nothing but occasionally causing bugs.
19:48 <@sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-nvidia.png
19:48 < matches> That is progress at least
19:49 < matches> Thanks
19:49 < matches> I will update the others to be the same view bounds
19:49 < matches> I *think* we have code to set the view bounds at start?
19:51 <@sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-intel.png
19:51 < matches> Haha
19:51 < matches> Well it's really obvious that that's different
19:52 < matches> Can you rerun it with -b 0.0869386 0.634194 2.63295e-07 2.63295e-07
19:52 < matches> Obsessive compulsive...
19:52 < matches> Must all be same view bounds...
19:53 < matches> I'd run it on my other laptop with intel integrated graphics except the keyboard still doesn't work
19:55 < matches> Actually don't bother
19:55 <@sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-nvidia1.png
19:57 <@sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-intel1.png
19:59 < matches> oah wierd stuff is happening with the quad tree
19:59 < matches> There is a big circle and a little circle
19:59 < matches> Is that supposed to be here...
20:00 < matches> The distance between them is not constant :S
20:09 <@sulix> Yeah, that doesn't happen on intel and is the bug I've been hitting my head against.
20:09 <@sulix> Pretty certain I'm trying to render one more object than there actually is somewhere, maybe corruping memory in the process.
20:32 < matches> Ok so it turns out the CPU is actually about as terrible as the GPU at those view bounds when you replace the "double" with "float" in the Circle Renderer :S
20:32 <@sulix> That's what I expected.
20:32 <@sulix> It looks like the nVidia one, right?
20:32 < matches> But it does slightly different wrong things!
20:34 < matches> It looks similar-ish
20:35 < matches> It is blocky as opposed to zig zaggy
20:39 < matches> As in it doesn't look as whack as intel
20:43 <@sulix> Hmm... I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I can't see any artefacts at all with CPU rendering w/ those bounds.
20:55 < matches> They are hard coded as doubles
20:55 < matches> Not floats
20:55 < matches> Or reals rather
20:56 <@sulix> Ah.
20:56 <@sulix> This explains much.
21:08 < matches> I have pushed a thing
21:09 < matches> It almost sounds like a real paper
21:09 < matches> Until you realise all it is is "we drew some circles and they look different"
21:09 < matches> Also your screenshots had some kind of crazy blue glowy border
21:10 <@sulix> Yeah, that's the KDE window shadow.
21:10 < matches> Fancy
21:10 <@sulix> It used to make the nVidia driver corrupt screenshots, but it seems to work now.
21:11 < matches> I'm pretty pleased with that 4 way comparison figure...
21:12 < matches> "One of these things is not like the others..."
21:12 < matches> *cough* intel
21:12 <@sulix> The conclusion is brilliant.
21:15 < matches> If we assume the nVidia and x86-64 figures are what things are supposed to look like
21:15 < matches> fglrx tries really hard
21:15 < matches> But doesn't quite make it
21:16 < matches> (I'm pretty sure that's just a particularly good view for it)
21:16 < matches> (If you move it around it goes insane)
21:16 < matches> I can respect the intel shader
21:16 < matches> It isn't afraid to blatantly disregard the rules
21:17 < matches> intel driver rather
21:17 < matches> Not sure why I put "shader" there
21:17 < matches> This has not been as productive as I hoped
21:18 < matches> Still
21:18 < matches> We finally have something written that Tim can pass judgement on
21:18 < matches> He's still in the country right?
21:19 < matches> He might want to finish passing judgement on my literature review first :S
21:21 <@sulix> I think he's still in the country, but don't hold me to that.
21:22 < matches> Ok, so if you translate around with the CPU things don't go insane, but they do on the GPU. That might be caused by something else though.
21:23 < matches> I'll be at University tomorrow
21:24 <@sulix> I might head in, too, then.
21:25 <@sulix> Do things still "go insane" on the GPU with CPU-side coordinate transforms.
21:26 < matches> Yeah
21:26 < matches> It looks like there is a tear
21:27 < matches> So you get this rectangle pattern
21:27 < matches> If you move it around on the CPU it maintains its shape
21:28 <@sulix> I think that fglrx (or maybe just the AMD hardware) calculates the coordinates per-triangle rather than per-vertex or something.
21:28 < matches> Under fglrx the bottom part of it sort of maintains its shape but there is a big diagonal line and the stuff above that changes
21:28 <@sulix> That's pretty weird.
21:29 < matches> Also the bottom part doesn't have concave bits but the top occasionally gets one
21:29 < matches> concave/overhanging whatever
21:29 <@sulix> The whole thing maintains its shape on nvidia (and even intel)
21:29 < matches> Well, the bottom half (and also the CPU/nVidia entire thing) looks kind of like a stair case
21:29 < matches> The top bit gets all these sticky out bits and overhangs
21:30 < matches> Which brings us to our next paper
21:30 < matches> The geology of fglrx
21:30 <@sulix> Intel also does the "staircase" on the other side of the circle.
21:30 < matches> On the other side...
21:30 < matches> Hmm the plot thickens
21:31 < matches> Oh well I need to sleep
21:31 < matches> Why do I feel like I have actually lost sleep over the holidays...
21:32 < matches> I am not ready for semester to start :(
21:32 <@sulix> I know exactly what you mean.
21:33 < matches> I seem to have been roped into unpaid work with physics
21:34 <@sulix> Oh dear. More lab demonstrating or something more interesting?
21:34 < matches> Hopefully if I visit ECM they won't make me do GENG5505 yet
21:34 < matches> Fixing my honours experiment I think...
21:35 <@sulix> Another pipe corroded through?
21:35 < matches> Haha
21:35 < matches> They were wondering where all the electronics went
21:35 < matches> (I have most of it)
21:35 < matches> (Also it's no longer functional)
21:36 < matches> (I may have taken some of it apart...)
21:36 < matches> (Although really the sensible option would have been to burn it with fire)
21:37 < matches> Goodnight anyway
21:37 <@sulix> I'm required to "correct" anything they want to change with this project after submitting it.
21:37 <@sulix> On the morrow, then!
--- Day changed Fri Jul 25 2014
11:24 < matches> I'm at UCC
11:39 <@sulix> Okay, I'll show up once I've sorted out this acedemic record stuff.
12:05 < matches> I went to ECM but apparently just a few other people are having difficulties...
18:24 < matches> So steam browser supports html5 canvas but not keyboard events
18:24 < matches> This seems to happen with a lot of browsers
18:25 < matches> We support html5 canvas (which is pretty much solely designed for web based games)
18:25 < matches> But we don't support any way to actually pass input to the page that doesn't suck
18:25 < matches> (I'm looking at you Safari)
18:31 < matches> It sort of spoils the "HTML5 is AWESOME" message the HTML5 people are aiming for
18:31 < matches> The best bit of html5 is <canvas> and that you no longer need to use html because you can just draw everything in the canvas...
18:32 < matches> Which is scarily similar to using PostScript
--- Day changed Mon Jul 28 2014
10:05 < matches> In 2.07 now
10:07 < matches> You removed SDL from contrib
10:07 < matches> So now it won't compile on the lab machines
10:07  * matches gets out the laptop then
--- Day changed Tue Jul 29 2014
09:59 < matches> I seem to have this bizarre illness
10:00 < matches> Where half my head feels fine
10:00 < matches> And the other half feels like I've been trying to read brainfuck
10:00 < matches> I hope you don't catch it
10:00 < matches> The side that is sick is the side that was closest to the group hug
10:00 < matches> Coincidence!?
10:00 < matches> I think not!
10:08 < matches> You know how there's this theory about the two halves of the brain being semi independent and sort of subconsciously able to think by themselves
10:08 < matches> I think the left side of my brain is dead
10:08 < matches> It's not responding to pings
10:09 < matches> I think the project working side might be the alive one though, so we shall see if I can actually do something useful
--- Log closed Tue Jul 29 23:13:08 2014
--- Log opened Wed Jul 30 12:03:38 2014
12:03 -!- matches [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
12:03 -!- Irssi: #ipdf: Total of 2 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 1 normal]
12:03 -!- Irssi: Join to #ipdf was synced in 0 secs
16:28 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has quit [Ping timeout: 121 seconds]
17:25 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
--- Day changed Sun Aug 03 2014
12:43 < matches> So I found my moronic mistake with the virtual FPU and it seems to actually work
12:44 < matches> I think it's even slower than using Rational<Arbint>
12:44 < matches> Unless everything's slow because of the QT now
12:45 < matches> There's an awful lot of "Rendering QT node" debug
12:46 < matches> No its the VFPU that makes sense
12:47 < matches> Since every floating point operation now requires writing 18 hex characters over a unix domain socket
12:47 < matches> Hooray VHDL
12:48 < matches> (I'm sure if you have $$$$ and like Enterprise(TM) software VHDL is great)
12:48 < matches> I'll just do some miscellaneous things and hopefully some of them will be useful
12:48 < matches> Bye
14:14 < matches> So with the VFPU and doing everything on the GPU we have 2.2 FPS
14:14 < matches> It seems to be able to cope with rectangles on the CPU
14:15 < matches> The circle may present some difficulties
14:16 < matches> It would be have been pretty cool to change the vfpu and see if anything makes it look like intel
14:16 < matches> But ultimately useless I suppose
14:37 < sulix> There might be some info in the hardware docs, though they're pretty incomprehensible: https://01.org/linuxgraphics/documentation/2013-intel-core-processor-family
14:38 < sulix> AMD also have manuals: http://developer.amd.com/resources/documentation-articles/developer-guides-manuals/
14:38 < sulix> nVidia are sworn to secrecy.
--- Day changed Tue Aug 05 2014
12:38 < matches> I'm looking at the atril source
12:38 < matches> To see if I can compile it without the oppressive 400% max zoom
12:39 < matches> It is rather intense
12:39 < matches> I think the zooms are set depending on the language?
12:41 < matches> There are po files which are definitely not position independent object files
12:43 < matches> #define ZOOM_MAXIMAL(zoom_levels[n_zoom_levels - 1].level)
12:43 < matches> The plot thickens!
12:45 < matches> Heh this is actually sort of making sense
12:45 < matches> They have a "cut-n-paste/zoom-control" directory
12:48 < matches> I'm confused as to how the maximum zoom is 6400% and yet my version will only zoom to 400%
12:48 < matches> But I guess I shall compile it from source and see what actually happens
12:51 < matches> They also have a script to configure their configure script...
12:51 < matches> Oh dear xml is involved
12:53 < matches> There needs to be a way to save the status of configure so you don't have to rerun it from scratch every time you fix an error
12:56 < matches> Our document viewer may only be able to render beziers and circles
12:56 < matches> But at least it doesn't have any dependencies!
12:56 < matches> Well many
12:56 < matches> I suppose since SDL is in contrib we should put GMP in contrib too
12:57 < matches> But yes, I don't care about caja plugins dammit I want to zoom on a pdf
13:00 < matches> "Warning: Comparison between pointer and integer"
13:00 < matches> Aaaah
13:00 < matches> It compiles...
13:01 < matches> But where did it put the binary...
13:02 < matches> Oh great it expects things to be in /usr
13:03 < matches> I guess I will run "install-sh" and hope I will still have a usable pdf viewer
13:07 < matches> There's a LOT of G_ and g_ variables
13:07 < matches> Actually functions
13:07 < matches> I think g_ does not mean global in this context
13:07 < matches> Maybe
13:11 < matches> So it's not just a matter of ZOOM_MAXIMAL being redefined to ridiculously huge numbers having any effect
13:11 < matches> I guess they use some other library that has zooming
13:13 < matches> It somehow detects what the maximum zoom should be based on the document as well
13:13 < matches> This is just over engineering!
13:19 < matches> ev_view_can_zoom_in (EvView *view)
13:19 < matches> return view->scale * ZOOM_IN_FACTOR <= ev_document_model_get_max_scale (view->model);
13:19 < matches> Let
13:19  * matches casually makes it return true
13:19 < matches> Also wtf
13:19 < matches> They have a "gboolean" type
13:19 < matches> Is "bool" inferior?
13:19 < matches> What more do you need than true and false
13:20 < matches> Is bool used as a variable name for something
13:20 < matches> sigh
13:24 < matches> No ok it still won't let me zoom in more
13:25 < matches> g_return_if_fail in the zoom functions
13:25 < matches> They don't look important
13:28 < matches> There are a surprising amount of places with a "if zoom or scale is bigger than the maximum, return"
13:28 < matches> Like, are three checks really necessary
13:29 < matches> I think you can set model->sizing_mode to "EV_SIZING_FREE" but I have no idea what that will do
13:29 < matches> So I'll just continue commenting out anything that looks like it will return early from the zoom process...
13:30 < sulix> Sounds like a plan!
13:31 < matches> The use of g_ for function names makes me want to stab someone :P
13:31 < matches> I assume it's related to gtk or maybe just gnome
13:32 < matches> Also about half their doubles are "gdouble"
13:32 < matches> And the other half are "double"
13:32 < matches> :S
13:32 < sulix> gtk had their own crazy, let's implement everything from scratch idea.
13:32 < sulix> They have their own "classes" in C, IIRC.
13:32 < matches> It's pretty object orientated yes
13:34 < matches> Ok I seem to now be able to zoom in a *bit* more and then it just stops drawing things
13:35 < matches> No wait it's just hopelessly slow
13:37 < matches> It also zooms in on the wrong spot and then draws it and then moves the view back to the mouse and draws again
13:38 < matches> But yes, it doesn't cope well with zooming at all
13:38 < matches> I was kind of hoping it would work
13:39 < matches> Maybe if I use a simpler document
13:43 < matches> Congratulations anyway
13:43 < matches> We can zoom further on a circle than atril can
13:44 < matches> Unfortunately the reasons atril can't zoom are probably not related to precision
13:44 < matches> Maybe I need to find some "if zoom > thing don't draw anything" and comment those out too
13:44 < matches> Sigh
14:07 < matches> It is resistant to my valgrind attempts
14:07 < matches> It seems to have spawned 9 processes
14:10 < matches> Oh "atril" is actually a series of hideous bash scripts that load libraries or something
14:12 < matches> You know
14:12 < matches> I'm sure if we tried
14:12 < matches> We could make a less shitty pdf viewer out of our program
14:29 < matches> Interesting
14:30 < matches> "ev_document_render" got called 10.6 Billion times
14:30 < matches> I don't think I changed the view that many times...
14:32 < matches> Ok, so just working on our own viewer is probably better at this point than working out why atril has a heart attack if you zoom
14:33 < matches> I'm going to pretend this wasn't a waste of time...
14:41 < matches> "existing pdf viewers cap the view because otherwise they break due to bugs that aren't actually related to precision"
15:43 < matches> So I suspect the GPU Bezier rendering is buggy
15:44 < matches> Or maybe it's a quad tree thing
15:45 < matches> Or both...
15:46 < matches> I'm pretty sure the appearance of an individual bezier should not depend on what other beziers are in the document :P
15:47 < matches> Yeah there's wierd quad tree shit going on
15:48 < matches> I'm going to try and add some sort of glyph/font like thing
15:49 < matches> It's either that or create hand drawn beziers in the current view
15:50 < matches> But I feel it desperately needs an example of being able to actually zoom in and create something at an "arbitrary" level
18:54 < matches> So we sort of have a very broken, very badly written, SVG parser
18:55 < matches> A bunch of bugs showed up in the bezier rendering
18:56 < matches> Although it might just be fglrx
22:23 < sulix> The GL code is now consistantly broken, rather than sporadically broken.
22:24 < sulix> Trying to render SVGs with it might count as modern art, though.
22:39 < sulix> Man, the buggier the bézier code gets, the more beautiful its output.
22:53 < sulix> Voilà: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-koch-svg.png
23:11 < sulix> And on the CPU: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-koch-svg1.png
--- Day changed Wed Aug 06 2014
11:00 < matches> That looks amazing!
11:04 < matches> I'm sorry
11:04 < matches> All I seem to do is add bugs :S
11:05 < matches> And XML
11:13 < sulix> I suspect you removed a lot of bugs with the -DQUADTREE_REMOVED. :P
11:14 < matches> It's the bit where parts of my Bezier code have been wrong for more than a month that make me feel guilty :S
11:14 < sulix> The GPU code was wrong in the same way.
11:15 < sulix> Also it used to corrupt all of the memory.
11:23 < matches> So you're not using the koch.svg file?
11:23 < matches> That breaks for me
11:23 < matches> Which isn't surprising considering the svg parsing code
11:24 < sulix> I was using koch1.svg from your Lit Review
11:25 < matches> Oh right
11:25 < matches> koch.svg isn't actually a valid svg file :S
11:26 < sulix> I tried it with a random, complex SVG from the internet, and segfault.
11:27 < matches> Haha
11:27 < matches> Yeah it works
11:27 < matches> We can zoom in further than atril!
11:28 < sulix> Victory!
11:34 < matches> So I was trying to think about shading things... and stroke thickness... and all those other things in SVG...
11:34 < sulix> Yeah, I thought about those.
11:35 < sulix> I came to the conclusion that I should probably try to make the quadtree work first.
11:37 < matches> Probably :P
11:58 < sulix> btw, your computer's clock is slightly out.
11:58 < sulix> alternatively there is a lot of time travel going on
11:58 < sulix> (secretly, I'm hoping it's the latter)
11:59 < sulix> (im my mind, I'm good enough to have bugfixed the SVG code before it was written)
17:10 < matches> Yeah I removed ntpd because my boot kept stalling at it for several minutes
17:17 < matches> The GPU Bezier renderer seems a lot more conservative about how many lines it uses
17:18 < matches> I thought I remembered just copying the GPU algorithm for the CPU but maybe I didn't
17:20 < matches> Oh
17:38 < matches> Some of the shader stuff confuses me...
17:38 < matches> Like: "pixize = vec2(pixel_w/bounds_w, 100*pixel_h/bounds_h)"
17:39 < matches> Random factor of 100 ?
17:39 < matches> As far as I can tell pixel_w,pixel_h is always 640,480
17:57 < matches> Hmm
17:57 < matches> But the window isn't 640,480
17:57 < matches> Wait
17:57 < matches> Is it
17:58 < matches> Yeah
17:58 < matches> The screen is 800 x 600
17:58 < matches> That is only slightly confusing...
17:58 < matches> Should I change all the 640,480 to 800,600 ...
17:59 < matches> Or will this break things
18:01 < matches> We are actually passing the width and height of the viewport around so I figure that should probably be used instead of 640 and 480
18:02 < matches> Also I suspect we want just a few more lines on the beziers since they often start looking more like trapezoids
18:04 < matches> But only if they are big to begin with
18:05 < matches> We can probably also do a "if x1,y1 == x2,y2 just use one line"
18:06 < matches> Or alternately actually implement lines as distinct from beziers but that's silly :P
18:06 < matches> If I can work out how to do shading then we won't even need rectangles and circles any more
18:06 < matches> I should probably focus on precision of things but I sort of want to be able to draw something cool first
18:15 < matches> Oh damn merge
19:19 < matches> So a series of curveto commands isn't just a series of individual beziers for each three points
19:20 < matches> I guess it's time to actually read the SVG spec a bit
19:20 < matches> Oh maybe they are cubic beziers
19:21 < matches> I thought they were just quadratic unless you used a special command
21:08 < matches> The order of your coefficients in the bezier geometry shader seems reversed...
21:08 < matches> But maybe that's because I reversed it in the CPU first...
21:08 < matches> I don't know
21:08 < matches> I will leave it in this order and hope it doesn't break
21:08 < matches> (I'm making the beziers cubic because it seems like a thing we want)
21:08 < matches> And is required for SVG paths
21:27 < matches> Hmm
21:27 < matches> SVGs also have quadratic beziers and as much as setting (x3,y3) == (x2,y2) *almost* looks the same...
21:29 < matches> Close enough I guess
21:30 < matches> I don't particularly want to add seperate objects for quadratic beziers since I've only ever seen cubic ones in SVGs anyway
21:49 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/svgshape.png
21:49 < matches> Woo!
21:50 < matches> I'm actually pretty excited about having a semi usable svg viewer that can zoom, if not indefinitely, a lot further than any of the open source image viewers will let you zoom :P
21:51 < matches> Shading... that's hard
21:51 < matches> Stroke thickness is kind of hard too...
21:51 < matches> Blergh
22:22 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has quit [Ping timeout: 121 seconds]
23:42 -!- sulix [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
--- Day changed Thu Aug 07 2014
21:24 < sulix> So it turns out ttf fonts were not very difficult to add at all: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-ttf.png
21:42 < sulix> And fixed the glyphs.svg rendering: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-glyphs.png
22:06 < sulix> So all of those Béziers make Gmpint very slow.
22:07 < sulix> It also runs out of memory very quickly.
22:11 < sulix> About 30 second of dragging an svg around uses ~15G of ram.
22:13 < sulix> It takes (with Rational<Gmpint> CPU rendering) ~10 G to render the default frame of glyphs.svg
22:18 < sulix> Okay, it just broke a computer w/ 32 GB of ram.
22:20 < sulix> Code is pushed, btw, for your computer-wreckingly-awesome enjoyment.
22:32 < sulix> I tried fixing Rational::ToDouble() and using GPU w/ CPU coordinate transform.
22:32 < sulix> Still runs out of memory.
22:33 < sulix> But it works, even if it's still a tad slow.
22:45 < sulix> Okay, memory use is not a problem at all if we delete out GMP integers after we're finished with them.
22:46 < sulix> (There was a TODO: to that effect)
--- Day changed Fri Aug 08 2014
16:11 < matches> Wait you just did the things *I* was supposed to do for this week :P
16:11 < matches> I hope you don't want me to fix quadtrees...
16:13 < matches> Ah sorry about the GMP 
16:14 < sulix> I gave the QuadTrees another go as well, but random half-letter-"b"s were everywhere.
--- Day changed Mon Aug 11 2014
10:56 < matches> Ok I think I need to throw all design principles out the window adding a keyboard handler
10:57 < matches> I know you were keen on having a mouse handler independent of the Screen class
10:57 < matches> But the Screen class detects the events
10:57 < matches> It really makes sense for the event handlers to just be member functions
10:57 < matches> Maybe virtual in the unlikely event that there are ever different types of Screen
10:58 < matches> Probably the View should handle the events
10:58 < matches> Then we wouldn't have this convoluted thing where View has a reference to a Screen but Screen has a pointer to a View...
10:59 < matches> But I need to let that go and actually do useful things
10:59 < matches> So KeyboardHandler is now a member of Screen
10:59 < matches> Delicious spaghetti
11:02 < sulix> I think I can bring myself to forgive you. :)
--- Day changed Tue Aug 12 2014
13:48 < matches> I can draw rabbit_simple.svg
13:48 < matches> !
13:48 < matches> Almost
13:50 < matches> IT IS BEAUTIFUL
13:52 < matches> Wait I think quad trees are enabled
13:53 < matches> Nope they aren't
13:53 < matches> Oh wel
13:54 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/infinite-precision-document-FOX.png
13:54 < matches> That didn't take very long
13:55 < matches> I suspect the wierd bits in the wrong spot are because there are translations applied to things
13:55 < matches> Because inkscape
13:57 < matches> Hmm yeah
13:58 < matches> I wonder why there are random straight lines between things though
13:58 < matches> They are filled regions of the same colour and no stroke but obviously we just read the beziers and draw the outlines
14:50 < matches> Dammit SVG
14:50 < matches> So the y coordinate of text refers to the bottom
14:50 < matches> The y coordinate of *everything* *else* refers to the top
14:51 < matches> It's alright this is ipdsvg we aren't constrained by stupid standards
14:59 < matches> Ergh somehow fonts are broken in eye of mate...
14:59 < matches> How did I even...
15:00 < sulix> Fonts are usually handled with y=0 being the "baseline" of characters.
15:10 < matches> There are a few wierd things going on with straight lines
15:11 < matches> Hmm only at the default zoom
15:11 < matches> Horizontal lines on both cpu and gpu are kind of wobbly
17:23 < matches> Ok I am suffering from an attack of matrix algebra
17:23 < matches> It was bound to happen sooner or later I guess
17:24 < matches> The spaghetti is cooking nicely
17:26 < matches> The fact that our document is all in GL coordinates and SVGs are not is causing me way more confusion than it really should be
17:27 < matches> All I need to do is set an initial transformation matrix then everything else should Just Work
17:27 < matches> Of course it does help if you actually use matrices instead of Rect's
17:29 < matches> Also I think functions that modify arguments passed by references is one of the things that tpg hates
17:29 < matches> But there are a lot of them here
17:29 < matches> They are so convenient!
22:03 < matches> If I can get transforms and groups actually working properly, we can probably hack some sort of recursive thing together and use view reparenting
22:03 < matches> Somehow
22:05 < matches> I'm thinking putting the fox in the rabbit's eye and so on recursively would actually be pretty damn awesome
22:05 < matches> It is easy to say these things though...
22:06 < sulix> So, I have view reparenting "working" in the quadtree code.
22:06 < matches> :O
22:06 < matches> Cool
22:06 < sulix> (The rest of the quadtree doesn't work, so the point is somewhat moot, though)
22:06 < matches> Wait you already had that working, but you have rendering bugs
22:06 < matches> Yeah
22:06 < matches> :P
22:08 < sulix> I will push that now, actually.
--- Day changed Wed Aug 13 2014
00:34 < matches> Yes
00:34 < matches> I have defeate
00:34 < matches> d
00:34 < matches> Basic matrices
00:36 < matches> So it is pretty ugly and inefficient but meh
00:36 < matches> We have translate, scale and matrix
00:37 < matches> skew will be pretty easy to add but probably useless
00:37 < matches> rotate is a bit harder
00:38 < matches> Also the skewing operations obviously don't work on rectangles
00:38 < matches> Or anything that isn't defined in terms of bezier paths I guess
00:38 < matches> But translating and scaling will
00:40 < matches> Ok, so SVG has a "defs" thing that lets you define groups without drawing them
00:41 < matches> And a "use" thing that lets you insert a group
00:41 < matches> Actually element in general
00:41 < matches> Doesn't have to be a group
00:41 < matches> So
00:41 < matches> I wonder if doing recursive magic with that works
00:48 < matches> Not in normal svg viewers it would seem
00:49 < matches> Hmm
00:51 < matches> (eom:7883): librsvg-WARNING **: Circular SVG reference noticed, dropping
00:51 < matches> That's just boring!
00:52 < matches> So I think we will need some fairly major changes to our Document structure to get much more SVG stuff working
00:53 < matches> I wonder if we actually need to store a DOM if we want that to work
00:53 < matches> Also I thought I fixed transformations but they still break for fox-vector.svg :(
00:58 < matches> I think "broken" will probably be the most commonly occuring word in our git commit messages
11:05 < matches> Oooh
11:06 < matches> svg-tests/recursive.svg is slightly recursive viwed in firefox
16:10 < sulix> The QuadTree works again!
16:10 < sulix> (I have finally worked out how to multiply by two, it seems...)
16:11 < sulix> Also s/ again//
17:23 < matches> Project complete!
18:05 < sulix> Man, nVidia has an OpenGL extension where you can just pass the "d" attribute of SVG paths in and have it render them for you.
18:05 < matches> Oh
18:05 < matches> Welp
18:07 < sulix> It's like: glPathStringNV(path, GL_PATH_FORMAT_SVG_NV, strlen(d), "M100,180, L40,10, etc...")
18:08 < matches> Presumably you could just replace 90% of the SVG stuff with that then :S
18:09 < sulix> It only works on nVidia hardware, though, so it's not really practical.
18:10 < matches> I think I need to actually do the Bezier's bounding rectangles correctly
18:10 < sulix> I was just about to add that, actually.
18:10 < matches> But its not just (x0,y0,x3-x0,y3-y0)
18:10 < matches> Ok
18:10 < matches> Go ahead then
18:10 < sulix> Nah, you have to take the x and y components separately and solve for min and max.
18:11 < matches> Yes google is a lot faster than actually doing maths
18:13 < matches> I can add that unless you've already written it?
18:13 < sulix> Sure.
18:13 < sulix> The internet seems to claim that you should use newton-raphson to find the roots of the derivatives, but I'm not really comfortable with doing that for cubic béziers,
18:31 < matches> I just differentiated the parametric formula
18:31 < matches> And got a quadratic
18:31 < matches> Unfortunately there is a slight problem with Real
18:31 < matches> Since we don't have a general "sqrt"
18:31  * matches adds that to the growing list of "fix later"
18:32 < matches> It doesn't compile for Rational<Gmpint> anymore anyway
18:38 < matches> I am writing code that sjy would probably not consider elegant
18:50 < matches> Well that totally broke everything
18:53 < sulix> So it turns out that the view reparenting was only working by chance.
18:55 < matches> :(
19:20 < matches> Hmm it turns out finding the bounding box of a bezier has really annoying edge cases
19:43 < sulix> Okay, automatic generation of new quadtree nodes "works" when zooming in.
19:44 < sulix> It doesn't do any fancy clipping, so the actual rendering code hits precision issues, but it's still pretty cool.
19:48 < sulix> It also get a bit buggy if you try to pan over the edges of quadtrees, as it only renders one node at a time.
19:59 < matches> Nice
21:14 < sulix> I have just achieved infinite precision with the quadtree!
21:14 < sulix> Only on rectangles, only when zooming in, and only when the camera doesn't cross a quadtree boundary, but it works!
--- Day changed Thu Aug 14 2014
09:50 < matches> cool
10:37 < matches> I'm beginning to suspect whoever said to use the Newton Raphson method to find Bezier bounding boxes was right
10:43 < matches> I love how the sites I looked up said "Obviously there is a problem if a = 0 or b^2 - 4ac < 0, but we can just make sure we always pick beziers that don't cause those problems
10:44 < matches> Ok
10:44 < matches> I have at least got an algorithm that returns finite sized bounding boxes now
10:45 < matches> I think it even works!
10:45 < matches> But only on the CPU
10:45 < matches> Presumably the GPU does something to cope with the fact that the bounding boxes were totally wrong before?
10:53 < matches> Oh it wasn't doing anything because they were {0,0,1,1}
10:54 < matches> I have to transform the Bezier coefficients before they are uploaded to the GPU
10:54 < matches> Blergh
10:55 < matches> What I've basically done is change it to be the opposite of how it was designed
10:55 < matches> -_-
10:56 < matches> So before, the Bezier control points were relative to some bounding rectangle but when I parsed the SVG I just made it always {0,0,1,1} so the coordinates were absolute
10:56 < matches> Now I have changed the Bezier control points to be absolute and then calculated a bounding rectangle from them
10:56 < matches> I can maths
10:57 < matches> So I could make the Beziers still have the {0,0,1,1} bounds which will fix the GPU renderer without having to transform the coefficients
10:57 < matches> And just leave this "SolveBounds" function in for actually getting the bounds
10:58 < matches> Except SolveBounds is disgusting
10:58 < matches> And slow
10:58 < matches> So I could add a Bounds member variable to the Beziers
10:58 < matches> And then we have two bounds
10:58 < matches> I seem to have coded myself into a catch 22 "No matter what you do it is terrible" situation
10:59 < matches> Adding a Bounds member variable to the Bezier struct sort of defeats the whole point of the "Object of Arrays" idea
10:59 < matches> You know what
11:00 < matches> I think the "Object of Arrays" approach has caused more problems than it solved :P
11:02 < matches> (Probably not actually)
11:09 < matches> Spaghetti
11:09 < matches> I'm going to transform the coordinates before uploading to the GPU shaders
11:09 < matches> Because I think that is the least objectionable?
11:09 < matches> I don't know
11:09 < matches> I still don't like any of the solutions
11:10 < matches> But having more than one bounding rectangle definitely seems dumb
11:10 < matches> Especially if the other is *always* {0,0,1,1}
11:11 < matches> I hope this doesn't totally break your quad tree
11:15 < matches> Actually looking at the quad tree it seems that is the best way to make it more likely to work
11:21 < matches> I feel like we should use SVGMatrix more and Rect less
11:21 < matches> But oh well
11:29 < sulix> Ah: so the Quadtree kinda relies on the Bézier coordinates being relative to the bounding rectangle.
11:29 < matches> Yep
11:29 < matches> I'll do that
11:29 < matches> It's easier to do the transform when the coordinates are uploaded to the GPU
11:29 < matches> Although probably less efficient
11:30 < matches> On the other hand, the CPU renderer relies on having absolute coordinates
11:30 < matches> Two renderers
11:30 < matches> TWICE the matrices
11:30 < matches> TWICE the confusion
11:31 < matches> And Rects are not really convenient because they aren't a proper transformation matrix
11:31 < matches> I can't just multiply some Rects together
11:31 < matches> Or calculate an inverse
11:32 < sulix> Yeah, there are problems there.
11:34 < matches> Hmm
11:34 < matches> I *almost* fixed it
11:34 < sulix> Rects are really good for the QuadTree, though.
11:34 < matches> We should leave it as rects
11:34 < matches> You just manually work out what it needs to be anyway
11:35 < matches> I think the inverse of the equivelant matrix will always work as a rect
11:35 < matches> So there are random lines missing from the beziers now
11:35 < matches> But the ones that are there are in the right spot!
11:36 < matches> (On the GPU)
11:36 < sulix> So, I looked at that. I see random missing lines on Intel, not on nVidia.
11:37 < matches> Oh were they missing before?
11:37 < matches> Well I don't recall them being missing before
11:37 < matches> Oh
11:37 < matches> I know what it is
11:38 < matches> When the bounding rectangle has width or height of zero
11:38 < matches> Sigh
11:38 < matches> Wait that can't be it
11:38 < matches> Most of the missing lines aren't straight horizontal or vertical
11:38 < matches> :S
11:39 < sulix> I think it's just dodgy rounding on the GPU.
11:40 < matches> I will push what I have I guess
11:40 < matches> I have nice pretty debug rectangles (in *colour*) around the beziers when they are rendered on the CPU
11:40 < matches> Somehow I don't think that is going to be sufficiently impressive progress in the meeting
11:41 < sulix> Oooh... I'm looking forward to trying that.
11:41 < sulix> I have an impressive Quadtree demo to do!
11:41 < sulix> Assuming the bezier stuff doesn't suddenly break.
11:41 < matches> ... it might
11:41 < matches> Ok, I will `git stash` and then `git pull` as opposed to merging
11:42 < matches> Yes, there are definitely not randomly missing beziers in your code
11:44 < matches> Wait, was your quad tree working with beziers before?
11:44 < matches> It wouldn't have been?
11:44 < matches> All the bounds were wrong
11:48 < matches> Ooh
11:48 < matches> H and V
11:48 < matches> What are they
11:49 < sulix> Horizontal and Vertical lines
11:49 < matches> Ah
11:50 < sulix> The QuadTree works with beziers, but doesn't increase precision.
11:52 < matches> Hmm, now to work out which of the 5 or 6 edge cases is breaking the Bezier bounds algorithm
11:53 < matches> It's kind of hard to debug
11:53 < matches> The edge cases apply seperately to the y and x directions
11:53 < matches> So you can't tell just by looking at a curve that it is an edge case
11:54 < matches> Unless you are a mathemagician I guess
11:55 < matches> I don't understand
11:55 < matches> The bounds for the beziers that disappear look right
11:59 < matches> Maybe I'm not uploading the data correctly anymore
12:03 < matches> Ok now it only breaks for the horizontal and vertical lines which I at least understand
12:03 < matches> I was iterating over the object bounds and uploading the ones that had a type of BEZIER
12:03 < matches> Oh
12:03 < matches> Oh
12:04 < matches> Yeah because I added a GROUP as well
12:04 < matches> And every <path> gets a GROUP now
12:04 < matches> So the order of indexes must be off
12:14 < matches> Face palm
12:14 < matches> This is why we have objects.data_indices
12:19 < matches> I wish I'd added the SVG stuff earlier
12:19 < matches> It makes it a lot easier to do stuff when you can mess around with actual documents
12:42 < matches> I have pushed some stuff
12:43 < matches> Mostly it just looks like I added a bunch of colourful rectangles to the CPU rendering
12:43 < matches> I think I broke the Quad tree too
12:43 < matches> Go team
12:43 < matches> Oh and there are a bunch of not so colourful GPU rectangles
12:43 < matches> Due to the "GROUP" object just using the outline rectangle shaders
12:44 < matches> So part of the quad tree seems to work on the GPU but not all of it
12:44 < matches> And none of it seems to work on the CPU?
12:48 < matches> Also instead of rendering a slightly broken fox it now renders a segfault
12:48 < matches> Similarly for the koch snowflake
12:48 < matches> It's alright we can still draw Humphrey
12:53 < matches> Oh
12:53 < matches> It's just the quad tree that segfaults on the more complicated svgs
13:38 < sulix> I have returned from the committee meeting, and that stupid 2/3rds majority thing has been revoked!
13:38 < matches> Hooray!
13:39 < matches> I should head towards University for the project meeting
13:39 < matches> It is tempting to just stay home
13:40 < matches> But that would probably not be wise
13:41 < sulix> You should come.
13:41 < sulix> I'm going to see if I can fix the Quadtree, but it looks like your changes have thoroughly broken it.
13:41 < matches> Sorry!
13:41 < sulix> By which I mean, it probably was only working if everything had bounds (0,0)-(1,1)
13:41 < matches> Haha
13:42 < matches> You can just undo my changes to demonstrate it if you want
13:42 < matches> To the bus
13:43 < sulix> I may yet do that...
14:54  * sulix -> CSSE
19:08 < matches> So shading on the CPU sort of totally breaks
19:08 < matches> But it exists
19:08 < matches> Progress!
19:10 < matches> Bezier bounds are not as good as I'd hoped
19:10 < matches> I think they only work if the end points form the bounds
19:17 < sulix> Ah...
19:21 < sulix> Btw, in the default "c" glyph, there are _two_ curves with bounds (0,0)-(1,1)
19:21 < sulix> Numbers 9 and 18
19:22 < matches> Yeah I found the wierd ebounds
19:22 < matches> It's in the font code
19:22 < matches> There is an AddBezierData with (0,0,1,1) instead of AddBezier (which automatically works out the bounds)
19:22 < matches> For vlines
19:22 < sulix> That'd do it.
19:23 < matches> shape.svg seems to lose part of the curve now
19:23 < matches> I've made the bezier control points relative
19:23 < matches> Things mostly sort of work
19:23 < matches> But the quad tree still looks fantastically broken
19:25 < sulix> It always looks broken if you pan around or zoom out: it's my ugly baby.
19:28 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/brokenbeziers.png
19:28 < matches> To be fair the beziers are actually fine
19:28 < matches> It's just the bounding rectangles that are broken
19:28 < matches> Also shading should probably not be turned on unless it is actually a closed path
19:29 < sulix> Hmm...
19:29 < matches> Wait
19:29 < matches> The beziers are rendering fine
19:29 < matches> But the bounding rectangles are wrong
19:29 < matches> Does this mean
19:29 < matches> If I *fix* the bounding rectangles
19:29 < matches> It will break something
19:29 < matches> :-(
19:29  * matches forges ahead nevertheless
19:30 < matches> It does look suspiciously like it is only ever using P0 and P3 for the bounds
19:30 < matches> Despite all that horrible solving for the turning points
19:31 < sulix> Yeah.
19:31 < matches> Oh
19:32 < matches> I suspect if I fix this it will totally break the absolute to relative bezier transform then
19:35 < matches> The file for those beziers is kind of interesting
19:35 < matches> inkscape has used absolute commands for all except one of the beziers
19:35 < matches> Why?
19:35 < matches> The first one was copied and pasted with the control points moved
19:35 < matches> Also for some reason random "translate" applied to the whole group
19:36 < matches> It might make some sense if it caused the coordinates of the actual paths to come out as integers maybe
19:36 < matches> But they don't
19:37 < matches> There is translate and then the initial "moveto" is not 0,0
19:37 < matches> I guess we shouldn't be trusting an svg editor that segfaults if you try recursion anyway
19:59 < matches> Ok, high school maths:1, 5th year science/engineering student:0
20:15 < matches> Also my amazingly clever shading algorithm has
20:15 < matches> ...
20:15 < matches> issues
20:15 < matches> When the paths are not in the view
20:16 < sulix> Ah...
20:18 < matches> In fact it has many issues in many cases
20:27 < matches> Hmm
20:27 < matches> I wonder if this is what causes problems with evince/atril
20:27 < matches> Ok not this
20:28 < matches> I mean, if they use a similarly terrible except actually working shading algorithm
20:28 < matches> And just draw everything to a really big texture so they can use it
20:28 < matches> As opposed to clipping things
20:28 < matches> That seems a little unbelievable though
20:29 < matches> Surely that would crash long before you even got to >1600%
20:30 < matches> I suppose what I should really do is look up some papers on shading
20:30 < matches> Blergh
20:35 < matches> Things are pushed
20:37 < matches> Ah crap
20:38 < matches> Things will be pushed in 8 hours according to my clock
20:38 < matches> Just don't do anything until after 4am tomorrow and everything will be in the right order
20:38 < matches> :P
20:39 < sulix> That shading is _amazing_
20:40 < matches> Try replacing the colour with rand()%255 for even more amazingness
20:40 < sulix> If you zoom in _just_ the right amount, all hell breaks loose. I love it!
20:40 < matches> Haha
20:40 < sulix> Slowly panning across it is also magical!
20:41 < matches> Try it on rabbit_simple.svg
20:42 < sulix> I think Humphrey might have come down with a case of stripey binary myxomatosis.
20:43 < matches> So I will have to think about shading a bit more :P
20:43  * sulix braves the unholy combination of shading and quadtree.
20:43 < matches> Oh I didn't try that
20:44 < sulix> It actually doesn't look any different.
20:44 < sulix> I think the quadtree only breaks w/ the GPU.
20:44 < matches> Yes
20:45 < matches> You lose the debug message if the node # > 9 it seems too
20:46 < matches> At least the quad tree works on the CPU
20:46 < matches> But why doesn't it work on the GPU they are now using the same bounds
20:47 < matches> So should I prepare a report for Tim?
20:47 < matches> Progress Report: Arbitrary precision numbers are unsurprisingly, totally infeasible
20:47 < matches> Therefore, we implemented random bits of SVG
20:47 < matches> Figure 1: A totally broken shading algorithm
20:48 < sulix> You should include this image of the quadtree: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-humphreys-ghost-face.png
20:48 < matches> Yes
20:48 < matches> I wonder if since we're allegedly engineers we should document what bugs go with what images
20:48 < matches> Hmmm
20:49 < sulix> That's why I name the screenshots like that, I know this goes with the "Humphrey's Ghost Face" bug.
20:49 < matches> Haha
20:49 < matches> So we have the svg-test images
20:50 < matches> Would it be worth while to have a commit script that automatically drew them and did screnshots
20:50 < matches> It might be tricky though because you have to test panning and zooming and things
20:50 < sulix> Yeah... perhaps videos?
20:51 < matches> We'd need to be able to control the view automatically
20:51 < matches> Which is actually required for that list of things in the proposal we are supposed to do anyway
20:52 < sulix> I think we'll want that feature at some point anyway for doing proper performance tests
20:54 < matches> I kind of want some sort of debug overlay for things like the bounding boxes too
20:54 < sulix> Hmmm... the bounds look right: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-humphrey-bounds-ahead.png
20:54 < matches> And a menu system
20:54 < matches> And the ability to "insert SVG here"
20:54 < matches> And open a file browser
20:54 < matches> And...
20:54 < matches> And...
20:54 < matches> Yeah
20:54 < sulix> I've been seriously considering doing a menu system.
20:54 < matches> Too bad christmas is after the thesis is due
20:54 < matches> Do it!
20:55 < matches> We're running out of mouse buttons to toggle things :P
20:55 < matches> Are there any SDL based menu systems that we can use easily?
20:55 < sulix> There are a couple of OpenGL-y ones that might work.
20:56 < matches> Let's not port the project from SDL -> FreeGlut
20:56 < sulix> No.
20:56 < sulix> Let's not.
20:57 < sulix> (I'm looking for an SDL/OpenGL menu system so that I can replace FreeGLUT in the Graphics project(
20:57 < matches> Could we use Qt or is that overkill?
20:57 < sulix> I suspect it's probably overkill.
20:59 < sulix> I've got a couple of old GUI libraries for SDL/OpenGL I wrote in high school I could dig up as a last resort.
20:59 < matches> ... I have seen your high school code
20:59 < matches> :P
20:59 < sulix> (I think one of them uses a tiny bit of boost, though, so I'd rather avoid it)
21:03 < matches> I kind of want to look at Qt at some point
21:03 < matches> Maybe if we have the menu in a seperate window...
21:03 < matches> Then we need threads...
21:03 < matches> Then we have two problems...
21:09 < matches> All the links to SDL libraries are broken
21:34 < sulix> I'm not sure what changed, but now ipdf crashes my OpenGL debugger.
21:42 < sulix> The QuadTree/GPU code works again!
21:42 < sulix> Somehow the bug I fixed last night reappeared, but I've added the needed *2s back in.
--- Day changed Fri Aug 15 2014
08:43 < matches> So it seems to work well but things still go wierd on the GPU
08:44 < matches> I'm in Quadtree node 32 looking at the tip of Humphrey's eyebrow
08:44 < matches> The bottom line moves normally
08:44 < matches> Vertically only sorry
08:44 < matches> It doesn't move horizontally
08:44 < matches> The top line stays still and every so often jumps to a new (wrong) position
08:45 < matches> On the CPU it appears fine though
08:45 < matches> Although on the CPU it doesn't show the "Current View QuadTree Node: 32"
08:46 < matches> Hrm, I should add a 2d view of a car to the svg-tests
08:47 < matches> Then I can be like "IT IS RELEVANT TO MECHANICAL ENGINEERING BECAUSE BEZIERS"
08:47 < matches> In the conference/thesis offense
08:48 < matches> My concern is actually more how I'm going to present the arbitrary precision number representations because they don't even work
08:49 < matches> Well I should probably try Gmp rationals and Gmp floats before totally giving up I guess
08:49 < matches> And also those p-adic things
08:50 < matches> I never looked them up
--- Day changed Sun Aug 17 2014
14:38 < matches> Hey Qt has a lot of stuff in it
14:38 < matches> They have their own iostreams that seem identical to std::iostream
14:39 < matches> It's kind of cool I guess except there are "Qs" everywhere
14:41 < matches> Ok we need a window icon
14:41 < matches> This is vital
15:54 < sulix> I've got SDL2 window icon setting code if you want it: https://github.com/sulix/omnispeak/blob/master/src/icon.c#L555
16:04 < matches> Cool
16:39 < matches> I'm bringing in spaghetti
16:39 < matches> I mean Qt
16:40 < matches> In theory this means the Debug functions should have a mutex if we want to debug things in the Qt stuff
16:40 < matches> But in practice screw it
16:40 < matches> What could go wrong?
16:41 < matches> (Don't worry, I have a CONTROLPANEL_DISABLED define)
16:42 < matches> This View/Document/Screen thing could probably be tidied up a lot
16:42 < matches> But effort
16:42 < matches> I think I'll just give ControlPanel direct access to document, screen and view
16:42 < matches> Currently everything has to go through view
16:43 < matches> Which would make more sense if some of screen was in view maybe
16:43 < matches> Bah screw design
16:51 < matches> So now we have 4 main classes!
16:51 < matches> 4 x the fun!
17:29 < matches> Bargh Qt needs its own version of make
17:29 < matches> That's stupid
21:09 < matches> So
21:10 < matches> I have a mysterious LMS deadline that suddenly appeared
21:10 < matches> "Progres Report"
21:10 < matches> Description
21:10 < matches> "asadf"
21:10 < matches> Due
21:10 < matches> 19th August, 11:01PM
21:10 < matches> What
21:14 < sulix> Oh dear.
21:15 < matches> I have sent an email
21:15 < matches> I hope that's not the conference abstract
21:15 < matches> I also really hope we're allowed to use our own computer and things in the conference
21:16 < matches> Also I really hope that if I can use my own computer it doesn't decide to shit itself anyway just to spite me
--- Day changed Mon Aug 18 2014
17:06 < matches> Good news and bad news!
17:07 < matches> The kerning now appears to kern in the right direction
17:07 < matches> But this means "BleedingCowboys.ttf" works
20:30 < sulix> It's a pain to look up clipping of beziers, because there's a separate technique for doing something else called "bézier clipping"
20:40 < matches> Baha
20:41 < matches> I'm basically just procrastinating with Qt
20:41 < matches> I mean
20:41 < matches> Doing *awesome* things with Qt
20:48 < sulix> I am looking with considerable envy at SolveQuadratic().
20:49 < sulix> SolveCubic() will get very ugly.
20:49 < sulix> Assuming I don't just sample the cubic at 100 points and look for roots.
20:49 < matches> Haha
20:49 < matches> Newton Raphson?
20:50 < sulix> Very tempting.
20:50 < matches> Then you can solve any bezier!
20:50 < matches> Then we can put in Quintics!
20:50 < sulix> Solving cubics exactly is not fun.
20:50 < sulix> Dear god no.
20:50 < matches> Imagine how many loops a quintic could have...
20:51  * sulix cries quietly in the corner.
20:53 < matches> So I'm calling AddText with sane values and nothing is happening :(
20:56 < sulix> With or without quadtree?
20:56 < sulix> With quadtree, everything is broken if you try adding things.
20:56 < sulix> Because they won't be added to a node.
20:57 < matches> No quad trees I think
20:57 < matches> Yeah no quad tree
21:00 < matches> Wait I think we need to rebuild the buffers or something
21:07 < matches> Ah, ForceRenderDirty()
21:14 < matches> I don't think the scale of our text is quite right?
21:14 < sulix> Well, the scale of everything is wrong, but it's entirely possible that the text is _extra wrong_
21:16 < sulix> In theory, the "scale" input to addText is the "height" of a character.
21:19 < matches> Mmm
21:19 < matches> I'm trying to add text relative to the current view
21:19 < matches> But it isn't consistent
21:19 < matches> When I go to a different view it is definitely not adding it in the same relative place
21:20 < matches> The scale and positions aren't *already* relative are they?
21:22 < sulix> Not to the view...
21:24 < matches> What are they relative to?
21:24 < matches> Anyway instead of fixing that bug I'm adding more
21:25 < sulix> Umm... The bounding box maybe?
21:25  * sulix investigates.
21:26 < sulix> Scale and position should (I think) be normal, document coordinates.
21:26 < matches> Odd
21:26 < matches> Oh well
21:26 < matches> Having Qt is totally worth it by the way
21:27 < matches> Although it is still slightly embarrassing that it has its own SVG parser
21:27 < matches> Ours is better!
21:27 < matches> It has Reals everywhere!
21:27 < matches> Except where it constructs Real from floats...
21:27 < matches> And converts them to floats...
21:28 < sulix> Thesis title should be "Keepin' it real: Staying afloat on the sea of document precision"
21:31 < matches> Bahaha
21:31 < matches> That is brilliant
21:32 < matches> The Qt stuff is never deleting anything
21:32 < matches> I suppose I should fix that at some point
21:33 < matches> So basically it is a state machine and you use the menu to change the state
21:33 < matches> Pressing OK does something depending on the state
21:34 < matches> And there is a single text edit you can type stuff into
21:34 < matches> In theory it can hide/show different widgets depending on the state
21:34 < matches> I feel like I should add a "Generate Thesis Title" widget now...
21:35 < matches> Also I can sort of see the appeal of lambdas for GUI programming now
21:35 < matches> But I have a feeling they would totally break Qt anyway
21:49 < matches> ...
21:49 < matches> Ok sometimes the text gets added upside down...
21:49  * sulix disclaims any and all responsibility for that.
21:51 < matches> Yes!
21:51 < matches> I finally did that thing I was saying I'd do for like 3 weeks
21:51 < matches> Zoom in to floating point limit
21:51 < matches> Add SVG
21:51 < matches> Watch it explode!
21:52 < sulix> Oooh...
21:52 < matches> It is glorious
21:54 < matches> We need to be a bit careful with thread safety in qt
21:55 < matches> Really we should be able to request that the qt thread call UpdateAll itself
21:55 < matches> Rather than calling it directly from the viewer thread
21:55 < matches> But I'm not sure how that's done
21:55 < matches> There's all this stuff about "Cross thread signals" on the internet
21:56 < matches> It seems you can hide/show things but not much else
22:47 < matches> Bah you pushed things!
22:55  * sulix proclaims the new features as excellent and promptly goes to bed.
--- Day changed Tue Aug 19 2014
18:08 < matches> My conference is in the week starting 13th October
18:08 < matches> Is Tim back then?
18:08 < matches> "your supervisor will be invited to attend and mark your presentation"
18:09 < matches> So if he can't go... I don't get a mark?
18:12 < matches> It sounds suspiciously like they are going to get everyone's supervisors to mark them and then just scale everyone :S
18:13 < matches> Surely at least one other person is going to read the final report...
18:13 < matches> I've heard bad things about the engineering scaling system
18:14 < matches> Your mark becomes inversely proportional to how well your supervisor's students did the previous year or something like that
18:15 < matches> Anyway, two months left to accomplish something!
20:05 < sulix> Worked out why the font bounds were weird.
20:06 < sulix> AddText takes (msg, scale, x, y) not (msg, x, y, scale), so the coordinates were all bunk.
20:09 < sulix> Fonts looks _amazing_ with floating pt errors, too.
20:09 < sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-i-think-you-mean-comic-fail.png
20:29 < sulix> The Art of Computer Programming briefly mentions the Stern-Brocot tree, btw.
20:29 < sulix> I can't see it being really useful, though.
21:06 < sulix> My difficulty clipping bézier paths may be because it is actually impossible.
21:06 < sulix> I think I've just found a paper saying that it is only possible for béziers which happen to be straight lines.
22:55 < sulix> Never mind, it is possible, it's just very nasty.
23:15 < sulix> Also C++14, because we need more lambdas: https://isocpp.org/blog/2014/08/we-have-cpp14
--- Day changed Wed Aug 20 2014
12:05 < matches> I guess we've accomplished the goals for this week's meeting then!
12:05 < matches> (That shading algorithm totally counts as a "first attempt")
12:07 < sulix> I'm about 2/3rds of the way through deriving the reparametrisation of béziers.
12:08 < sulix> It basically just boils down to pages and pages of rearranging polynomials.
12:38 < sulix> I managed to get the qt4/qt5 monstrosity compiling on my laptop.
12:38 < sulix> It has a "moc-qt4" program, which works, whereas "moc" is qt5.
16:28 < matches> I think I need to stop adding this log to git...
23:08 < sulix> matches: But then, how would history record that I've finally got a maybe-correct derivation for cubic bézier reparametrisation: http://davidgow.net/stuff/cubic_bezier_reparam.pdf
23:08 < sulix> (Code is in git)
--- Day changed Thu Aug 21 2014
12:57 < sulix> So it turns out that quadtrees are hard, and reparametrising béziers is why.
13:03 < matches> I don't seem to see anything anymore with the quad tree enabled
13:10 < sulix> The quadtree doesn't let you add things in realtime.
13:10 < sulix> Quadtree nodes are immutable once created.
13:12 < matches> Ah
13:35 < sulix> debug: ReParametrise (bezier.h:190) - (0.000000,0.000000),(1.000000,1.000000),(1.000000,1.000000),(1.000000,1.000000) -> (-nan,-nan),(-nan,-nan),(-nan,-nan),(-nan,-nan)
13:36 < sulix> Looking good!
13:54 < sulix> Clearly, the quadtree rendering is now perfect: http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-this-is-definitely-a-fox.png
--- Day changed Sun Aug 24 2014
17:51 < matches> ...
17:51 < matches> I am parsing CSS in the SVGs
17:51 < matches> WHAT HAVE I DONE
17:52 < matches> Blame inkscape for always using css to control the properties
17:57 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/death-by-shading.png
17:59 < matches> Anyway there is a proper "Group" data type like with the Beziers
18:00 < matches> So if you want to cache things related to groups you can put them in that I guess
18:02 < matches> Really it should be called "PATH" not "GROUP" but I vaguely thought it might be able to be used as either
--- Day changed Mon Aug 25 2014
10:39 < matches> I was thinking about how to do shading more
10:40 < matches> And I basically arrived at the idea Loop and Blinn have that you kept talking about
10:40 < matches> Except I didn't realise it at first because my version was all using rectangles instead of triangles
10:40 < matches> I think I will try to get my scanline fill to work first though
13:03 < matches> It sort of works
13:15 < matches> ... or not
--- Day changed Tue Aug 26 2014
14:25 < matches> I wonder if I'm going to end up just reverse engineering an algorithm that I was too lazy to understand properly
14:26 < matches> I really like the idea of flood fill better than doing insane triangulation maths
14:26 < matches> Surely GPUs can flood fill
14:28 < sulix> I think they can, but either very slowly or only on very new hardware...
14:28 < sulix> I think you'd need to do it in several passes, maybe?
14:28 < matches> The problem I had with flood fill was working out where to start
14:28 < matches> I have something that almost works
14:28 < matches> That requires no clever maths...
14:29 < matches> But it is CPU only
14:29 < matches> And probably breaks in a bunch of special cases
14:30 < matches> It doesn't have precision problems though (once you've drawn the boundary that is)
14:31 < matches> It would still be cool to go through the Loop/Blinn algorithm on CPU and GPU
14:31 < matches> Because that is going to have floating point maths in it
14:31 < matches> flood fill has no floats
14:31 < matches> Therefore it is infinite precision
14:31 < matches> Objective complete
14:32 < matches> Actually I don't think my algorithm is proper flood fill, it's sort of scanline flood fill but not?
14:32 < matches> When in doubt write random code
14:34 < sulix> How are you handling the case where, due to a path being half offscreen it becomes two paths?
14:34 < matches> ... I am not
14:35 < matches> If part of the path is offscreen it is annoying
14:36 < sulix> Hopefully, once some of the quadtree code is more functional, the path clipping code can be used to clip paths to the screen.
14:39 < matches> Compositing is also totally broken because the fill just looks for black pixels
14:40 < matches> But if I can get it doing fonts then that's sort of not totally useless
18:35 < matches> I am very tempted to implement a "Please click on the location to fill this path from" interface at the moment
18:39 < matches> Alright, I have shading somewhat stack overflowing
18:39 < matches> I mean
18:39 < matches> Working
18:39 < matches> *
18:39 < matches> ********
18:49 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/shading-the-only-svg-that-doesnt-segfault.png
20:43 < matches> Argh
20:43  * matches stabs coordinate transforms
20:43 < matches> stab stab stab
20:44 < matches> My filling algorithm is to find the 4 extrema of the path
20:44 < matches> And try and flood fill inwards from each one
20:45 < matches> But the extrema pixel coordinates keep transforming to *outside* of the path
20:45 < matches> By one pixel
20:45  * matches stabs
21:52 < matches> I guess I should just actually implement loop and blinn shading
21:52 < matches> Flood fill is not as easy as I had hoped
21:53 < matches> I have to start doing annoying geometry maths to work out what point I can start the flood fill at
21:55 < matches> Sigh
--- Day changed Wed Aug 27 2014
22:33 < sulix> Suddenly: ToAbsolute on ToRelative does not give original Bezier
22:34 < sulix> I may need to rethink what my quadtree code is doing to those poor curves.
22:51 < sulix> Never mind, that assertion happens _whenever_ trying to load cubicbeziers.svg.
23:03 < sulix> Oh wow: you should see what happens if you start splitting and reparametrising beziers with bad precision.
23:03 < sulix> 'tis "whacked"
23:08 < sulix> http://davidgow.net/stuff/ipdf-a-slight-curve.png
23:15 < sulix> And the Quadtree infinite precision for béziers now works*
23:15 < sulix> *for some beziers.
23:15 < sulix> * for some large finite value of "infinite"
--- Day changed Thu Aug 28 2014
11:35 < sulix> What time is it? It's NaN time!
11:44 < sulix> Ah, so... horizontal lines have a height of zero in their bounds. This makes divides by zero happen in places.
11:48  * sulix apologieses profusely for his latest "break absolutely everything" commit.
11:57 < sulix> Yeah, making divide by zero crash rather than generating NaNs breaks a lot of things.
11:57 < sulix> You'd be surprised by how often we divide by zero.
11:57 < sulix> Mostly in the Quadtree code.
11:58 < sulix> Because, damnit, mathematics can't beat me.
12:20 < matches> Yes, lines have zero width... stupid lines
12:21 < matches> I stopped the segfaults in shading by adding a depth counter to FloodFillOnCPU
12:21 < matches> Which makes interesting shading patterns...
12:22 < matches> I think it's time to fall back to the "Use the second algorithm on Wikipedia" approach
12:23 < matches> I can still use a Flood Fill but hopefully a less segfaulty one
12:29 < matches> I'm not sure about ToAbsolute and ToRelative...
12:29 < matches> I thought they should be inverses but they seem not to be
12:29 < matches> Oh wait, the divide by zero would do that
12:30 < matches> That curve looks cool
12:30 < matches> You should talk about it lots in the meeting
12:31 < matches> For the whole meeting
12:31 < matches> Nothing else
12:31 < matches> Don't mention the total lack of progress I made...
12:32 < matches> How much can I trust SolveCubic?
12:40 < matches> Basically I'm going with randomly picking points until I find one inside the shape then starting a flood fill from that point
12:41 < matches> Checking the pixels for the edges is not feasable
12:42 < matches> If you scan along a bresenham line you could jump over the edge
12:42 < matches> ... I see an "if false" in SolveCubic
12:42 < matches> Slightly worrying
12:43 < matches> Ah
12:43 < matches> I approve of SolveCubic
13:31 < matches> So
13:31 < matches> Did you introduce the floating point exception or did I...
13:45 < sulix> I just did.
13:49 < sulix> SolveCubic may have small problems.
13:50 < matches> Yes I am trying to rewrite it now...
13:50 < matches> I swear we did this in CQM
13:52 < sulix> Solvecubic also sometimes tries to take the square root of a negative number.
13:52 < matches> Yep
13:54 < sulix> I've pushed slightly less broken code.
13:55 < sulix> Ny which I mean slightly more broken.
13:55 < matches> ...
13:55 < sulix> I'm avoiding divide by zeros by "if (denominator = 0) denominator = 1" style shenanigans.
13:56 < matches> I'm slightly scared by the change to Rect::TransformRectCoordinates
13:56 < matches> Oh right
13:56 < matches> Yeah
13:56 < matches> That seems...
13:56 < matches> Scary
13:56 < sulix> It works, scarily enough.
13:56 < matches> Anyway I already ifdef'd the thing out of SolveCubic
13:56 < matches> It's too slow for me though
13:57 < sulix> And by works, I mean I haven't found any issues yet.
13:57 < matches> I am brute forcing a point inside the shape
13:57 < matches> This requires finding the intersections with horizontal and vertical lines for every single bounding bezier
13:57 < matches> Then the "even or odd" test
13:57 < matches> You only have to do it once
14:05 < matches> I think SolveCubic would best be done by doing Newton Raphson or the Shooting Method between the endpoints and the turning points
14:05 < matches> I'll see
14:06 < matches> I'll try implement it and see if it's faster
14:06 < matches> You may have to demonstrate my totally broken shading for me
14:06 < matches> I haven't committed in a while
14:41 < matches> Oh
14:41 < matches> SolveCubic may not have been the bottleneck there...
14:41 < matches> -_-
14:41 < matches> The failure to update the variable for a while loop miiiight be more of an issue
14:44 < sulix> Good, 'cause I'm thinking of "upping the SolveCubic accuracy" a bit.
14:44 < sulix> Anyway...
14:44  * sulix -> CS
14:46 < matches> I've reimplemented SolveCubic
14:46 < matches> In theory it works
14:55 < matches> I reckon Binary Search is the only algorithm I am good at implementing :S
14:57 < sulix> Oooh...
14:57 < matches> What?
18:56 < matches> So, the fact that we are not solving cubics analytically is probably important in terms of precision issues
18:58 < sulix> Yeah, that's why I started trying to solve them analytically and then stopped and cried.
18:58 < matches> :(
18:59 < matches> There is a solution, it's just ugly
18:59 < sulix> Nah: for the Quadtree, it didn't matter much. As long as the error went in the correct direction, you'd just lost a tiny bit of efficiency.
19:00 < matches> Hmm
19:00 < matches> I don't expect shading using arbitrary precision arithmetic will be particularly fast anyway...
19:01 < sulix> Well, ideally most of the work in the shading will be done in screen-space anyway.
19:01 < matches> Yes
19:02 < sulix> And, of course, you don't need infinite precision for that because pixels/integers/etc.
19:03 < sulix> So, fingers crossed, things shouldn't matter too much.
19:03  * sulix realises that that is a maddeningly vague statement.
19:03 < matches> Well
19:04 < matches> I got the fill point to actually be in the correct location by actually solving the intercepts correctly
19:04 < matches> But
19:04 < matches> If you zoom *out* far enough, it can end up no longer inside the shape when transformed to screen space
19:04 < sulix> Okay, new plan.
19:04 < sulix> No zooming out.
19:05 < matches> I wish there were other people in this channel so I could justify putting that in qdb
19:20 < matches> There is a temptation to not require all those references to be const during rendering
19:20 < matches> We might want the Path to be able to alter itself based on the view
19:20 < matches> But I guess we'll take that path when we get to it
19:22 < matches> It might be worthwhile caching Path's for fonts
19:22 < matches> But I'd have to change the coordinates to be relative
19:22 < matches> Too many coord transforms
19:24 < sulix> Yup, that can be the subtitle of the thesis: "Too many coord transforms"
19:26 < matches> "A coordinated approach to graphics"
19:26 < matches> Oh wow
19:26 < matches> That should be a textbook
19:26 < sulix> "Transformers: Matrices in disguise"?
19:30 < sulix> Okay, it turns out (if denominator is zero, make denominator 1) has one flaw.
19:30 < sulix> Sometimes you should make the denominator... negative 1.
19:30 < matches> ...
19:30 < sulix> Somehow, I did not see this coming.
19:30 < matches> I'm not sure how this maths works
19:30 < matches> 1/0 != 1/-1
19:30 < sulix> That's what they want you to think.
19:31 < sulix> (Or maybe the bug I'm having is unrelated to that, but it seems like a fun guess)
21:16 < matches> Floating Point Exception in fglrx!
21:16 < matches> glXDestroyContext
21:16 < matches> It only happens when the program is about to close
21:16 < matches> So I'll be fine
21:18 < sulix> Ah, maybe enabling floating point exceptions was a bad idea.
21:18 < sulix> ...if it causes lots of "fglrxceptions"!
21:21 < matches> Well fglrx is exceptional
21:37 < matches> I'm falling back on just testing a crap tonne of points for "inside" and adding all the ones that are to a vector
21:37 < matches> I think there are some false negatives in Path::PointInside
21:37 < matches> Also FloodFill misses some edge pixels which makes no sense
21:38 < matches> If it's next to a filled pixel it should get filled!
21:47 < matches> So the disadvantage of using a breadth first search is that when your queue gets really big instead of getting a segfault you just get OOM
21:48 < matches> segfaults are quick
21:48 < matches> segfaults are like a pistol and oom is like drowning
21:54 < sulix> There is no way a BFS floodfill should ever OOM
21:54 < sulix> How many pixels are there, and how much are you storing per one?
21:58 < matches> Probably max 256x256 pixels, 4 way fill
21:58 < matches> It does not like rabbit_simple.svg
22:04 < matches> Yeah there is *something* causing it to get in a loop
22:04 < matches> Because obviously my BFS didn't check for loops
22:14 < matches> -_-
22:14 < matches> It is in a loop
22:14 < matches> Because there is a region with fill colour of white
22:14 < matches> And the flood fill is just "If it isn't white, stop"
22:14 < matches> Maybe I should set the background to have 0 alpha or something
22:15 < matches> Alpha seems to not actually do anything at the moment
22:27 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/who-the-hell-needs-antialiasing-anyway.png
22:44 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/shady-the-fox.png
22:47 < matches> rabbit_simple.svg actually doesn't work as well as rabbit.svg
22:48 < matches> I think one of the fill points of the outer ear is inside the inner ear
22:54 < sulix> Oh my... They're beautiful!
23:07 < matches> Ah crap
23:07 < matches> I will be pushing
23:07 < matches> 8 hours in the future
23:07 < matches> I really should fix my system clock
23:07 < matches> One of these days...
--- Day changed Mon Sep 01 2014
17:05 < matches> The wobbly lines on things are irritating me
17:10 < matches> There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with Bresenham, which means the actual line endpoints are wrong
17:11 < matches> The GPU does everything from floats and magically they go to the right spot in the buffer
17:11 < matches> The CPU has to calculate integer pixel coordinates
17:16 < matches> I need a magnifier I can't see the pixels that are in the wrong spot
17:16 < matches> I know they are there
17:21 < matches> ... ok maybe the Bresen Ham was a little past its use by date
19:48 < matches> The more I try and get these lines to not look dumb, the more convinced I become that glDrawLines is doing something fancy
19:56 < matches> You end up with wiggles in the line because the end points round to a different pixel to what you end up at by drawing the line
19:57 < matches> If you make sure you start from where the last line ended, you still get a bend because of the left over error from the last line
19:58 < matches> ...
19:58 < matches> Drawing a single line when you know the Bezier is actually a single line is probably going to be less rage inducing than trying to fix this
21:01 < matches> The Beziers are now classified according to Loop and Blinn
21:01 < matches> Well
21:01 < matches> Maybe
21:01 < matches> It at least knows what lines are
21:01 < matches> ...
21:02 < matches> Ok all the ttf beziers are SERPENTINE and LOOP so that's probably wrong
21:43 < matches> Ah, floating point precision strikes again
21:43 < matches> That's kind of annoying
21:47 < matches> But I suppose it's relevant
21:47 < matches> Unless I'm totally screwing something up
21:48  * matches adds in arbitrary fabs(x) < 1e-6 checks
21:58 < matches> On the other hand, if you use DeCasteljau and stop the sub dividing whenever you get to something that classifies as a line, it's actually pretty cool
21:59 < matches> But if you zoom in too far it starts to get classifications totally wrong
22:02 < matches> Yeah I have an abstract due in 2 weeks
22:02 < matches> so screwed
--- Day changed Tue Sep 02 2014
13:42 < matches> Ok, let's not use floating point values for colours
13:42 < matches> Baad
13:43 < matches> Bad bad
13:43 < matches> Bad sheep
13:43 < matches> The project isn't about precision of representable colours
13:44 < matches> So I'm perfectly OK with using uint8 for colour components
18:53 < matches> Is it too late to change the aim of the project to "render svg-tests/fox.svg but without antialiasing"
18:54 < matches> "Or using the GPU"
18:55 < matches> Well, I understand why shading doesn't usually use flood fill now anyway
18:55 < matches> But I still kind of think flood fill is better at high resolutions
18:56 < matches> Not parallelisable I guess
18:56 < matches> ... Or is it
18:57 < matches> I was going to try and do arbitrary precision stuff but it seems we can no longer compile unless Real == double or float
--- Day changed Wed Sep 03 2014
17:26 < matches> It would seem Mr Munroe has beaten us...
17:28 < matches> In Javascript
17:28 < matches> We should die of shame
17:29 < matches> Hahaha
17:29 < matches> "// there is no elegance here. only sleep deprivation and regret"
17:31 < matches> On the bright side, we now have a reason to reference xkcd
17:31 < matches> I guess?
17:59 < sulix> I just saw that, and had planned to use that comment as my next commit message.
--- Day changed Thu Sep 04 2014
10:59  * sulix sulix also engages panic mode.
11:00  * sulix apparently also needs to engage sleep mode.
11:00  * sulix almost engaged sheep mode by mistake.
11:49 < sulix> How sure are you that SolveCubic works?
18:37 < matches> Well, sure within 1e-4
19:40 < matches> Rational<Gmpint> compiles again
19:41 < matches> It just takes... several minutes... to load "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog"
21:04 < matches> I have a new ingenius plan
21:06 < matches> This will probably not work but hopefully it won't take me too long...
21:06 < matches> Oh dear what am I saying
21:06 < matches> It's going to take a month now
22:24 < matches> I really should be integrating one of those two libraries Rowan suggested into the project
22:24 < matches> As opposed to implementing what I like to call the "Paranoid Number"
22:25 < matches> It starts as a float
22:25 < matches> It checks each operation for an exception, and if it does it adds the operation to a linked list instead
22:25 < matches> After trying to simplify the next elements in the list
22:26 < matches> This is going to be awful
22:26 < matches> But it's been a while since I wrote a good linked list
22:32 < matches> ... I think the last linked list I wrote had a nasty tendency to randomly segfault...
22:32 < matches> Nevertheless we shall forge ahead
23:14 < matches> You know you haven't had enough sleep when you start to terminate lines with ':' instead of ';'
23:14 < matches> I blame python
23:14 < matches> Not that it was valid python syntax either
23:15 < matches> But it's a good scapesnake
23:42 < matches> Oh recursive list based functions
23:42 < matches> How I have missed you
23:42 < matches> void Foo() {if (m_next != NULL) m_next->Foo();}
23:42 < matches> <3
--- Day changed Fri Sep 05 2014
09:26 < matches> It sort of kind of works
09:26 < matches> Except when it breaks
09:26 < matches> ParanoidNumber::Simplify needs improvement
09:26 < matches> Also operator+=
09:26 < matches> operator-=
09:26 < matches> operator*=
09:26 < matches> and operator/=
09:26 < matches> But it's definitely a number
09:27 < matches> It just occasionally does things in totally the wrong order'
09:28 < matches> So basically the idea is if you have an inexact (or overflow/underflow) operation, you delay it, and then in theory you can rearrange the operations so you have a smaller error...
09:28 < matches> It seems to give better results than floats for tests/paranoidcalculator
09:29 < matches> But that might be because it is initialised off 3/10 and the float starts at 0.3
09:30 < matches> It could all be totally useless
09:30 < matches> It probably is totally useless
09:31 < matches> I have a hunch that even if it's terrible it might beat true arbitrary precision arithmetic
09:31 < matches> In terms of actually being able to use it
09:31 < matches> Who needs mathematics when you have blind intuition...
--- Day changed Sun Sep 07 2014
11:37 < sulix> Explicit mentions of hitting floating point precision issues in the xkcd comic: http://chromakode.com/post/notes-on-xkcd-pixels
17:33 -!- unmercifulfish [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
17:33 < unmercifulfish> mwahahaha
17:34 < unmercifulfish> you can't escape my stalkerish tendencies now
--- Day changed Mon Sep 08 2014
11:10 < matches> This channel seemed like such a good idea at the time...
11:19 < sulix> (So did the quadtree...)
12:08 -!- Pommers [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
12:08 < Pommers> http://chromakode.com/post/notes-on-xkcd-pixels
12:10 < sulix> It's gettign crowded in here.
12:10 < sulix> Pommers: We were looking at that yesterday. The XKCD guys had it easy.
12:11 < Pommers> Lets get all the people in here
12:42 < unmercifulfish> IPDF PARTY
13:49 < matches> Hmm, maths is harder than I thought
15:41 < Pommers> Speaking of math, I know a guy who is looking for people versed in maths and willing to work on psuedo random number sets
--- Day changed Wed Sep 10 2014
11:50 < matches> So, compiling with mpfr reals is not as simple as including the mpfr real header and doing a typedef
11:50 < matches> As there appear to be compiler errors in mpfr
11:51 < matches> Does anyone actually check that things compile before including them in debian..
11:53 < matches> I'd expect this sort of thing from Fedora
11:58 < matches> Never mind it's namespace issues
11:58 < matches> I'm sorry debian
12:15 < matches> Something is horrendously broken about mpfrc++
12:16 < matches> Oh
12:17 < matches> #if REAL >= REAL_RATIONAL was not a wise choice
12:21 < sulix> Ah...
12:24 < matches> mpfrc++ is at least as precise as doubles but slower
12:24 < matches> I never actually found the limit for doubles
12:24 < matches> I should do that first
12:26 < matches> Hmm, things start to disappear at around 4e-11 but you can still add stuff and it looks fine
12:27 < matches> Ok doubles go crazy at 1e-17
12:27 < matches> 1e-15 even
12:30 < sulix> Is that zooming in on the origin, or somewhere further away?
12:31 < matches> Somewhere further away
12:31 < matches> If you translate towards the origin you can actually see the shapes start to get better
12:31 < matches> It's actually pretty cool
12:35 < matches> There's something dodgy with starting the View with low width/height as opposed to zooming in to the same width/height
12:37 < matches> mpreal doesn't seem to want to show anything
12:39 < matches> I think it's well past time we automated the zooming/translating process
12:39 < matches> Sitting here zooming for 20 minutes is not really an effective use of time...
12:47 < matches> Speaking of which, the CPU shading evaluates the fill points lazilly now, so you don't have to wait 5 minutes even with doubles just to load an SVG
15:39 < sulix> For all of the hangers on... quadtrees are now slightly more functional.
15:39 < Pommers> "functional"
18:40 -!- iceweaselOS [[email protected]] has joined #ipdf
18:40 < iceweaselOS> Apparently talking in ICC isn't allowed 
18:41 < iceweaselOS> ICC 
18:41 < iceweaselOS> dammit
18:41 < iceweaselOS> it has autocorrect 
18:42 < iceweaselOS> Humphrey  the rabbit  does not work  :(
18:42 < iceweaselOS> it gets stuck in pause
18:44 -!- iceweaselOS [[email protected]] has quit [Client exited]
--- Day changed Thu Sep 11 2014
10:53 < matches> I wonder who that was
10:59 < matches> "... for some reason in irram they decided to let x<y loop forever if x=y ..."
10:59 < matches> That's...
10:59 < matches> Ok
10:59 < matches> Fine
11:00 < matches> sulix: How many "x < y" checks do we have?
11:10 < sulix> A finite number..., I guess?
11:10 < matches> iRRAM appears to do some sort of fancy wrapping of MPFR
11:11 < matches> So I'm not hopeful
11:11 < matches> Considering MPFR seems to slow down hideously
11:11 < sulix> Wrap all of the numbers inside other numbers.
11:11 < matches> I did some more ParanoidNumber stuff
11:11 < matches> Maybe one day it will actually give the correct result
11:11 < matches> Then I can actually implement Simplify() ...
11:12 < sulix> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_GCD_algorithm
11:12 < sulix> (If you want fast gcd for bigints, btw)
11:14 < matches> Should I plead "I had assignments due" or "I was seeing if Humphrey The Rabbit would work on a Firefox OS phone" in the progress meeting...
11:14 < matches> iRRAM does seem to have a friendly install script
11:15 < sulix> As long as you don't plead the FITH, you're probably fine. :P
11:16 < matches> I'm fairly certain that floats are the best possible number representation and you need to do something more clever than just change your number representation if you want an arbitrary precision document
11:16 < matches> Something like... some kind of... quad... tree
11:17 < sulix> Do not use those words. You may not be able to vanquish what you summon.
11:23 < matches> I need to write an abstract...
11:24 < matches> "We compare different number representations and find them all to be useless"
11:24 < matches> Hmm, something non commital
11:25 < matches> "By the date of this conference we will hopefully have something interesting to say"
11:25 < matches> "We discuss the drawbacks of adding IRC channel logs to git repositories"
11:26 < matches> Ah nooo
11:26 < matches> iRRAM uses "REAL"
11:28 < matches> Also someone's been using too much javascript because there are all these extra ';' in their headers and it annoys -Werror=pedantic
11:58 < sulix> ... :-(
15:04 < matches> Spot the slight mathematical flaw in iRRAM
15:04 < matches> inline LAZY_BOOLEAN operator == (const REAL&    x, const REAL&    y){ return  (y<x)&&(x<y) ; }
15:05 < matches> inline LAZY_BOOLEAN operator != (const REAL&    x, const REAL&    y){ return  (y<x)||(x<y) ;}
15:06 < matches> inline LAZY_BOOLEAN operator <= (const REAL&    x, const REAL&    y){ return  (x<y); }
15:06 < matches> They don't seem to have equality
15:06 < matches> But that doesn't stop them implementing the operators...
18:21 < sulix> Clearly the way to fix your computer's clock issues: http://jackf.net/bezier-clock/
18:22 < matches> Against all better judgement I am still trying to fix ParanoidNumber
18:22 < matches> And oh my goodness that is amazing
18:23 < matches> But
18:23 < matches> It still thinks it's 02:23:31
18:23 < sulix> Unless I fix the quadtree view code, infinite precision only works if the coordinate you're zooming in on can _not_ be represented as a float.
18:24 < matches> ?
18:24 < matches> ??
18:25 < sulix> So if you zoom in on a coordinate that is exactly representable as a sum of powers of two, then you're always zooming in on the boundary between two quadtree nodes.
18:25 < matches> Haha
18:26 < matches> Could you use an extra "centre" node?
18:26 < matches> That would be redundant though
18:26 < matches> Hm
18:26 < sulix> Nah, I just need to actually get around to supporting displaying content from more than one node at a time.
18:32 < matches> ParanoidNumbers seem to actually construct properly now
18:32 < matches> At least, if you construct them and convert back to doubles, they are within 5% of the double
18:33 < matches> Now... simplifying...
18:33 < sulix> With float ParanoidNumbers or double ParanoidNumbers?
18:33 < matches> doubles
18:33 < matches> But I'm testing the traversal of the list(s) when converting back
18:34 < sulix> Ahhh...
18:34 < matches> You need two recursive functions and I really hope I don't get stack overflows...
18:35 < matches> You start with "value = Head.value * Head.MultiplyFactors + Head.AddTerms"
18:35 < matches> Then define MultiplyFactors as "1 * f1.AddTerms * f2.AddTerms * ..."
18:36 < matches> Then AddTerms is "0 + t1.MultiplyFactors + t2.MultiplyFactors + ..."
18:36 < matches> It gets confusing how you deal with division and subtraction...
18:37 < matches> I'm sure you can write that as a non recursive function... somehow...
18:37 < matches> I don't seem to be overflowing the stack though
18:38 < matches> So 666 operations have taken 5 minutes
18:38 < matches> But that's without simplifying anything
18:38  * sulix is currently traversing quadtree nodes via needlessly complicated recusion.
18:38 < matches> I am quitely confident that I may be able to render a frame in at most 10 years
18:39 < sulix> Clearly in your seminar, you should start zooming in and when it gets slow just say "If you'll bear with me for a moment" and then just leave the room.
18:39 < matches> The thought has crossed my mind...
18:41 < matches> Something that is kind of cool is I can change the digit to be something like uint8_t and see how well it converts to floats
18:41 < sulix> That is pretty cool.
18:41 < matches> It will be when I implement it that is
18:41 < sulix> How well _does_ it convert to floats?
18:42 < sulix> (Also, sudden thought: is NaN a valid mark for this project, as I am getting the feeling it should be...)
18:42 < matches> My paranoid number tester does occasionally fail with "NaN != NaN"
18:42 < matches> That's good!
18:42 < matches> They both got NaN!
18:43 < matches> Well, ideally I will be able to make it so that the ParanoidNumber *doesn't* get NaN
19:17 < sulix> Hmm... I think the ext4 driver just crashed on my computer.
19:18 < matches> :S
19:18 < sulix> I didn't know that was possible.
19:25  * sulix -> other computer
19:31 < matches> I'm inventing cool terminology
19:31 < matches> Paranoia
19:31 < matches> Is the number of ParanoidNumbers...
19:33 < sulix> "Peeking around corners looking for NaNs, wearing a tinfoil hat to guard against surious SIGFPEs, it's... ParanoidNumber!"
19:33 < matches> That is the best description
19:33 < matches> Well
19:34 < matches> It actually kind of blindly walks around the corner into the SIGFPE and then freaks out and runs back around it
19:35 < sulix> It's like running away from the fireball in slow motion.
19:37 < matches> I'll at least win an award for most original number representation
19:37 < matches> (He hopes)
19:37 < matches> (It's probably not)
19:38 < matches> (It's probably equivelant to one of the many alternative number representations that I didn't look up...)
19:38  * sulix also hopes there is an award for most buggy implemention of a quadtree.
19:38 < matches> (Specifically, the ones in the Handbook of Floating Point arithmetic that were described as "curiously useless")
19:40 < sulix> (Googling "curiously useless" yields the phrase: "My boss is curiously useless. He fanatically creates an abundant amount of work for everyone while at the same time manages to get nothing done.")
19:40 < sulix> (I suspect they're referring to iRRAM)
19:40 < matches> Bahaha
19:43 < matches> I think that simply replacing floats with int8_t actually does work
19:44 < matches> Which is cool because it is easier to test if an operation with int8_t can be represented exactly
19:44 < matches> But on the other hand there will be fewer operations that can be represented exactly
19:45 < matches> I think this may actually work
19:46 < matches> You don't need arbitrary precision to represent screen space and you are converting from view space to screen space
19:47 < matches> So maybe it won't be that terrible, even though it would need a lot more digits to represent the same arbitrary precision value
19:47 < matches> I think
19:47 < sulix> You need more than an int8_t to represent screen space.
19:47 < sulix> (An int16_t would do it, though)
19:48 < matches> You just need to be able to represent each individual factor in the operation
19:48 < matches> factor and term
19:48 < sulix> You may (probably will) need factors > 127
19:48 < matches> Probably
19:50 < matches> If I just implement an "Exact" template function...
19:50 < matches> Uh oh, templates
19:51  * sulix thinks that he's approaching the worst recursive subroutine ever written.
19:52 < sulix> (It has four switch statements in it so far)
19:57 < matches> Template errors
19:57 < matches> Aargahasdf
19:58 < matches> Compilers are so good at identifying exactly what error you made and so useless at actually providing any hint of how you can fix it
19:58 < matches> It's totally different from like "expected ';' before ..."
19:59 < sulix> I saw a feature request for Google translate to support "gcc -> English".
19:59 < matches> I want to specialise some template static member functions...
19:59 < matches> That was my first mistake...
20:00 < matches> Ok, they don't need to be static member functions, they can just be ... whatever you call a function that has no namespace associated with it
20:01 < sulix> Functions...?
20:01 < matches> Bah
20:01 < matches> I would say "Regular functions" but they tend to be less common in C++
20:02 < sulix> I've heard them called "first-class functions" before.
20:03 < matches> That's a little elitist
20:03 < sulix> I'm sort-of enamoured with the idea of "business-class functions" and "economy-class functions," though.
20:11 < sulix> BTW, I just commited something that doesn't compile. Fixes will come shortly, it was just the easiest way to get it from computer A -> computer B.
20:13  * sulix has made a typo and copy-pasted it into 16 places.
20:13 < matches> copy-paste is best practice...
20:14 < matches> It irks me that "a -= b" is equivelant to "a += (-b)" but there is no "a /= b == a *= (-b)"
20:14 < matches> Well there is sort of, but only for rationals
20:14 < sulix> The operator you're looking for is (1 / b)
20:14 < matches> Yes, but - is quicker
20:14 < sulix> This is true.
20:15 < matches> I mean 3 can be represented exactly but 1/3 cannot
20:15 < matches> With floats
20:15 < matches> Most annoying
20:15 < matches> I'm currently trying to reduce all the superflous "{0 + ...}" in ParanoidNumber
20:16 < matches> It likes to create 1000 element lists with 900 zeroes in a row
20:35 < unmercifulfish> this is gripping reading
20:35 < unmercifulfish> so glad I am a part of this
20:35 < matches> This is the cutting edge of useless research
20:41 < sulix> "The bézier tiptoed out of bed. What an adventure it would be to go beyond the quadtree node in which it had lived its entire life. Its mother had told it sternly that it was dangerous to wander the dark wastes beyond the root node. Bobby Bézier had never believed the stories, though: there were no such things as wild NaNs that ate all of the coefficients of naughty boys. Bobby looked up at the sky: the infinite void of night penetrated only by the deb
20:43 < Pommers> Oh yeah. One of the people in cs has a nice post on their door about rabbits that I want to grab a copy of
20:50 < matches> I have a "TrustingOp" and "ParanoidOp"
20:50 < matches> I think I'm having too much fun...
20:54  * sulix has decided to give up actually coding and take up writing bézier curve fanfiction full time.
20:55 < sulix> (People say it's derivative, but it's just about to reach a turning point)
21:15 < unmercifulfish> qdb
23:09 < matches> Oh dear
23:09  * matches curses kahan
23:10 < matches> I do not understand how this works, but if I delete terms that are "-0" things break
23:13 < matches> So I got to the point where ParanoidNumber gave results that were reasonably close to just using a normal double without simplifying them
23:14 < matches> And now I am basically adding random lines of code and running the tester and seeing if it still works :S
--- Day changed Fri Sep 12 2014
00:15 < matches> This reminds me of the James Micken comment about addition and multiplication basically being the same thing...
01:19 < matches> Oh my goodness
01:19 < matches> I think ParanoidNumber just worked for one very specific case!
01:19 < matches> ParanoidNumber: 0.3 + 0.3 + 0.3 = 9/10, ToDouble() -> 0.9000000000000000222044604925031308084726
01:20 < matches> double: 0.3 + 0.3 + 0.3 = 0.9000000000000001332267629550187848508358
01:20 < matches> And strtod("0.9") = 0.9000000000000000222044604925031308084726
01:23 < matches> For 0.2+0.2+0.3 = 7/10 it has an error of 1e-16 compared to doubles which apparently have no error
01:24 < matches> But as floats it has an error of 1e-8 compared to 4e-8
01:24 < matches> Hmm, why does 7.0 / 10.0 give a bigger error than 0.2 + 0.2 + 0.3
01:24 < matches> Oh
01:24 < matches> It'll be denormals probably
01:25 < matches> That is... quiet irritating
01:27 < matches> So... it is sometimes better than a float but only if there is a full moon and you sacrifice thrice the number of one tenth of unity goats three times
01:28 < matches> The other times it breaks because subtraction is totally FITH
01:29 < matches> Oh, it should be able to do 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 except my calculator tester doesn't allow me to enter non decimal numbers
01:32 < matches> I think 0.3+0.3+0.3 is the only thing it can do better than regular floats
01:32 < matches> Woo
01:40 < matches> Ah it is better at beating doubles when it is using doubles as the digit type
01:40 < matches> But it still is sometimes worse if you have a small number of operations
01:40 < matches> Probably because one division is less precise than several additions
01:42 < matches> I'm going to keep telling myself that this is useful
01:42 < matches> After I sleep
01:51 < Pommers> It isn't currently a full moon...
01:51 < Pommers> Also
01:51 < Pommers> Go to bed
11:27 < matches> It was a full moon after I sacrificed the goats
11:40 < Pommers> Stop toying with space matches 
--- Day changed Sat Sep 13 2014
09:25 < unmercifulfish> I feel that the logs for this chat should just be added to qdb
09:25 < unmercifulfish> < matches> It was a full moon after I sacrificed the goats
12:36 < Pommers> Should make a QDB bot for submitting them
16:20 < matches> When sulix is awarded the nobel prize for his work on quad trees, I will be proud to be a part of this channel
16:21 < Pommers> Until then you won't be?
16:23 < matches> I've been thinking of adding a "grep -v matches" before the automatic log commit
17:45 < matches> I am a horrible person
17:45 < matches> I am exploiting that "delete" acting on a NULL pointer has no effect
17:46 < matches> "delete Operation(new ParanoidNumber(a), ADD)"
17:47 < matches> Where Operation will either return the first argument or NULL
17:50 < matches> At the moment I'm very pleased with how cleverly I am about to shoot myself in the foot
17:50 < matches> We'll see how I feel after I pull the trigger
17:53 < matches> I have either written an extremely elegant or an extremely segfaulting function
17:57 < matches> The latter is looking more and more likely
17:57 < matches> But I'm sure there is beauty underneath
17:57 < matches> Like the ugly duckling!
17:59 < matches> There's still hope, it turns out I'm segfaulting way before I even get to that
18:01 < matches> Apparently 2+1 is 6, but doubles think 2+1 is 5
18:02 < matches> "Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, if that is granted, all else follows"
18:06 < matches> Ok, 1 + 1 is 2
18:06 < matches> I think we can call that a result
18:06 < matches> Write the thesis and we're done here
22:18 < matches> 1 + 0.3 = 13/10 and 13/10 + 0.2 = Segfault
22:18 < matches> Getting close
22:19 < matches> Now I'm doomed to not sleep until it works because I'm never going to remember how this works
22:20 < Pommers> Got a whiteboard?
22:20 < matches> I do actually but it's in the other room
22:20 < matches> And it does not have space for this
22:22 < matches> I don't think I've ever used so many delete operators...
22:23 < matches> Also constructing a 4 diretional list on the stack then stealing one of the branches
22:23 < matches> It's a game of "dodge the double delete!"
22:24 < matches> Which reminds me, we have copious memory leaks in an external library
22:24 < matches> 'ld' ?
22:25 < matches> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.19.so
22:25 < matches> Not sure if that's something I'm doing wrong
22:26 < matches> Turns out you can't pipe valgrind's output to less
--- Day changed Sun Sep 14 2014
18:23 < matches> http://szmoore.net/ipdf/sam/abstract.txt
18:24 < matches> You know
18:24 < matches> It sounds a lot more boring than it has been
18:24 < matches> I also need a title
18:24 < matches> "Number Representations and Precision in Vector Graphics" ?
18:24 < matches> I'm too scared to pick something punny...
18:26 < matches> Libreoffice thinks that is 147 words and pluma thinks it is 150...
18:26 < matches> Oh
18:26 < matches> hyphenated IEEE-754
18:28 < matches> I think the first sentence could probably be less mind numbingly boring
18:28 < matches> My last thesis started with "In this project" which seems terribly not academic
18:29 < matches> (Every time I read that thesis I get a little more convinced that the markers didn't actually read any of it)
18:29 < matches> ParanoidNumbers are not going well
18:30 < matches> Like, it's hard to debug where things go wrong when you have a list like this:
18:30 < matches> debug: main (tests/paranoidcalculator.cpp:75) - a is: {3*(23*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))+(3*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))/10+(4*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))/100+(1*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))/1000+(2*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))/10000+(3*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))/100000))))))/10+(1*(23*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/100000+(2/1e+06+(2/1e+07+(3/1e+08)))))))))+(3*(398123+(1/10+(2/100+(3/1000+(5/10000+(1/1 ...
18:31 < matches> That's without simplifying it
18:31 < matches> But when it gives the wrong results before you even simplify it, that's bad
18:32 < matches> I'm preeety sure it's not just giving the wrong results because it has a stupid number of terms/factors
18:32 < matches> It's wrong enough that there's an extra factor or a factor missing or I don't even
18:34 < matches> Hmm
18:34 < matches> I want to add "Unlike paper, ..." before the third sentence
18:34 < matches> I'm going to Captain Obvious
18:38 < matches> :(
18:38 < matches> Panic mode is well and truly activated now
--- Day changed Mon Sep 15 2014
14:00 < sulix> matches: You need to put the title in: "Keepin' it real: Staying afloat on the sea of document precision"
--- Day changed Tue Sep 16 2014
12:25 < matches> I think I'm sinking
12:27  * sulix has failed to come up with a suitable sinking/syncing pun.
12:27 < sulix> Or, for that matter, a reason why the quadtree clipping sometimes breaks.
12:33 < matches> Hey, at least multiplication doesn't sometimes break
12:33 < matches> That's fairly major
12:34 < matches> My graph traversal for the paranoid number is somewhat flawed
12:34 < matches> Yeah it's a giant graph
12:34 < matches> Smell the memory cooking
12:34 < matches> I should do some performance tests
12:34 < matches> Even if I don't have anything to performance test...
12:34 < matches> We did promise graphs
12:35 < matches> (The other kind of graph)
12:35 < sulix> How are you traversing the graph?
12:35 < sulix> (The first kind)
12:36 < matches> Originally I was alternating between multipying and adding, but that doesn't work if the first term in a factor has factors of its own
12:36 < matches> I could probably still use that but I'd have to add zeroes or something
12:37 < matches> Thinking of it as a linked list is wrong anyway, as factors can have terms and terms can have factors and I'm not making any sense am I
12:37 < matches> Maths can be made up of maths
12:37 < matches> I kind of regret basically promising to have this done in my abstract...
12:37 < sulix> Hmmm...
12:40 < matches> Anyway, either I am creating the graph wrong and traversing it correctly, or creating it right and traversing it incorrectly, or they are just both totally wrong
12:41 < matches> Leaning towards the latter
12:43 < sulix> You need to traverse it from the bottom-up, I think.
12:50 < matches> Yeah, I need to change both the creation and traversal
12:50 < matches> Repeated divisions need to change into a division of a number multiplied by a number
12:51 < matches> Then the traversal is relatively trivial
12:55 < matches> Division is annoying
12:55 < matches> Why does maths need division
12:55 < matches> All the other operations make sense
12:56 < matches> Someone should reinvent mathematics without a concept of division
12:56 < matches> We'd all be happier
12:56 < sulix> I'm pretty certain there's a formal proof of that.
12:57 < sulix> Most number systems don't have the concept of division.
12:57 < matches> Haha
12:57 < sulix> (The integers, for example)
12:57 < matches> They have division with remainder though?
12:58 < matches> Ah
12:58 < matches> But you don't get a single number out
12:58 < matches> You get two
12:58 < matches> So it's not a proper operation?
13:00 < sulix> It's not a binary operation, and it's not the inverse of division.
13:00 < sulix> *multiplication
13:07 < Pommers> Guild debate. Pretty sure I have the best camera angle here
13:43 < matches> Guild debates are beyond the scope of this project
13:44 < matches> Urgh I'm regretting distinguishing between ADD and SUBTRACT now
13:44 < matches> Just ADD and MULTIPLY should be all the universe needs
13:51 < matches> You have to be doing something wrong when you are using a triple pointer
13:57 < matches> Delicious triple pointers
13:57 < matches> Now I feel like a triple chocolate milkshake
13:58 < matches> Ok, I have integers 0->9 adding and subtracting preeettty well now
14:13 < sulix> Ah, the power of modern technology!
14:29 < sulix> When in doubt, more debug output!
14:55 < sulix> Ah ha! I have solve (read: hacked horribly around) the quadtree bug.
14:56 < Pommers> http://xkcd.com/859/
14:56 < sulix> Basically, adding a bunch of fake roots in fixes it.
14:56 < sulix> Details at 11.
14:56 < sulix> Pommers: You are a terrible person.
14:57 < Pommers> Oh wait. It's there. I should sit closer to my screen
15:32 < matches> Ok, I'm pretty sure Paranoid Numbers are the worst idea ever
15:32 < matches> Possibly worse than iRRAM
15:32 < matches> I mean, in theory you can simplify things
15:32 < matches> But when you can't, you just use ridiculous amounts of memory
15:33 < matches> I don't think you can simplify that many things either
15:33 < matches> If I get it working enough I can demonstrate that it is a terrible idea at least...
16:46 < matches> Oh my goodness it is kind of working
16:46 < matches> I've said this before...
16:47 < matches> But it's at least at the point where it gives suspiciously similar answers to the right answer
16:48 < matches> As opposed to suspiciously off by factors of a random number
17:31 < matches> So I think all I have to do now is simplify the damn things
17:31 < matches> There are all sorts of amazing optimisations like not using a std::vector for the terms and not using seperate std::vector for + and -
17:31 < matches> And I think you can probably optimise it even more if you just use doubles
17:31 < matches> But
17:31 < matches> It is better at repeated division/multiplications
17:32 < matches> See TestMulDivIntegers
17:32 < matches> By better I mean slower
18:50 < matches> I have pushed a thing
18:50 < matches> Try not to judge me too harshly
18:51 < matches> Also there's no way it will compile on Cabellera anymore
23:06 < matches> So
23:06 < matches> I just made SVGs load into the centre of the view...
23:06 < matches> And then I realised that is exactly the sort of thing that will break sulix's quad tree
23:06 < matches> Sorry sulix
23:07 < matches> My role in this project is basically to make sulix have to do more work...
23:21 < Pommers> Why'd you break cabellera?
23:30 < matches> I didn't break cabellera
23:30 < matches> I used C++11 auto range iterators
23:30 < matches> for (auto add : m_next[add])
23:31 < matches> As opposed to: for (vector<ParanoidNumber*>::iterator i = m_next[ADD].begin(); i != m_next[ADD].end(); ++i) ParanoidNumber * add = *i; ...
23:31 < matches> Cabellera's g++ is too old for such amazing things
23:32 < matches> But I was at a point where I needed to change like 50 things from iterating over linked lists to iterating over some kind of hideous graph of std::vectors
23:32 < matches> Stuff typing all that
23:32 < matches> I broke the quad tree because I thought it would be nice to have SVGs automagically appear in the middle of the screen
23:33 < matches> As opposed to the top left underneath all the debug output
23:49 < sulix> matches: You are too kind.
23:49 < sulix> The quadtrees are actually working fine at the moment, by virtue of me modifying SolveCubic to no longer solve cubics.
23:51 < Pommers> return null;?
--- Day changed Wed Sep 17 2014
00:03 < matches> Wait what
00:04 < matches> Did you remove Cubic Beziers
00:04 < matches> Because I liked having Cubic Beziers
00:04 < sulix> I'm still trying to work out why it works myself.
00:04 < sulix> Nope, still cubic béziers, solvecubic now just returns some things which I'm pretty certain actually aren't roots as well.
00:05 < Pommers> Do either of you want to trade? I'll work on iPDF and you can fix my housemates computer
00:05 < matches> Hah
00:05 < matches> Set up that Jenkins server and we'll talk
00:06 < Pommers> The Container exists for Jenkins
00:06 < Pommers> So it's been started
00:06 < matches> I wish CS would stop thinking up names for things that are also names for other things
00:06 < matches> Container
00:06 < matches> Puppet
00:06 < matches> Orchestration
00:06 < matches> For god's sake
00:06 < matches> Paranoid Number is totally a legit name
00:07 < Pommers> Stop being paranoid about things matches 
00:07 < matches> "Tree" is acceptable because it at least looks like a tree
00:07 < Pommers> Also, coming to dinner?
00:07 < matches> There is dinner?
00:07 < matches> When?
00:07 < matches> It's midnight...
00:07 < Pommers> Thursday
00:07 < matches> Oh
00:07 < matches> I suppose
00:08 < matches> Thursday is typically the post meeting freak the hell out day
00:08 < matches> Monday Tuesday and Wednesday being the pre meeting freak the hell out days
00:08 < matches> Friday is the I should really prepare for my Physics tute day
00:09 < Pommers> Saturday is "o god coderdojo day"
00:09 < matches> Yeah
00:09 < matches> Sunday is I should really not be playing computer games but I will anyway day
00:09 < matches> No wait last sunday was a freak the hell out day as well, until they made me play monopoly
00:09 < matches> Sorry, monotony
00:10 < matches> Anyway how do you get valgrind to print number of flops
00:10 < sulix> I'm just s/.*day/PANIC day/g at the moment.
00:10 < matches> Your thing works!
00:10 < matches> Sort of
00:11 < sulix> thing?
00:11 < matches> Quadtrees
00:11 < Pommers> "thing"
00:11 < sulix> Technically it works*
00:11 < Pommers> "it"
00:11 < matches> I have about 4 things I still haven't even tried yet
00:11 < matches> And a couple of things that will work if you wait the lifetime of the universe
00:12 < Pommers> Hmm... I should make my bed while this backup happens
00:12 < matches> Bed is tempting
00:12 < sulix> *The roots I'm using might not actually be roots, it doesn't work if you either pan, zoom out or anything other than zoom in on a single point forever.
00:12 < Pommers> But having too much fun coding?
00:13 < matches> I'm working towards actually making graphs of something
00:13 < matches> I'm still working out exactly what I will graph
00:13 < matches> flops seems important
00:13 < matches> I'm basically replacing a single inexact flop with a lot of usually but not always exact flops 
00:14 < matches> And several hundred MB of memory...
00:18 < matches> Ok, this can't be right
00:18 < matches> To render one frame of an empty document takes 137,708 F64 operations
00:18 < matches> I assume that means double
00:19 < Pommers> That could use some optimizing...
00:19 < Pommers> Make all the functions return null and see how that speeds it up
00:19 < matches> -_-
00:19 < matches> This is using regular doubles
00:19 < matches> Not Paranoid Numbers
00:20 < matches> ParanoidNumbers takes about 5 minutes to do 20000 operations at the moment...
00:20 < sulix> I could believe it.
00:22 < Pommers> I'd be paranoid if it took that long
00:22 < matches> Don't make fun of the Paranoid Numbers
00:22 < matches> They are a work of art
00:23 < sulix> Part of me really wants to try compiling the quadtree with them, and part of me is terrified at the prospect.
00:23 < matches> There isn't a REALTYPE for them yet
00:25 < matches> They might work better if you had a giant Trie of them but I have no idea how to structure that
00:25 < matches> At the moment there is one tree per number and the tree can have a variable number of children for each node... :S
00:31 < matches> Anyway what performance metric do we want
00:31  * matches consults the proposal
00:32 < Pommers> What will be easier to do? Time or space?
00:32 < matches> Time
00:32 < matches> But Rowan was kind of keen on Space
00:32 < matches> Number of flops is probably the best
00:32 < Pommers> Just put some ascii art daleks in
00:34 < matches> Ok, so 1 frame = 30,897 F32, 129,042 F64 and 1000 frames = 4,364,459 F32,  6,933,526 F64
00:35 < matches> 6800 doubles to render a blank document
00:35 < matches> Actually
00:35 < matches> !
00:35 < matches> There is a rectangle in it!
00:35 < matches> Of width and height 0
00:40 < Pommers> I almost have the container for jenkins fully set up now
00:43 < Pommers> I just need to give it an IP and then just set up jenkins
00:45 < matches> I was joking about Jenkins...
00:46 < Pommers> I actually have a use for it...
01:16 < Pommers> Housemates computer is fixed
01:16  * Pommers sleeps
01:29 < matches> Dammit
01:29 < matches> I entered a timestamp of 10:56 instead of 22:56 and now my commit is at 13:27
01:30 < matches> I tried git commit --amend --date= but it didn't quite work
01:31 < sulix> Would it count as cheating on the performance metrics if time travel was involved?
01:31 < matches> Nooo
01:32 < sulix> As you can see, ParanoidNumber actually takes only -12 hours to render a frame by being so cautious it violates causality.
01:32 < matches> So, the "spatial" metric can be: Number of pixels not the same, and mean minimum distance horizontally/vertically to the nearest set pixel in the original
01:32 < matches> Because I said so
01:32 < matches> A possible other metric would be the Fourier Transform
01:33 < matches> But that's stupid
01:33 < matches> -12 hours is pretty good
14:43 < Pommers> Jenkins is set up and I can let you create an account if you want to play with it
17:01 < matches> Best idea ever
17:02 < matches> A performance test that saves the graph as an svg
17:02 < matches> Then runs itself on the graph...
17:05 < Pommers> recursive testing?
17:05 < matches> Yes!
17:07 < Pommers> Set your testing up in jenkins
17:08 < matches> This is performance tests not sanity tests
17:08 < matches> Or whatever they're called
17:08 < matches> We don't need to make sure things work...
17:08 < matches> We just need them to not work fastly
18:35 < matches> SDL_WINDOW_HIDDEN is useful
18:36 < matches> Actually I'm surprised it works
18:37 < matches> As much as having ipdf constantly flashing up and stealing my window focus is exciting, I am relieved to be able to stop that
18:37 < matches> Now I just need to stop the monitor from randomly flashing its menu and/or turning off...
18:42 < matches> So I can show some graphs tomorrow, although they may not be graphs of actually useful things
19:44 < matches> I hope you like ipython because we're using ipython
19:50 < matches> git.ucc seems sick...
--- Day changed Thu Sep 18 2014
11:40 < matches> Good news!
11:40 < matches> You can run ipdf on motsugo
11:40 < sulix> I heard.
11:40 < sulix> My good news is that I just added something to the quadtree.
11:40 < sulix> (Sort-of)
11:41 < matches> The GPU rendering doesn't work on motsugo though
11:41 < sulix> I fail to be surprised.
11:42 < matches> Does the quadtree work with the centred SVGs?
11:44 < sulix> I haven't been brave enough to do the horrible merge that needs to happen.
11:45 < sulix> I'm currently trying to work out how I'm going to pass which node that you want to add something to through all of the Add* code.
11:52 < matches> Ah
11:57 < matches> I'm about to hack around C++ 'const' correctness
11:57 < matches> What could possibly go left
11:57 < matches> I mean wright
11:57 < matches> I mean lng
11:57 < matches> asdf
11:58 < matches> segmentation fault
12:00 < matches> Well it compiled at least
12:00  * matches notes that if he ever sees a function declared 'const' again he should not assume that it is actually const...
12:01 < matches> Now to overload the new and delete operators...
12:04  * sulix hides quietly in a corner.
12:05 < matches> ParanoidNumber needs to call new and delete an excessive amount
12:05 < matches> Because you might need to create a new one but you might not, but you can't tell in advance :S
12:06 < sulix> So: pool or arena?
12:06 < sulix> (I'd probably recommend an arena)
12:06 < matches> I've not heard of an arena, which probably means its better
12:07 < matches> It sounds traumatic though
12:07 < matches> Remember these numbers are paranoid as it is
12:08 < sulix> Basically allocate a large block of memory, every time you allocate return the next <n> bytes of it.
12:08 < sulix> Delete is a no-op, everything is freed when you delete the entire arena.
12:10 < matches> Hm I thought that was a pool
12:11 < sulix> A pool is basically an array of objects of the same type that get reused.
12:12 < sulix> Though nomenclature is pretty dodgy generally wrt memory management.
12:12 < matches> SO thinks they are the same
12:12 < matches> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13381123/whats-the-difference-between-a-memory-arena-and-a-memory-allocator
12:12 < matches> Actually no that's not quite the question I was looking for
12:13 < matches> I said pool and it says "allocator"
12:13 < matches> (But some guy with upvotes says arenas are also called pools)
12:13 < matches> (Democracy has decided!)
12:13 < matches> Ok I see the difference
12:13 < matches> Yeah, I was going to use a pool, but I guess arena would be better
12:14 < sulix> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_pool
12:15 < sulix> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Region-based_memory_management
12:28 < matches> So, PN gives "inf" for an operation that doubles do fine
12:29 < matches> But on the plus side, Wolfram Alpha gives "Wolfram alpha does not understand your query -344+(6+8/10 +...)"
12:29 < matches> "Showing results instead for "6+8/10 +3/100"
12:30 < matches> (The maths is syntactically correct, or at least, I'm fairly sure it is. I'm not actually going to count all those brackets...)
12:31 < matches> I find it amusing that there is a number representation that is just "That number is too complicated, here is a similar looking one"
12:32 < matches> Actually, correction
12:32 < matches> *addition rather
12:32 < matches> "Insert more money to calculate the number"
12:32 < sulix> "Upgrade to wolfram alpha pro to use numbers with more factors"
12:32 < matches> Yes
12:32 < matches> That is pretty much what it says
12:34 < matches> Hmm, I think PN should take a couple of minutes per frame at the moment
12:34 < matches> I should probably actually test it
12:39 < matches> That's a whole lot of compiler errors
12:39 < matches> Argh
12:39 < matches> I hate the "overloaded call to ClassConstructor(int) is ambiguous" errors
12:40 < sulix> I think the idea of "compiler errors" is clearly too negative.
12:41 < sulix> We should have "constructive compiler feedback" instead.
12:41 < sulix> "warnings" should become "suggestions"
12:41 < matches> I don't understand that type of eror
12:41 < matches> The compiler is supposed to silently typecast the primitive types right?
12:41 < sulix> Yes*
12:41 < matches> So if you have a constructor for a double it will cast "0" to "0.0" and use that
12:41 < sulix> Yes*
12:42 < matches> If you implement constructors for *both* it will get confused
12:42 < sulix> (If there isn't another constructor that is equal or better)
12:42 < matches> If you implement constructors for only *one* it *still* gets confused
12:42 < matches> Aaskdfasdf
12:43 < matches> It's totally confused
12:43 < matches> I think
12:43 < matches> It sees the int
12:44 < matches> Then goes "I can construct a ParanoidNumber off that"
12:44 < matches> Then goes "But I can construct a ParanoidNumber off the const ParanoidNumber &"
12:44 < matches> That doesn't make sense
12:44 < matches> Why is the copy constructor ambiguous
12:45 < sulix> That's exactly what I hate about c++.
12:45 < sulix> (Also boost)
12:51 < matches> It gets Real(0) mixed up with Real(const char * str)
12:51 < matches> Really
12:51 < matches> Why
12:51 < matches> FFS
12:52 < matches> std::string it is then
12:52 < matches> Don't know why it had to complain about every single other constructor being ambiguous as well
13:01 < matches> I've just realised
13:01 < matches> ParanoidNumber is going to have to be thread safe
13:01 < matches> As long as we want the control panel to work anyway
13:01 < matches> Blergh
13:05 < matches> Oh boy
13:05 < matches> You know you are in trouble when "this == NULL"
13:06 < matches> I feel like I am messing with forces beyond my ken
13:06 < matches> I haven't even overloaded new yet
13:06 < sulix> this == NULL is actually perfectly possible.
13:07 < matches> Yeah but where is it coming from
13:07 < sulix> It's the correct result if you call a member function of a null pointer.
13:07 < matches> Yeah I know
13:07 < matches> But
13:07 < matches> But
13:07 < sulix> (Is it time for captain valgrind?)
13:07 < matches> That spits out so many errors due to other libraries :(
13:07 < matches> I'm learning to use gdb more effectively
13:07 < matches> I finally learned how to set breakpoints
13:08 < matches> And print variables
13:08 < matches> You can even get it to call functions
13:08 < matches> That's cool
13:08 < sulix> Yeah, gdb is pretty amazing.
13:08 < matches> So I have this four dimensional tree of death
13:08 < sulix> What you should do is setup the libstdc++ pretty printers.
13:08 < matches> The child links are implemented as a std::vector of pointers
13:08 < sulix> It makes gdb print stl containers nicely.
13:09 < matches> Somehow there are null pointers in the vector
13:09 < matches> That should really not happen
13:09 < matches> I could check that the pointers are not null but I suspect that won't solve the underlying issue
13:09 < matches> Of null pointers ending up in places
13:10 < matches> Couldn't I do something like: 'p (Pointer*)vector.data()'
13:10 < matches> I should try that
13:11 < sulix> PANIC PANIC PANIC
13:12 < sulix> Apparently my draft dissertation is due tomorrow.
13:12 < matches> Wahtasdfasdf
13:12 < matches> What
13:12 < matches> When did this happen
13:13 < sulix> http://undergraduate.csse.uwa.edu.au/year4/Current/dates.html
13:14 < matches> :S
13:14 < matches> I thought Rowan said you had two weeks...
13:14 < matches> Or was that two weeks ago..
13:14 < matches> Also I know I don't technically have to submit a draft dissertation but I share some level of panic
13:15 < sulix> Yeah, I thought I had more time, too.
13:15 < matches> I'm sure you can organise it with Rowan
13:16 < matches> My last thesis was somewhat of a blur
13:16 < matches> I'm not sure there was a draft
13:17 < matches> You'll get through it
13:20 < sulix> (The question is not so much if I'll get through it, but if I'll get through it in the next hour and forty minutes... :P)
13:22 < matches> I give you permission to copy/paste my lit review
13:22 < matches> Although to be honest it could do with less rambling about svg and postscript
13:26 < sulix> btw, I've found a way to make the quadtree run as slowly as the rationals.
13:28 < matches> How?
13:28 < sulix> Totally broken linked lists?
13:28 < sulix> (I think)
13:29 < sulix> QuadTree nodes can now "overlay" other quadtree nodes, which is the way I'm hacking mutability in.
13:29 < sulix> For some reason, if you zoom in and then zoom back out again, it ends up creating a new overlay for each individual curve.
13:30 < sulix> Each overlay runs the entire View::Render function again, independently.
13:30 < matches> Damn
13:30 < matches> I don't understand how these vectors have NULL in them
13:30 < matches> I have "assert(b != NULL)" before the only two places where things get added to them
13:31 < sulix> Are asserts enabled? :P
13:32 < matches> I thought that was Java
13:32 < matches> Also python
13:34 < sulix> I'm not actually sure about the standard asserts, but most of them do get disabled if you're not in a debug build.
13:34 < matches> Ooh
13:34 < matches> oh oh oh
13:34 < matches> I always do this
13:34 < matches> std::vector::vector does not construct with a size
13:35 < matches> It constructs with elements
13:35 < matches> So vector n(0) is baad
13:35 < sulix> I always use vector(size, initialvalue)
13:35 < matches> Nope that isn't it...
13:35 < sulix> Or just use the default constructor if I want "empty".
13:36 < matches> I'm already wrapping the billions of 'new's in a check that it isn't null
13:36 < matches> What is going on
14:40 < Pommers> matches: Fix your NTP already
16:28 < matches> sulix: "That's actually not too bad, I may be rationalising it, but..."
16:28 < matches> (We wouldn't want the spectators to miss any of the puns)
16:28 < sulix> (For context: talking about the performance and correctness of rational numbers)
23:35 < matches> Your predictions of Simplify leading to infinite loops were remarkably accurate
23:36 < matches> That just means the number can be infinitely Simplified!
23:49 < sulix> Simplify() { return 0; /* it can't get much more simple */ }
23:49 < matches> Haha
23:50 < matches> Well I just spent 15 minutes learning why I had the stupid ".test" extension on all the testers in the first place
23:50 < matches> (Which I recently removed because it was stupid)
23:50 < matches> Turns out it was there so that make clean could remove all the testers without needing to keep a list of them all
23:51 < matches> And that no matter how many times I ran make clean, I was still running the same buggy executable from 7 hours ago...
23:51 < matches> "Not so stupid after all!" says past matches
23:51 < matches> "Shut up" says present matches
23:52 < matches> "When are we going to sleep" says future matches at approximately 3am
23:53 < matches> Things get wierd when you remove NTP
23:53 < matches> I have a watch on my wrist but it's not the same
23:55 < matches> "You know what the .test extension is still dumb, I'll just remember to rm them when they need rebuilding" says a slightly older present matches
--- Day changed Fri Sep 19 2014
00:00 < matches> Ah, good old copy paste and naming variables 'n' and 'm'
00:01 < matches> Mever fails to segfault
01:05 < matches> PN Yields: 1.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
01:05 < matches> PN is: 1
01:06 < matches> Doubles Yield: inf
01:06 < matches> TAKE THAT KAHAN
01:06 < matches> Hmm
01:06 < matches> I could multithread the paranoid number...
01:07 < matches> At least, the Convert to double part of it
01:11 < matches> Ah, it fails on the very next test though
01:11  * matches regrest uncommenting the "return 0;"
01:11 < matches> grects
01:11 < matches> regrects
01:11 < matches> dammit
01:11 < matches> it is too aerly for this
01:21 < matches> So ipython stores pngs as giant base64 encoded strings
01:21 < matches> In JSON format
01:21  * matches shudders at the commit diff
01:23 < matches> Good luck sulix
09:47 < sulix> "Bang, zoom, straight to the rounding error"?
12:17  * sulix falls over in a heap of insanity and shame.
17:20 -!- mode/#ipdf [+o matches] by OperServ
17:20 -!- matches changed the topic of #ipdf to: IPDF: A Document Precision Playground
17:20 <@matches> This is good reading
17:21 <@matches> I just read "At its core, IPDF breaks documents" and choked on my drink
17:22  * sulix thinks we might have a new slogan.
17:23 <@matches> I think it's important that you don't specify what the initials actually stand for
17:23 <@matches> People will think it's a fancy PDF viewer
17:23 <@matches> Except it's really a broken SVG viewer
17:25 < sulix> I don't intend to give any more explanation than IPDF™.
17:25 < sulix> Or possible IPDFⓇ
17:25 <@matches> I am jealous of your compose key
17:26 < sulix> Mwäháhà!
17:33 <@matches> Ah yeah, precision vs zoom doesn't work to well for doubles for some reason
18:24 <@matches> Look at ParanoidNumber go
18:24 <@matches> Look at it go!
18:24 <@matches> Well you can't because you're not here
18:24 <@matches> I should do a live stream
18:24 <@matches> It is so exciting
18:24 <@matches> It's been going 5 minutes but it hasn't failed any tests since I commented out the comparison against doubles
18:25 <@matches> Yes
18:25 <@matches> Eat all the memory
18:25 <@matches> Soon you will grow strong
18:27 <@matches> Actually I probably *want* it to start failing tests
18:28 <@matches> Because if it gives the same result as a double it's not any better than a double...
18:28 <@matches> At the very least it is mathematically interesting
18:29 <@matches> I'm not sure Mathematically interesting and "Chemical Engineering Conference" go together
18:29 <@matches> Also I don't have enough Maths training to say anything about it other than it is interesting
18:29 <@matches> It is a ring of complete hidden sets of fields
18:29 <@matches> Yeah
18:29  * matches uses maths
18:30 < sulix> Technically, I don't think that things which use floats can ever be rings or fields due to the whole rounding error thing.
18:34 <@matches> Well
18:34 <@matches> It's a tree
18:34 <@matches> I can hold on to that
18:34 <@matches> I understand trees
18:35 <@matches> They have trunks and bark and leaves
18:35 <@matches> Hmm, I should add a Bark sub class
18:35 <@matches> I wonder if I can bring myself to implement the same test algorithm in Mathematica and compare the results
18:36 <@matches> I think using Mathematica in research requires you to sell your soul though
18:41 <@matches> Also Frames thinks that enabling optimisation will magically make PN less terrible
18:41 <@matches> I'm somewhat skeptical
18:41 <@matches> But here goes
18:42 <@matches> (I am anticipating it will make it much faster, in that it will segfault after 2 operations)
18:45 <@matches> Well it didn't segfault, but apparently "219123 != 219123"
18:48 <@matches> Actually
18:48 <@matches> It seems a lot faster
18:48 <@matches> Hooray Frames
18:48 <@matches> Thesis done
18:49 < sulix> Does it speed up the GMP and/or Arbint rationals much?
18:49 <@matches> Haven't tried yet
18:49 <@matches> I need to adapt Paranoidtester into a general tester
18:49 <@matches> Or was that realops
18:49 <@matches> I forget
18:49 <@matches> I have a lot of testers that I suspect do basically the same thing
18:57 <@matches> Compiling with -Ofast does lead to
18:57 <@matches> WARNING: main (main.cpp:29) - __STDC_IEC_559__ not defined. IEEE 754 floating point not fully supported.
18:57 <@matches> (I am the best programmer I put in all the warning messages!)
18:58 <@matches> And ipdf segfaults
18:58 <@matches> But not the tester
18:58 <@matches> In stbtt_FindGlyphIndex
18:59 <@matches> Are we going to need to submit another pull request...
19:17 <@matches> Ah
19:17 <@matches> Adding all those "SanityCheck" calls may have slowed things down a tad
19:17 <@matches> IPDF::ParanoidNumber::SanityCheck (this=0xe80a640, visited=std::set with 9775 elements = {...})
19:23 <@matches> Sanity-Check-this - out
19:24 <@matches> I think I need more sleep
19:53 < Pommers> goto bed matches 
--- Day changed Sat Sep 20 2014
21:22 <@matches> Overloading operator new and delete is kind of terrifying...
21:25 <@matches> Things run blindingly fast
21:25 <@matches> Until they segfault
21:26 <@matches> I suspect std::vector does not take kindly to being destructed multiple times
21:33 <@matches> Hmm
21:33 <@matches> I need to make std::vector pointers instead?
21:33 <@matches> That's getting a little convoluted...
21:35 <@matches> Or what I really need is a delete operator that doesn't actually call the destructor automagically
21:35 <@matches> (Even when you overload delete it still calls the destructor?)
21:36 <@matches> I'm noticing a bit of a trend here
21:36 <@matches> You can overload C++ operators but if you do it totally breaks everything
21:36 <@matches> eg: You could implement a double() operator for casting to double but you're better off just writing Double() and using it everywhere because otherwise the compiler goes insane trying to use your operator in places
21:37 <@matches> You can implement your own delete operator but that won't stop the compiler from doing everything it does with the standard delete...
21:38 <@matches> The only operators you can overload (mostly) are the arithmetic ones
21:39 <@matches> Also the compiler seems to occasionally just use the standard delete anyway which just makes everything TOTALLY INSANE
21:39 <@matches> WHY
21:39  * matches grumbles and prepares to write "Delete" and "New"
--- Day changed Sun Sep 21 2014
16:43 <@matches> I think I'm just an idiot
16:47 <@matches> Arena doesn't help that much
16:47 <@matches> Which is odd
16:48 <@matches> If anything it is slower :(
16:49 <@matches> It's hard to profile something that doesn't work in valgrind
17:00 <@matches> On the other hand, removing all the "SanityCheck" calls is surprisingly effective...
17:48 <@matches> Damn
17:48 <@matches> I guess new and delete isn't as expensive as just doing a craptonne of branches
22:33 <@matches> So, probably a better idea is to stop the CPU renderer from recalculating the object bounds every single frame
22:33 <@matches> And update the object bounds when the view is changed instead
22:34 <@matches> Since we don't really care what the original bounds are
22:37 <@matches> This is basically what the quad tree does...
22:37 <@matches> Well it changes coordinate systems as well
22:37 <@matches> But I can zoom in a lot further now than I could before...
22:38 <@matches> Until eventually there is a sigfpe
23:19 <@matches> Ok
23:19 <@matches> This is slightly worrying
23:19 <@matches> I can zoom to {0.5,0.5,1e-41,1e-41} and insert things without any problem
23:21 <@matches> The CPU renderer does tend to sigfpe
23:27 <@matches> Man I feel really foolish now
23:27  * matches makes plans to delete the IRC logs again
23:32 <@matches> So
23:33 <@matches> The good news is that GMP rationals are pretty effective when you do cumulative transforms on the object bounds as opposed to keeping the bounds static and transforming them to view coordinates
23:34 <@matches> The bad news is that so are regular floats
23:34 <@matches> I'm pretty sure it just means we need a better tester
23:38 <@matches> Or
23:38 <@matches> We lie