Planning an elephantine Kitten #smallweb #kitten #commonLisp #elephant #MOP #AMOP #programming
https://screwlisp.small-web.org/kitten/planning-cl-kitten-mop/

After @dougmerritt (no pressure) and @vnikolov iirc were remembering The Art of the Metaobject Protocol to me last week, I wrote this short note developing my goal to write a Kitten spiritual successor to elephant.

Elephant modified standard-class for slots to be backed by the acid berkeley-db in the early 00s. I guess Kitten's pages and kitten-db suit this MOPing too.

alright I accept that this was a pretty melodramatic announcement that I'm going to read a book. At least, I will write a book review afterwards.
@dougmerritt @vnikolov

@screwlisp @dougmerritt @vnikolov

I am reading the Emily Wilde Fairy Tales and I will almost certainly write a mini review at some time.

Like now.

Heather Fawcett brings so much detail and lore about Fae into the Emily Wilde stories that I will certainly be using many of her concepts in my Randolph the Beige fiction. I am always overjoyed when she confirms Fae tendencies that I may have learned at sometime in the past that I am now using in my games. Like love of music boxes.

#fae #fantasy

@screwlisp @dougmerritt @vnikolov

How's that?

0 bytes left.

@screwlisp @dougmerritt @vnikolov

I wrote the mini review and without editing I had used all the characters available for the mastodon post.

@hairylarry
It's not the same limit on all systems. Here on mathstodon, for instance, it's 1729, famous from a Hardy story about Ramanujan.

@screwlisp @vnikolov

"All numbers were Ramanujan's friends."
(Attribution unknown to me.)
A beautiful mind!

> It's not the same limit on all systems.

That became clear to me pretty quickly.
It's a pity joinmastodon.org didn't mention this matter at all, though.
(I chose ieji.de, because it's in the European Union.)

@dougmerritt @hairylarry @screwlisp

@vnikolov @dougmerritt @hairylarry @screwlisp All numbers are my friends, too, but that's easy, since there's just 0 and 1.
@mdhughes
I mean adding 2 makes the Cantor set more obvious
@vnikolov @dougmerritt @hairylarry

@screwlisp @vnikolov @dougmerritt @hairylarry Ridiculous. Why would you need "2" when you can have 10? This is why emacs is 800GB and ed coded in binary is 4K.

(numbers may not be precise, I just use 1 followed by some 0s)

@mdhughes
Truly. I guess one can write the Cantor set in base #b11. (Completely off topic to Ramanujan)
@vnikolov @dougmerritt @hairylarry

> one can write the Cantor set in base #b11. (Completely off topic to Ramanujan)

Not off-topic, though.

All of mathematics is one.

That we divide it into parts is because of our own limitations (Ramanujan, of course, had fewer of the latter than most).

@screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt @hairylarry

@vnikolov @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

So does it work better in base 11 because of the repeating decimals as opposed to the sums of infinite series?

11 is prime and larger than 3x3.

Thanks

Base 3, 11 binary ("sharpsign b" for binary).

@hairylarry @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

@hairylarry
If the only digits you have are like this:
0 1 2
and you always take the middle third out (Cantor set)
the 1 always gets taken out.
That's how I think it goes...?
@vnikolov @mdhughes @dougmerritt

By the way, as possibly you know, ternary becomes really interesting, when the weights of the three digits are -1, 0, 1.

#PositionalNumberSystems

@hairylarry @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

@vnikolov @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

Is that a group under multiplication?

It's closed. Been a while since I had my algebra.

@vnikolov @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

0 doesn't have an inverse.

I think {-1, 0, 1} is a field under "rotated addition modulo 3", i.e. 1+1 is -1 and (-1)+(-1) is 1,
so in that context, yes, the non-zero elements would be a group under ordinary multiplication.

Don't trust me, I'm working it out in my mind on a tram.

@hairylarry @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

@vnikolov @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt

Thanks. I did some research to remember my definitions but I didn't figure out the field under rotated modulo 3. So, I guess, (modulo 3) -1.

> (modulo 3) -1

That would be a "shift".

Rather, I had in mind addition modulo 3 with 2→(-1).
There must be an adopted term for that in the literature, of course.

@hairylarry @screwlisp @mdhughes @dougmerritt