Home liberachat/#xmonad: Logs Calendar

Logs on 2022-04-12 (liberachat/#xmonad)

00:07:40 × werneta quits (~werneta@137.79.198.1) (Remote host closed the connection)
00:33:19 → twiclo joins (~twiclo@mail.twil.cx)
00:42:05 × jao quits (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net) (Remote host closed the connection)
00:52:14 → jao joins (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net)
01:05:26 × geekosaur quits (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur) (Remote host closed the connection)
01:19:23 → geekosaur joins (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur)
02:03:04 × banc quits (banc@gateway/vpn/airvpn/banc) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
02:08:47 × noex quits (~null@user/noex) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
02:10:06 → noex joins (~null@user/noex)
02:25:49 → banc joins (banc@gateway/vpn/airvpn/banc)
02:30:55 × noex quits (~null@user/noex) (Remote host closed the connection)
02:31:28 → noex joins (~null@user/noex)
04:08:02 × jao quits (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net) (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
04:13:35 → werneta joins (~werneta@70-142-214-115.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net)
04:43:09 × PotatoGim quits (sid99505@id-99505.lymington.irccloud.com) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
04:44:44 → PotatoGim joins (sid99505@id-99505.lymington.irccloud.com)
04:50:39 × Czernobog quits (~Czernobog@user/czernobog) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
04:51:28 → Czernobog joins (~Czernobog@user/czernobog)
04:54:29 → mohab joins (~mohab@156.223.48.148)
04:54:38 × mohab quits (~mohab@156.223.48.148) (Client Quit)
05:25:12 × noex quits (~null@user/noex) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
05:25:46 → noex joins (~null@user/noex)
05:32:10 → benin joins (~benin@183.82.204.110)
05:47:21 → benin7 joins (benin@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/benin)
05:48:27 × benin quits (~benin@183.82.204.110) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
05:50:03 → benin joins (benin@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/benin)
05:51:47 × benin7 quits (benin@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/benin) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
05:58:22 → benin2 joins (~benin@183.82.204.110)
06:00:07 × benin quits (benin@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/benin) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
06:00:07 benin2 is now known as benin
06:00:21 → dschrempf joins (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu)
06:20:27 × dschrempf quits (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
06:42:40 <amenonsen> i'm trying out Actions.DynamicProjects, and i'm getting an error defining my keybinding to invoke switchProject:
06:42:55 <amenonsen> https://irc.toroid.org/file/2/MWmR0C0Z40Tj36HX
06:43:49 <amenonsen> I think i'm following the instructions at https://xmonad.github.io/xmonad-docs/xmonad-contrib/XMonad-Actions-DynamicProjects.html correctly, not that there's much to them. and i can't seem to find any examples of the use of DynamicProjects other than this page anyway.
06:46:14 <amenonsen> i wonder if this code was broken somehow by subsequent changes to mkXPromptWithModes (though i don't see exactly how that would be the case)
06:51:16 <Solid> the docs are just wrong
06:51:32 <Solid> it should at least be `switchProjectPrompt def`
06:51:56 <Solid> (or your prompt config instead of `def`, if you have one)
06:53:05 <amenonsen> i _just_ discovered that while reading the docs for xmonadPrompt from Prompt.XMonad
06:53:12 <amenonsen> and it works.
06:53:17 <amenonsen> thanks.
06:53:36 <Solid> I'll push a fix, thank for reporting this :)
06:53:49 <amenonsen> oh, cool, thanks. i was going to open a PR.
06:54:22 <Solid> oh, even better!
06:54:31 <Solid> I will hold off then and let you do that
06:57:41 → dschrempf joins (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu)
06:59:01 → cfricke joins (~cfricke@user/cfricke)
07:01:06 <amenonsen> done
07:15:48 × benin quits (~benin@183.82.204.110) (Remote host closed the connection)
07:32:40 × dschrempf quits (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
07:56:36 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
08:05:10 → dschrempf joins (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu)
08:09:23 × mc47 quits (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47) (Remote host closed the connection)
08:26:37 × dschrempf quits (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu) (Quit: WeeChat 3.4.1)
08:43:05 <amenonsen> i'm going to read a haskell tutorial to understand a bit more basic syntax.
10:24:16 <tdammers> XMonad, the #1 gateway drug to Haskell, takes another victim
10:31:30 × Czernobog quits (~Czernobog@user/czernobog) (Quit: ZNC 1.8.2 - https://znc.in)
10:32:59 × defjam quits (~eb0t@90.203.122.28) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
10:33:13 → Czernobog joins (~Czernobog@user/czernobog)
10:34:46 → defjam joins (~eb0t@90.194.37.234)
10:39:08 <Solid> always makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside
10:45:46 <tdammers> it's how I got sucked in, and now look at me, a veritable Haskell Consultant
10:47:11 <thonoht[m]> I went the other way :P XMonad being written in Haskell got me to run Linux
10:49:42 → Nahra joins (~user@static.161.95.99.88.clients.your-server.de)
10:50:34 Solid also went the other way around
10:51:24 <Solid> but I also got interetsed in Haskell because I really enjoyed a course on category theory that I took and someone absolutely blew my mind when they said "btw, you can actually apply this in computer science" to me
10:51:26 × geekosaur quits (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur) (Remote host closed the connection)
10:51:36 <Solid> so there's a history of going backwards there :P
10:52:51 <thonoht[m]> Haha that's slightly different for me . The FP course I followed in uni heavily pushed category theory before any programming which was really hard at the time, but then when I got to do programming in Haskell I really enjoyed it.
10:53:10 <thonoht[m]> Although I still only do recreational programming in Haskell
10:53:36 → geekosaur joins (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur)
10:53:47 <Solid> indeed, I'm not a professional programmer either
10:54:06 <Solid> I guess having a background in maths makes my tajectory not so unusual
10:54:11 <Solid> s/ta/tra/
10:54:18 <thonoht[m]> I am a professional programmer. And nowadays even functional, with Elm and F#, just not Haskell :P
10:54:33 <Solid> oh I see
10:55:23 <thonoht[m]> But writing a production scale webserver in F# with all of the OO libraries behind it is a lot less daunting than doing it all in Haskell I have to say, even if I technically understand most of the concepts used there (I think)
11:08:25 liskin thought that learning enough Haskell, politics and people skills to maintain xmonad would make getting a Haskell job easier but turns out that's not really the case :-/
11:08:54 <liskin> On a bad day I might even be tempted to say that Haskell jobs suck :-)
11:09:11 <thonoht[m]> What's the problem then, I would assume it's not your skills
11:09:39 <thonoht[m]> * your skills?
11:11:14 <tdammers> Haskell on "not Linux" sounds painful
11:12:08 <thonoht[m]> As long as you're doing small toy projects it's perfectly doable on Windows
11:12:21 <tdammers> IME Haskell jobs don't suck any more or less than your average programming job; it's just that there is not a lot of them
11:12:48 <thonoht[m]> I've seen some remote offers come by the Haskell channel, but it appears to all be blockchain related
11:13:22 <tdammers> well yeah, crypto is currently probably the only industry with a fast-moving job market for haskell devs
11:13:54 <tdammers> haskell jobs in other fields exist, but they are smaller, slower moving, and often flying under the radar
11:14:34 <davve> its pretty popular with mathematicians
11:14:42 <thonoht[m]> I also wouldn't really know how to look for them, especially since I would like to stay local
11:15:26 <tdammers> if you're not into remote, then that's going to be a challenge
11:17:12 <abastro[m]> Uhm, what is popular with mathematics?
11:17:39 <thonoht[m]> Python, as far as I see :P
11:18:19 <abastro[m]> Yep
11:18:30 <abastro[m]> Tbh I don't know how it came to be like that even
11:19:15 <thonoht[m]> I do think with non-programmer mathematicians, the dynamic typing is quite popular. Also it's very accessible, being interpreted and all
11:19:34 <tdammers> Simple - Python has usable bindings for number-crunching libraries, and a reasonably intelligent person can learn it in 1-2 weeks.
11:19:46 <liskin> thonoht[m]: I don't know exactly what the problem is. Could be me, could be the jobs suck, could be random circumstances.
11:19:53 <abastro[m]> Hm yeah, accessible, right.
11:20:04 <abastro[m]> Well though, to be fair, most mathematicians won't ever touch programming in their entire life
11:20:12 <abastro[m]> Other than latex, that is.
11:20:42 <abastro[m]> (Most mathematicians doesn't need number crunching)
11:20:44 <liskin> And R and Matlab and... :-)
11:20:55 <Solid> most mathematicians are nerds and thus have at least minimal exposure to nerd stuff :P
11:21:02 <abastro[m]> M a t l a b sigh
11:21:14 <abastro[m]> Are they really nerds tho hmm
11:21:19 <tdammers> Also, for weird historical reasons, academia is largely still stuck in an imperative model of computation. I have worked with a mathematician once; she would develop a nice declarative mathematical theory, prove it all, and then turn it into an imperative algorithm, which I would then implement in Haskell. Of course that last step involved untangling the imperative loops and expressing it all in
11:21:21 <tdammers> terms of maps and folds and such...
11:21:25 <thonoht[m]> I would love to try an explain Haskell and its elegance to one of my mathematician friends one day, and see if I can convince them. But I'm afraid they won't really care
11:21:30 <Solid> I'm working in a very pure field and at least all PhD students know one or more programming languages
11:21:49 <abastro[m]> Mathematicians ofc won't care
11:21:50 <tdammers> but at least writing the code in Haskell made it easier for her to verify that it did in fact capture what the theory said
11:22:04 <abastro[m]> Oh, very pure field?
11:22:05 <abastro[m]> Hmmm
11:22:06 <Solid> many of the profs as well, though it's more spotty there (it may be a function of age :)
11:22:20 <abastro[m]> Well I mean, at least professors don't know programming :P
11:22:37 <amenonsen> do people in very pure fields find it hard to make any impact on the outside world? ;-)
11:22:47 <abastro[m]> Academia of CS is indeed stuck in imperative model I think
11:23:03 <Solid> amenonsen: we don't care so no, we don't find it very hard :D
11:23:11 <abastro[m]> Like, it has been dominant for so long years
11:23:20 <abastro[m]> Which pure field, btw?
11:24:12 <Solid> I do (applied) category theory (where the applied should be read as "lift ordinary maths into the categegorical language and then do cool stuff")
11:24:24 <thonoht[m]> Hey, I and some colleagues have introduced Elm and F# at our company. That was the easy step. But I imagine I could at least sneak Purescript in there at some point if I stay long enough. So to me it seems FP does seem to be getting some traction
11:24:54 <abastro[m]> Oh, applied category theory
11:25:10 <abastro[m]> Interesting, I guess the field would be closer to programming
11:25:20 <amenonsen> i'm familiar with functional programming from before, just not so much with haskell
11:25:32 <Solid> most of the colleagues do similar things or are into representation theory/Hopf algebras and their generalisations
11:25:48 <abastro[m]> I heard category theorist takes dedication to work in.
11:26:13 <Solid> just like any other field if you go deep enough, really
11:26:22 <abastro[m]> Like, e.g. there are not so many profs working on it
11:26:38 <abastro[m]> Well, a prof did say that it is going to be harder than other subfields
11:26:44 <abastro[m]> Because there are less ppl doing it
11:27:06 <Solid> less people also means more things to explore :)
11:27:24 <abastro[m]> Well yep, but you need to learn the subject first
11:27:28 <Solid> but really, any topic you could choose to do a PhD in will only have a handful of people who care about _exactly_ what you do
11:27:33 <abastro[m]> And that learning is harder
11:27:47 <abastro[m]> Well yeah, only handful would care indeed
11:27:49 <Solid> there are many good books introductory on the subject
11:27:56 <Solid> so it's really not a problem
11:28:24 <abastro[m]> I feel like Category theory introduction would not be enough
11:28:27 <abastro[m]> Or it isn't?
11:28:37 <Solid> you learn the rest by osmosis :>
11:28:49 <Solid> obviously your advisor will guide you to other resources
11:29:25 <abastro[m]> Wait, even though advisor is not majoring in CT?
11:29:48 <abastro[m]> So.. different subfiled but can still guide you?
11:30:28 <Solid> nono, they are also doing work in the field
11:30:32 <Solid> among other things
11:31:12 <abastro[m]> Yea, I mean searching for such ppl won't be easy
11:31:21 <Solid> most profs won't take you if you don't at least do something they are tangentially interested in (which is a good thing; you don't want a desinterested advisor)
11:31:37 <abastro[m]> Because doing CT is like doing lie group theory, I heard
11:31:50 <Solid> Well I didn't have very many problems (survivorship bias etc., I know) :]
11:32:12 <abastro[m]> Woah
11:32:30 <abastro[m]> It is true that many ppl don't do much CT, right?
11:32:38 <abastro[m]> While it does serve some basis
11:32:52 <Solid> not many people do mathematics in general
11:32:52 <geekosaur> CT is so pervasive and so fundamental that lots of folks "dabble in it"
11:33:11 <Solid> and yeah, you basically can't learn about higher algebra without needing at least basic concepts
11:33:13 <abastro[m]> I mean among mathematics folks
11:33:31 <abastro[m]> geekosaur: My impression is that many folks don't dabble in it
11:33:33 <geekosaur> I am not a mathematician, but have some interest in physics — and it's surprising how much advanced physics involves CT
11:33:53 <abastro[m]> Somehow FP-ers get in to some CT it seems
11:33:57 <geekosaur> of course, these are not everyday bategories, but.
11:34:23 <abastro[m]> But e.g. many mathematicians don't care much about CT - at least that is my impression
11:34:38 <abastro[m]> Except for absolute basics, that is
11:34:41 <geekosaur> most mathematicians are focused on a very specific area
11:34:56 <geekosaur> unless that area happens to be CT itself, they won't be interested
11:35:06 <geekosaur> but they'll still be using some CT concepts
11:35:14 <abastro[m]> Indeed
11:35:28 <abastro[m]> Well, only some of the CT concepts
11:36:01 <abastro[m]> CT is a bit regarded as fundamental theory, which is not revisited and researched by much
11:36:24 <abastro[m]> (Just saying what I heard, btw. I myself do not know enough)
11:37:16 <abastro[m]> In contrast, it should be comparatively easier to get into pde analysis fields
11:37:18 <geekosaur> like I said, most mathematicians are focused on very specific areas. ct itself is one of those areas… but CT itself is pretty well mapped out at this point. it's not CT that is interesting but the categories :)
11:37:56 <Solid> that's your opinion :P
11:38:28 <abastro[m]> Which one?
11:39:09 <abastro[m]> (Are Categories interesting hmm)
11:42:11 <abastro[m]> CT does not seem to be as pervasive for learning advanced algebra. Is it pervasive on research level?
11:49:41 <abastro[m]> (I guess nvm)
11:50:02 <Ether[m]> A few days ago i asked how to remove default bindings someone told me remove with Xmonad.Util.EzConfig but it doesn't remove all the default bindings..
11:52:47 <tdammers> I like to think of CT as the theory of theories. It can be helpful, but in most cases, you don't need to understand theory theory to understand a specific theory
11:53:50 <abastro[m]> tdammers: Was my impression as well!
11:53:51 <Solid> abastro[m]: I mean, try learning about modern algebraic topology without category theory; or homological algera, or representation theory, or operad theory, or Hopf algebra theory, or even lie theory
11:53:56 <yusz-01[m]> Ether[m]: I use https://xmonad.github.io/xmonad-docs/xmonad-contrib/XMonad-Util-CustomKeys.html (XMonad.Util.CustomKeys) for this as I had to remove the default navigation keys because I wanted to remap them to other ones
11:54:13 <Solid> tdammers: Freyd famously said "Perhaps the purpose of categorical algebra is to show that which is trivial is trivially trivial"; seems pretty apt :)
11:54:39 <Solid> Ether[m]: as I said before, you can just override the `keys` field completely with your own keybindings
11:54:53 <geekosaur> Ether[m], if you really want to remove all default bindings then you set the `keys` field directly
11:55:00 <geekosaur> without the `M.union` stuff
11:55:26 <tdammers> Solid: mathematicians never disappoint when it comes to creative use of language
11:55:30 <geekosaur> it's less convenient because you can't use Emacs-like keys, you have to use keysyms
11:55:56 <yusz-01[m]> geekosaur: oh, didn't know about that, will make my config more minimal rather than having to specify the keys I want to remove directly
11:56:41 <geekosaur> or you could just set it to \_ -> M.empty, then define your own keys with EZConfig
11:57:34 <abastro[m]> Solid: I guess lie theory comes way after lie group theory?
11:58:44 <Solid> abastro[m]: it's just a blanket term for talking about lie groups and lie algebras
11:58:53 <abastro[m]> Hm, Idk how my uni have courses for some of those without covering any CT
11:59:50 <abastro[m]> Well, the uni courses does not cover CT while some courselines goes quite a depth into lie group and lie algebras
12:00:18 <Solid> you can talk about these things non-categorically sure (that's how they were first discovered, after all)
12:01:15 <Solid> but when you get to ~the masters level you need to know at least the categorical language to know what the hell people are talking about
12:02:00 <abastro[m]> Strange that there are masters level course for lie algebra but no course for CT
12:02:25 <abastro[m]> Solid: I guess it is somewhat implicitly covered in the classes then.
12:02:43 <tdammers> "lie algebra" sounds like a sociologist and a mathematician got drunk together and did unspeakable things
12:03:02 <Solid> hahahaha
12:03:18 <Solid> tdammers: the dude was called Lie; quite unfortunate for him I suppose :P
12:03:25 <tdammers> Solid: could be worse I guess
12:03:32 <Solid> indeed
12:03:36 <Solid> talk to Jaques Tits about that
12:03:54 <abastro[m]> Lmao
12:05:10 <tdammers> then again, the language part of a mathematician's brain tends to be so scarred that they will just say things like "Tits Theory" with a straight face and without hesitation
12:05:31 <Solid> yes definitely
12:05:35 <abastro[m]> Ye, wonders
12:06:08 <abastro[m]> Oh, is it possible to get to advanced subjects without any CT basis btw?
12:06:24 <abastro[m]> I am getting this feeling that my uni courses are geared towards this way
12:06:28 <abastro[m]> Of avoiding CT
12:08:10 <Solid> some people really don't like it
12:08:19 <Solid> have some of those in our faculty as well
12:08:26 <Solid> can't understand them :P
12:08:50 <Solid> anyways, need to get back to work
12:09:05 <abastro[m]> I see, cya!
12:11:36 <abastro[m]> I realized I was chatting like this when I have to write graduate admission paper :/
12:12:20 <geekosaur> classic avoidance :)
12:13:15 <abastro[m]> My suicidal life :/ I should fix this
13:00:06 × rieper|net quits (~riepernet@sxbeta1.geo.uni-leipzig.de) (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
13:01:15 → rieper joins (~riepernet@sxbeta1.geo.uni-leipzig.de)
13:01:39 → dschrempf joins (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu)
13:12:41 → jao joins (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net)
13:21:54 × dschrempf quits (~dominik@92-249-159-213.pool.digikabel.hu) (Quit: WeeChat 3.4.1)
13:44:25 <abastro[m]> Is there a way to write gtk declaratively other than gtk-declarative?
13:44:44 <abastro[m]> So that I could use it for taffybar (or for other configurable task bars)
13:45:23 <abastro[m]> Writing imperative widget is quite frustrating.
13:59:36 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
15:03:03 <geekosaur> knew I wrote all those debugging modules for a reason :)
15:04:58 <geekosaur> abastro[m], afaik there's no good way to do declarative anything GUI aside from monomer and various poor wrappers
15:05:23 <abastro[m]> Oh noo.. :(
15:05:40 <abastro[m]> Monomer bar when
15:06:12 <abastro[m]> Tbh I liked gtk declarative until I realized it uses lots of unsafe/ad hoc typelevel stuffs
15:06:52 <geekosaur> monomer bar would be pretty heavy since it's SDL2 based
15:27:02 <abastro[m]> Monomer is based on SDL2,
15:27:08 <abastro[m]> s/,/?/
15:27:13 <abastro[m]> Oh no, why..
15:27:44 <geekosaur> because it abstracts away all the platform dependent stuff really well
15:27:46 <abastro[m]> <del>Perhaps I would really try at writing a library from raw GL</del>
15:28:11 <geekosaur> so monomer can leave the os x vs. windows vs. linux to sdl2 and focus on the haskell part
15:29:00 <abastro[m]> Oh, interesting part is that taskbar for xmonad only need to support linux
15:29:18 <abastro[m]> So one could indeed make a specialized ui lib for linux I guess
15:29:27 <geekosaur> right, but monomer's goal is to be platform independent without being a webapp
15:29:31 <abastro[m]> ...tho I certainly do not have time for thad 😣
15:32:54 <geekosaur> one could indeed do that, but you would fine your first request would be windows support :)
15:33:17 <abastro[m]> Why tho, when monomer exists?
15:34:08 × mc47 quits (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47) (Remote host closed the connection)
15:34:35 <abastro[m]> Windows support: Pls use monomer
15:34:35 <abastro[m]> Done :P
15:50:21 × cfricke quits (~cfricke@user/cfricke) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
16:13:26 × Czernobog quits (~Czernobog@user/czernobog) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
16:14:17 → Czernobog joins (~Czernobog@user/czernobog)
16:20:13 × Czernobog quits (~Czernobog@user/czernobog) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
16:21:41 → Czernobog joins (~Czernobog@user/czernobog)
17:02:33 <geekosaur> I wonder if glfw would be suitable
17:08:15 <geekosaur> hm, https://hackage.haskell.org/package/reflex-gi-gtk
17:08:30 <geekosaur> reflex is a well known frp library
19:03:41 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
20:40:50 <anon_kun600[m]> https://dpaste.com/G9MLKN9S6 I edited like you guys said but it would start so I added back the lines I removed
20:40:53 <anon_kun600[m]> now it still won't start
20:41:03 <anon_kun600[m]> xmonad.hs:316:1: error:... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/c0270b5bc2ddfcc1d3b0928631b17e6f9e31fabb)
20:41:18 <anon_kun600[m]> of course its due to the extra main = do but I still don't know what to do
20:42:06 <geekosaur> remove it. again. like the first time this happened
20:42:21 <geekosaur> I don't know why you pu tit back in again
20:42:29 <geekosaur> *put it
20:42:52 × jao quits (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
20:49:48 → jao joins (~jao@cpc103048-sgyl39-2-0-cust502.18-2.cable.virginm.net)
20:58:49 <geekosaur> and it's just like the first leg: one attempt on target, one goal
20:58:58 <geekosaur> whoops, sorry, channel
21:33:26 × geekosaur quits (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur) (Remote host closed the connection)
21:35:16 → geekosaur joins (~geekosaur@xmonad/geekosaur)
21:46:31 × mc47 quits (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47) (Remote host closed the connection)
21:46:51 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
21:50:31 × mc47 quits (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47) (Remote host closed the connection)
21:50:51 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
21:52:26 × mc47 quits (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47) (Remote host closed the connection)
21:53:22 → mc47 joins (~mc47@xmonad/TheMC47)
21:54:18 <anon_kun600[m]> geekosaur: but it worked before
21:54:19 <anon_kun600[m]> it loaded
21:54:45 <anon_kun600[m]> removing it anyways but confused
21:57:48 <geekosaur> you had it before, I told you to remove it (6 days ago even, I just checked my log)
21:59:50 <geekosaur> https://ircbrowse.tomsmeding.com/browse/lcxmonad?id=57904#trid57904
22:00:33 <geekosaur> line numbers are different now
22:00:51 <geekosaur> but it's still that stray `main =` at the bottom, with the real one at the top
22:01:50 → JohannOg[m] joins (~wubhlueao@2001:470:69fc:105::1:f791)
22:01:56 <geekosaur> 313-317 this time
22:04:06 JohannOg[m] is now known as Johann[m]
22:21:38 × sagax quits (~sagax_nb@user/sagax) (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
23:26:01 × Nahra quits (~user@static.161.95.99.88.clients.your-server.de) (Remote host closed the connection)

All times are in UTC on 2022-04-12.