<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>Crutcher's Blog</title>
    <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com</link>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <description>Crutcher's incessant rambling on subjects of linguistics, boozahol, and awesome.</description>
    <lastBuildDate>22 Sep 2004 21:36 CST</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>Picking Up Steam</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2006/03/27/00.39/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
I've been trying to get going with the whole PhD dissertation thing for
some time now, and I seem to have gotten out of the habbit of writing.
Now, this is a problem, because the things I want to cover in the modeling
languages book require a good deal of tricky writing, and I'm just not up
to it yet. So I've started work on a less ambitious project, one which I
hope will help me ramp up to the modeling languages book - a book on little
languages. I've even started a web site,
<a href="http://littlelanguages.com">littlelanguages.com</a>, to start
working out some of the ideas for <i>this</i> book. It is my hope that I'll
be able to pull together a good primer on these techniques which I use all
the time, and that the experience of writing the little languages book will
give me the momentum (and expertise) to write the modeling languages book.
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UltraViolet is Terrible</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2006/03/07/09.13/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
This is mainly a warning to my friends. T and I saw UltraViolet this
weekend with Alex, and it is bad. Really bad. Don't give them money.
Watch something else.
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Better Ways to Spend $200 Billion</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/12/17/23.35/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[

So I was talking to T about better ways to spend $200 billion dollars to
insure the safety of Americans than fighting in Iraq. Here we define
<e>better</e> as <i>more likely to reduce American casualties</i>. This is
a short list, though I'm sure you'll have your own.

<ul>
<li><b>reduce driving fatalities</b><br/>
In 2003, there were 42,643 driving fatalities in the US (17,013 of
which were alchohol related). Let's say that 200 million of the US's
297 million population are drivers (a high estimate), that's $1000 <e>per
driver</e> to reduce fatalities. Do you think we could make a dint?</li>

<li><b>reduce infant mortality</b><br/>
In 2003, the total infant mortality reported by the CDC was 28,428.
That averages 6.9 deaths per 1000. Think we could make a dint in that?
Think of the children.</li>

<li><b>reduce suicides</b><br/>
According to the CDC, in 2001, suicide took the lives of 30,622 people in
the US.  In 2002, suicides led to 132,353 hospitalizations, and 116,639
trips to the emergency room which did not require an overnight stay. I'm
sure we could do something for the emotional health of the 100,000+ people
a year who hurt themselves (and impact our health costs).
</li>

</ul>

  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Crud</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/12/14/09.51/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[

I've got something. Not sure what it is, but it isn't bad enough to
<e>stay</e> in bed, though it has brough me home early from work, and I did
skip a day last week. It just isn't going away, I've had it for about a
week now. My sinuses <e>itch</e>.<br/><br/>

In other news, work's interesting, but I can't really talk about it. I've
got a largeish project I'm working on, hoping to finish this week, and I'm
doing lots of documentation/process work to try and clean up projects of
this sort. Keeping me busy, and a little confused.<br/><br/>

I'm hoping to start making some real progress on the Disertation front
soon, I'm beginning to piece together a larger outline for it, and I've
made some changes to the core terminology that I think are solid.
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>python toy: kurry</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/11/07/13.54/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[

Here's a neat bit of python I worked up for fun the other day. It's a curry
function, but it supports keywords as well, I call it <b>kurry</b>.
Using kurry, you can do the following sort of things, which is quite useful
in python:

<code>
def foo(a, b, c, d, e):
  return { 'a': a, 'b': b, 'c': c, 'd': d, 'e': e }
  
bar = kurry(foo, 1, c = 3, d = 4)

assert(bar(2, d = 5, e = 6) == foo(1, 2, 3, 5, 6))
  </code>

The code for <b>kurry</b> makes extensive use of python's variable-argument
and keyword mechanisms. The following things are true:

<code>
def varargs(*args):
  # *args in param def means collapse args into tuple
  return args

assert(varargs(1,2,3) == (1,2,3))

# *args in function call means expand arg tuple
assert(varargs(*(1,2,3)) == (1,2,3))

def varkwargs(**kwargs):
  # *kwargs in param def means collapse keyword args into dict
  return kwargs

assert(varkwargs(a=1,b=2) == {'a':1, 'b':2})

# **kwargs in function call means use dict as keywords.
assert(varkwargs(**{'a':1,'b':2}) == {'a':1, 'b':2})
  </code>

Here is the code for <b>kurry</b>:

<code>
def kurry(func, *cargs, **ckwargs):
 "curry a function, with keyword support"
  return lambda *largs, **lkwargs: \
    func(*(cargs + largs), **dict(ckwargs.items() + lkwargs.items()))
  </code>

We save the positional and keyword arguments at <b>kurry</b> time, and we
append the new arguments, and update the keywords at call time.

  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Space Elevator</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/10/23/08.51/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
Theresa and I spent saturday (Oct 22nd) at the
2005 Space Eleveator Games from
<a href="http://www.elevator2010.org/site/index.html">elevator2010.org</a>
There was a lot of cool stuff, and we got about 4 hours worth of footage.
We're going to cut this together into a series video pods, and we plan on
getting the first one out this week.
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Brothers Morgan</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/08/27/12.14/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
Morgan is in town, and he and T and I are all heading to see
<search>The Brothers Grimm</search> at the matinee today. It looks purty, and since I
was raised upon quite a few books of fairy tails, I'm totally siked!
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Anti-Sit</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/08/26/17.46/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
This absolutely fascinated me, it's a gallery of anti-sit technology,
litterally, different devices for impeding sitting on various pieces of
archetecture.
<a href="http://www.usemenow.com/web-log/archives/the_antisit/index.html">The
Anti-Sit</a>, 

<link href="http://www.boingboing.net/2005/08/26/metal_thorns_to_keep.html">Boing Boing</link>
  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Disertation</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/08/04/21.23/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
<p>
So, I'm trying to start my disertation, for real, really. Really.  God.
Ick. Okay, here's my pickle. I'm trying to describe the problem that my
work addresses in a readable manner (see "How to do things with words" for
a good example of 'readable'). The polite way of talking about this is that
you mustn't tell anyone that they are wrong. People reading about language
design already have pretty strong opinions about what they are doing. So,
let's see, a language is:
</p>

<ol>
<li>A set of symbol strings, as defined by some automata (from finite
automata theory).</li>
<li>A mapping between 2 discrete symbol fields (from semiotics).</li>
<li>Both 1, 2, and the domain knowledge necessary to edit statements in the
language (from psychology).</li>
</ol>

<p>
So I'm trying to describe this whole design problem, with minimal jargon.
I know that I'm not getting out of this without some jargon (but a big part
of my planned doctoral work is driving the various field's jargon towards
coherence), but you can't open a book with a sledgehammer of vocabulary.
You have to hold people's hands, and walk them comfortably into the context
you are trying to deliver.
</p>

  ]]></description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Accelerando</title>
      <link>http://monket.samedi-studios.com//blog/2005/07/16/12.50/post.html</link>
      <description><![CDATA[
I've just put together an <a href="/software/mbook-reader">Mbook</a>
for <a href="http://www.accelerando.org">Accelerando</a>,
which you can pick up from
<a href="http://press.samedi-studios.com/mbooks/ACCEL">ACCEL</a>.

<br/>

Btw, California is awesome. I've just gotten my blog environment back up
and running. I'll do a post about who I work for in a day or two.

  ]]></description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
