@aescling @wallhackio makefiles mostly just read like technical specifications where there's a big list of definitions at the beginning and you need to just skip them and then look back at them later when you start getting confused
@aescling @wallhackio could always start
today¦s cursed G·N·U Make recipe
@for target in $$($(MAKE) -s -f '$<' listout QUIET=1 $(SHUSHEOPTS)); do if test '-d' "$(BUILDDIR)/public/$$target" && test '!' -d "$(DESTDIR)/$$target"; then mkdir -p "$(DESTDIR)/$$target"; fi; for file in $$(find "$(BUILDDIR)/public/$$target" -not '(' -name '.*' -or -type d ')'); do printf '%s\n' "$$file" | sed 's:$(BUILDDIR)/public/:/:;s:/_\(.*\)_\(\..*\)$$:/[\1]\2:g;s/¦/:/g;' | xargs printf 'Copying <%s>…\n' >&2; printf '%s\n' "$$file" | sed 's:$(BUILDDIR)/public/:$(DESTDIR)/:;s:/_\(.*\)_\(\..*\)$$:/[\1]\2:g;s/¦/:/g' | xargs cp "$$file"; done; done
i think it’s really cool how the semantic web people did a bunch of work and wrote a bunch of theory about how we can teach computers to reason, and then within a few years mostly agreed that having computers reason is a waste of time, but kept the formal specifications and vocabulary because it actually made things easier for humans to explain things to each other
this is fine for what i’m doing so far but i’m still waiting for that Moment when a specification inevitably tries to use an Ontology Itself as the subject or object of an object property, thus implying that owl:Ontology is an owl:Class not merely an rdfs:Class (these are not the same)
anyway the actually interesting insight wasn’t in that specification but in the specification mapping R·D·F to Direct Semantics which states, with no fanfare, that all owl:OntologyProperty’s (note: this term is not documented) are silently transformed into owl:AnnotationProperty’s (interesting for the insight that properties of ontologies are functionally annotations in their implications)
if you are wondering how bad it can be, you have clearly never read a Semantics specification
literally rewound because i KNOW the lyric is boy and doesn’t sound at all like girl but that is what i heard ok
@aescling
• they keep adding new evolutions
• some people are only familiar with the classics and hate anything which came out after 2001
@aescling
• weird names
• “there’s no way that’s real; you just made that up”
• “ok well SOMEBODY who designed this has a kink”
• there’s lots of them
Administrator / Public Relations for GlitchCat. Not actually glitchy, nor a cat. I wrote the rules for this instance.
“Constitutionally incapable of not going hard” — @aescling
“Fedi Cassandra” – @Satsuma
I HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THINGS. YOU CAN JUST @ ME.
I work for a library but I post about Zelda fanfiction.