On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 07:22:58PM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote: > Le 28/08/2017 à 11:44, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com a écrit : > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:41:42AM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote: > > > Le 27/08/2017 à 19:29, sylvain.bertr...@gmail.com a écrit : > > > > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 05:27:24PM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote: > > > > > My idea is how to reconcile the implementation of programs and a > > > > > kernel > > > > > that is a multiplexer like plan9 with a language and a sound > > > > > compilation > > > > > environment like that of Oberon. > > > > > > > > Once you have a nice working kernel with a vulkan stack and GPUs > > > > drivers, we'll > > > > talk about it again. In the meantime, good luck and fair winds. > > > > > > > > But really, you should try ada and rust, they "solved" probably all > > > > what you > > > > are talking about, already. > > > > Even rust has a less worse syntax than go, as far as I can recall. > > > > Don't forget > > > > to have a look at ada, a very strongly backed language... oh! and I was > > > > told > > > > something about mathematical proof integration with the D language. > > > > You also have the ML family, the "beauty" of "functional" languages: > > > > formal proof software is usually written using them, and lucky you, one > > > > of them > > > > has object orientation straight in the syntax, ocaml. I expect the > > > > addition of > > > > "aspect programming" straight in the syntax too! > > > > A good start would be to write your own compiler (not optimizing > > > > first). I > > > > suggest a c++17 compiler could be a good warm up, what do you think of > > > > that? > > > > > > That one feels the anger through irony. Thanks anyway. > > > > Irony, probably, but there is probably more, like a bit of truth and > > reality? > > > > It may be time to come down from the silver tower. > > Then explains.
You are on suckless. _You_ have to explain how you end up here missing some core points of suckless that much. -- Sylvain
