hiro:
> Yeah, I think your arguments make perfectly sense.
> I would still be interested to know whether Akshat had the same
> thoughts in mind:)
I have great affinity for everything Plan 9 -- from
the superficial interface to the depths of its
methodology (although, I was recently dumped
by venti
Inline
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:52 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > Well, actually, I was thinking of something along the lines of Lisaac:
> > "dynamic" modules are statically compiled ala object files, & the run
> time
> > handles issues between Plan9 & Inferno. Sys->load & the like would not be
>
> Well, actually, I was thinking of something along the lines of Lisaac:
> "dynamic" modules are statically compiled ala object files, & the run time
> handles issues between Plan9 & Inferno. Sys->load & the like would not be
> dynamic, but would work as expected. Hell, it could even just be a
> .N
Well, actually, I was thinking of something along the lines of Lisaac:
"dynamic" modules are statically compiled ala object files, & the run time
handles issues between Plan9 & Inferno. Sys->load & the like would not be
dynamic, but would work as expected. Hell, it could even just be a
.Net/perl2ex
> > >Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for some time,
> >
> > it doesn't mean anything.
>
> Uh, considering that ircfs is for Inferno (via Limbo), having a Limbo
> compiler to native Plan9 would be a potential solution, assuming the run
> time could be kept the same.
de t
Uh, considering that ircfs is for Inferno (via Limbo), having a Limbo
compiler to native Plan9 would be a potential solution, assuming the run
time could be kept the same.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> >Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for so
>Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for some time,
it doesn't mean anything.
Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for some time,
but I've much else on my hands. One day when free...
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 9:28 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
> >
> > I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
> > ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, s
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
>>
>> I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
>> ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, seems like a total waste of time
>> when you have a perfectly fine one in limbo, which is a much more
>> convenient language for build
>>
>> I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
>> ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, seems like a total waste of time
>> when you have a perfectly fine one in limbo, which is a much more
>> convenient language for building such a thing anyway.
>>
[snip]
> so, since an irc
>
> I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
> ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, seems like a total waste of time
> when you have a perfectly fine one in limbo, which is a much more
> convenient language for building such a thing anyway.
>
the op said he was running plan
>I don't want to
> run Inferno
> outside of Plan 9, and certainly not over a remote connection to Plan 9 (these
> also being my only options -- unless someone wants to start creating drivers
> for
> Atheros wireless cards)
Couldn't you run Inferno inside of plan9?
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Akshat Kumar
wrote:
> Although there is already an ircfs for Inferno, since I don't want to
> run Inferno outside of Plan 9
Why not?
> and certainly not over a remote connection to Plan 9
Why not?
> (these
> also being my only options -- unless someone wants to
Regarding nadict (the rc scripted Acme interface to dict(7)), for
those interested,
I plan to add the remaining "Next", "Prev", and "Nmatch"
functionalities as found
in adict.
Of the brief trials I did with this, it seemed to get messy.
Although there is already an ircfs for Inferno, since I don't
So it did on Windows + Mulberry. I know, I know, I'll shut up.
--On Friday, January 16, 2009 8:17 PM -0500 erik quanstrom
wrote:
On Fri Jan 16 20:16:55 EST 2009, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
due to GMail's default encodin
On Fri Jan 16 20:16:55 EST 2009, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
> the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
> due to GMail's default encoding. now using Unicode
>
> sorry
> ak
looked fine on plan 9.
- erik
the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
due to GMail's default encoding. now using Unicode
sorry
ak
Certain applications have been blessed with 9fans' ignorance for too long.
dict(7) and friends seemed to be becoming over-joyous.
For those interested in Japanese on Plan 9, I provide here (edict2.tar) scripts
to convert Jim Breen's extended Japanese dictionary, EDICT2, to a format
usable with dic
18 matches
Mail list logo
