On 25 Apr 2010, at 19:55, blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
Unfortunately - that means noisy discussion and collaboration amongst
people from a variety perspectives and skillsets/experience. Which is
anathema to 9fans lone-ranger aesthetics.
I don't really understand this part. Why does porting
On 04/25/2010 06:07 PM, Patrick Kelly wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
>> Karljurgen Feuerherm
>> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 6:33 PM
>> To: 'Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> Karljurgen Feuerherm
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 6:33 PM
> To: 'Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs'
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women
>
>From the Oxford Encyclopedic Dictionary:
ethos. n. the characteristic spirit or attitudes of a community,
people, or system, or of a literary work, etc.
I think Corey's use of the word certainly fit that definition, which I
would hope is what most people heard... whether or not one agrees.
K
>
> It infers that "what Corey wants" is to bring GNU and Linux into
> Plan 9.
>
> Which isn't true.
I must admit to jumping to that conclusion too easily. I guess it's
because the most common discussions here start either with "I've
been beating my head against a wall; has anyone seen this or can
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> Corey
> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 2:14 AM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women
>
> On Saturday 24 April 2010 21:20:35 Rahul Murmuria wr
On Saturday 24 April 2010 21:20:35 Rahul Murmuria wrote:
> I would like to point out that the Glendix project has been doing
> something quite the opposite of what Corey wants,
>
... that's not a strictly accurate statement.
It infers that "what Corey wants" is to bring GNU and Linux into
Plan
This thread is mighty old now.. but I would like to point out that the
Glendix project has been doing something quite the opposite of what
Corey wants, but solves the same problem.
http://www.glendix.org/
Imagine running the Linux kernel and all of regular GNU, with all the
Plan 9's sweetness pat
Thank-you!
K
>>> erik quanstrom 18/04/2010 11:18:39 pm >>>
> Could you (or someone) elaborate on the "C99" battle? I'm wondering whether
> this implies critique of the C99 standard or something else (and how this
> relates to C under Plan9)
ken's c compiler has some extensions. like unnamed
Well that was a very long discussion, and a fairly pointless one
for the following reasons:
- It doesn't matter whether Plan X is a good idea or not, unless
someone is actually going to try to implement it. That is not
at all clear at this point.
- Most of the discussion seems not to have been
Unless you have something constructive to say, rather than make up some
fantastic problem in what I say, I'm done here.
Yay?
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com
> but if you're looking for somebody to say "Sounds
> great, where do you want me to start?" you'll probably be waiting a
> long time,
I think it's more "what a great idea, I've thought about the same and
here is what I have done". Fact is, it's all largely there in
/n/sources/contrib(*), 9vx and
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Corey wrote:
> On Sunday 18 April 2010 13:58:19 erik quanstrom wrote:
> [purposefully removed context surrounding the following statement:]
>
>> seems awful limiting for a research os.
>>
>
> Exactly.
>
>
> Plan X proposes an extension of 9 space for the experimen
> Could you (or someone) elaborate on the "C99" battle? I'm wondering whether
> this implies critique of the C99 standard or something else (and how this
> relates to C under Plan9)
ken's c compiler has some extensions. like unnamed structures.
you don't have to use them. i don't think that's
> Anyone ever peek at one of the Oberon to C compliers? Or maybe the
> Oxford stuff?
>
> http://spivey.oriel.ox.ac.uk/corner/Oxford_Oberon-2_compiler
why not build a native compiler? translating to c seems such
a waste. oberon (especially wirth's current iteration) is tiny.
unfortunately, i d
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Federico G. Benavento
wrote:
> p2c (pascal 2 c)
Anyone ever peek at one of the Oberon to C compliers? Or maybe the
Oxford stuff?
http://spivey.oriel.ox.ac.uk/corner/Oxford_Oberon-2_compiler
-Jack
On Apr 18, 2010, at 3:58 PM, C H Forsyth wrote:
>> Just to clarify, you do mean the TV show?
>
> yes, yes i do.
Please end this thread. Soon you'll have someone re-implementing the 'google
"write in C"' lyrics and posting yet another video to you tube.
Or better yet, the reciting all of Ed W
Then let's see it happen; I'm not sure what you're waiting for.
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> Corey
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2010 8:51 PM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans
On Sunday 18 April 2010 13:58:19 erik quanstrom wrote:
[purposefully removed context surrounding the following statement:]
> seems awful limiting for a research os.
>
Exactly.
Plan X proposes an extension of 9 space for the experimental purpose
of promoting and supporting an additional class
Could you (or someone) elaborate on the "C99" battle? I'm wondering whether
this implies critique of the C99 standard or something else (and how this
relates to C under Plan9)
Thanks
K
>>> Corey 18/04/2010 3:26 pm >>>
Plan 9 chose not to fight any
network protocol standards (IL not withstand
i don't think i understand your point at all any more. more
verbiage isn't going to solve it for me.
two small things, though:
> Regardless, even if the sources _were_ stagnant... and even if
> Plan 9 proper was used professionally by an even _smaller_
> number of developers, it would still n
>Just to clarify, you do mean the TV show?
yes, yes i do.
On Friday 16 April 2010 16:58:38 andrey mirtchovski wrote:
> TL;DR
On Friday 16 April 2010 21:20:15 Federico G. Benavento wrote:
> too long for me to read, could you summarize in 3 lines?
On Saturday 17 April 2010 10:06:35 Iruata Souza wrote:
> still too long.
I'm not avoiding these requests.
There have been many direct responses to my posts, every
one of them has a number of good points - even when I
disagree with some of them; and (as is natural and expected)
a number of misunderstandings as well.
I can't respond to them all without spamming the list, so I'll
refrain (wouldn't h
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:35:53 BST C H Forsyth wrote:
> perhaps Plan 9 is just the Black Books of software?
You mean with 9fans playing the role of Bernard Black? Could
be -- if you squint a bit Black Books is an anarchic place,
with piles of books, cartons of old takeouts, an odd jam
sandwic
> scheme
> ocaml
> haskell
> lua
> limbo
> linda
> pforth
> python
>
tcl
4th
bprolog
p2c (pascal 2 c)
f2c (fortran 2 c)
extra/perl which could be easily updated
--
Federico G. Benavento
On 04/17/2010 05:35 PM, C H Forsyth wrote:
perhaps Plan 9 is just the Black Books of software?
Just to clarify, you do mean the TV show?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Books
--
Scott Sullivan
perhaps Plan 9 is just the Black Books of software?
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:58:00 PDT Corey wrote:
>
> The Plan 9ers have "successfully" prevented the Plan Xers from "encroaching",
> but it's the Plan Xers who are going to find new and interesting expressions
> of a Plan 9 based operating system, however in order to bootstrap, the Plan
> Xers need
> * a stance against alternate programming language paradigms
A few seconds rummaging through /n/sources/contrib turns up:
scheme
ocaml
haskell
lua
limbo
linda
pforth
python
All these seem fairly alternate to me.
Alright. Perhaps we're converging here. Small team is what I was thinking--I
agree that as teams get larger they get more unmanageable and tend to produce
less focused (and thus less efficient or pristine) results.
This has been a helpful discussion for me in terms of trying to get the gist of
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> lu...@proxima.alt.za
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 2:02 PM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women (was Re: TeX: hurrah!)
>
> > You ha
> You have repetitively ignored the heart of my e-mails, and even ignored
> chunks of what I've said just to criticize me.
Sorry, knee-jerk response. If I disagree with what you say, I'm much
more likely to include it and criticise it than to ignore it. And I
see little value (to the community)
> There will always be exceptions. Also, eadership can give a group an
Oops, where did the "l" in leadership go?
++L
> I struggle with this. Groups can do things and have honour. And groups often
> do things without paycheques. I remember a group effort to implement Tiny C
> for microcomputers in the late 70s... it was a group effort and was plenty
> honourable...
There will always be exceptions. Also, eader
> Attempting to [discuss and speculate on different potential expressions
> of Plan 9] here on 9fans continues to be a traditional source
> of agitation and flames, tempered with a healthy dose of shut up and
> code.
As it appears to me, this mailing list does tolerate such discussion, and I
f
> The image this brought to mind was Buddhism. Would Buddhism be better
> if it were infused with Evangelism? Doubtful.
As a very young Roman Catholic, I was quite taken by evangelism, I
still have embarrassing memories of shedding a tear for a missionary
amongst the lepers contracting leprosy hi
> Individual work has a benefit no community work can have; honor. That
> product's success or failure is going to affect the image of who
> created it. When an individual creates a product, it has a desire to
> see it succeed. When a group creates a product, they have a desire to
> get their p
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:29 PM, wrote:
> very little new is being created, but rather many old things are being
> "improved" upon (regurgitated) in manners that consume more and more
> computing cycles and deliver less and less performance.
I think this is an important observation.
When I saw
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 3:49 AM, Corey wrote:
> On Friday 16 April 2010 21:29:44 lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
>> > Messy, with high levels of noise-to-signal - certainly... but absolutely,
>> > astoundingly productive and in constant motion.
>>
>> In my opinion, most of the output from the Posix de
I struggle with this. Groups can do things and have honour. And groups often do
things without paycheques. I remember a group effort to implement Tiny C for
microcomputers in the late 70s... it was a group effort and was plenty
honourable...
>>> "Patrick Kelly" 17/04/2010 10:19:40 am >>>
Indi
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:41 PM, wrote:
> Polluting Plan 9 with fashionable toys isn't going to save the
> world, isn't even going to be useful to the existing Plan 9 community,
> so why do you believe it should happen, rather than allow Plan 9 as it
> exists, both as a philosophy and as the imp
> > > You can be right about the manpower issue. In no way could on man build a
> > > bridge, but one man can build efficient software.
> >
> > Even here there is room for disagreement. Do you think a
> > community-designed bridge would be preferable to one designed by a
> > single architect? Th
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> lu...@proxima.alt.za
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 12:10 PM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women (was Re: TeX: hurrah!)
>
>
> Yes there is, but the disagreement in between what I wrote, and what you
> read. In the quoted sentence, I was talking about the building, or
> implementation, process. What you then began to talk about was the design
> process.
Computer programming is much more design than implementation, un
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> lu...@proxima.alt.za
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 10:26 AM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women (was Re: TeX: hurrah!)
>
> >
> You can be right about the manpower issue. In no way could on man build a
> bridge, but one man can build efficient software.
Even here there is room for disagreement. Do you think a
community-designed bridge would be preferable to one designed by a
single architect? The seminal concept of "T
> On the other hand: doesn't individual development suffers from at least two
> problems?
>
> (1) lack of a common vision leading to potentially widely divergent and
> incompatible solutions
> (2) lack of sufficient energy (manpower etc.) behind any given project
> development to make any real
> It's imperative that the current official Plan 9 sources and distro
> remain undisturbed.
okay. it may not be your intention, but now you're trolling.
you complained that the official sources were stagnant in
your opening salvo. now you're arguing the opposite. hard
to take this completely se
> On the other hand: doesn't individual development suffers from at least two
> problems?
>
> (1) lack of a common vision leading to potentially widely divergent and
> incompatible solutions
Yes, but the products are small enough that one can bring two
incompatible strands together. Whereas de
On the other hand: doesn't individual development suffers from at least two
problems?
(1) lack of a common vision leading to potentially widely divergent and
incompatible solutions
(2) lack of sufficient energy (manpower etc.) behind any given project
development to make any real headway.
Pres
> -Original Message-
> From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of
> Corey
> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 5:39 AM
> To: 9fans@9fans.net
> Subject: Re: [9fans] Mars Needs Women (was Re: TeX: hurrah!)
>
>
> I appreciate your tim
> But even all that begins to miss the original attempted point of my
> first post: the idea that perhaps it could be beneficial if there
> were some means for interested Plan 9 fans to rationally discuss and
> speculate on different potential expressions of Plan 9 based operating
> systems.
>
fre 2010-04-16 klockan 23:49 -0700 skrev Corey:
> I've been considering the prospect of implementing a
> kencc dialect for the clang c front-end).
It is more practical to start with adding LLVM IR target to kencc. You
won't get Clang's source analysis/refactoring features this way, but it
is a qui
On Saturday 17 April 2010 00:28:42 SHRIZZA wrote:
> Long-windedness aside, your thought process is fairly sound.
>
Sorry for the annoying verbosity. It's difficult for me to express the
ideas more succinctly in a manner that reduces the risk of flames
or misunderstanding.
> However, keep in mi
I appreciate your time and consideration in your responses, thanks!
You made several points and asked several questions this email,
however it's difficult for me to answer them because they appear
to be put forth under the idea that "Plan X's" purpose is to natively
host common popular consumer-l
> ... are simply - by far - much more important and practical to a greater
> number of people than these other prominent Plan 9 idioms:
>
> * radical frugal simplicity throughout the entire system
This would remove itself as soon as the developer base increases
beyond an indeterminate critical m
Long-windedness aside, your thought process is fairly sound.
However, keep in mind that Plan 9 represents an escape from the perversion of
Unix.
Is a compromise between Plan 9 and "Plan X" worth the risk of history repeating
itself?
On Friday 16 April 2010 21:29:44 lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
> > Messy, with high levels of noise-to-signal - certainly... but absolutely,
> > astoundingly productive and in constant motion.
>
> In my opinion, most of the output from the Posix developers is trash.
> It's the equivalent of a cancer
> Messy, with high levels of noise-to-signal - certainly... but absolutely,
> astoundingly productive and in constant motion.
In my opinion, most of the output from the Posix developers is trash.
It's the equivalent of a cancer, polluting the body with poisons.
Somewhere in the mix there will cert
too long for me to read, could you summarize in 3 lines?
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Corey wrote:
>
> The following is not a troll. (the subject is for the sake of humor only)
>
> On Friday 16 April 2010 11:10:28 Patrick Kelly wrote:
>> Have you look at what Plan 9 has done? I would hardly g
TL;DR
The following is not a troll. (the subject is for the sake of humor only)
On Friday 16 April 2010 11:10:28 Patrick Kelly wrote:
> Have you look at what Plan 9 has done? I would hardly go to say we are
> reactive. Every other system has reacted to what Plan 9 has done, not the
> other way around.
63 matches
Mail list logo
