On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 21:39:38 - smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
> If I were filling out an Acme wishlist, I would like to see triple and
> quadruple clicks select larger chunks of text. Being able to do
> something like click-click-click-click to "Select All" (in those apps
> that support it) i
On Friday, April 29, 2011 11:26:03 PM Anthony Sorace wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2011, at 12:05 AM, errno wrote:
> > But APE has c++ (old version of gcc though).
>
> APE has no c++. there is a very old version of gcc floating around on
> sources that can, with some effort, sometimes be made to compile th
First I assume you have used abaco - it is incomplete but its the best plan9
has at
present - without using linuxemu.
There is cfront c++ but this is so old it would probably not be worth getting
it to work - templates never worked in AT&T cfront. The exception to this the
HP cfront implementat
On Saturday, April 30, 2011 01:25:53 AM Steve Simon wrote:
> First I assume you have used abaco - it is incomplete but its the best
> plan9 has at present - without using linuxemu.
>
I appreciate abaco for what it is, but unfortunately it's not something I
can expect to satisfy most users' activi
On 30 Apr 2011, at 3:42 am, errno wrote:
I know you already received more info, but there was also this recent
thread related to the topic:
http://www.mail-archive.com/plan9-gsoc@googlegroups.com/msg00431.html
Ah, that's the clearest thing yet. Thanks. I should have checked the
plan9-gsoc
On 30 Apr 2011, at 9:16 am, errno wrote:
So, shaking this out just a bit further:
(anyone reading, please just ignore this if you find it too long,
and/or too annoying, and/or too naive - or whatever - I'd rather
hear crickets chirping than hecklers carping - thanks)
I hope you won't find th
On Sat Apr 30 03:07:39 EDT 2011, ba...@bitblocks.com wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 21:39:38 - smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
>
> > If I were filling out an Acme wishlist, I would like to see triple and
> > quadruple clicks select larger chunks of text. Being able to do
> > something like click
errno writes:
> Due to the requirements, it appears that incorporating the web as a
> 1st-class-platform in plan 9 is effectively unapproachable:
You forgot to backtrack to your webkit/gecko choicepoint and follow down
the gecko goal tree.
--
+--
Anthony Sorace writes:
> because it's a huge amount of work. there's a whole pile of standards and
> pseudo-standards to deal with, the set is ever-growing, the components are
> ever-growing, and there isn't really a good definition of "correct".
Perhaps there's a "Plan 9" way to approach the pr
Perhaps there's a "Plan 9" way to approach the problem which might
involve a "less-huge" amount of work.
There is nothing "Plan 9" about this. When a piece of code gets so large
as to be impossible to understand, it's time to throw it out and start
over.
Where we as "engineers" fail is in n
On Saturday, April 30, 2011 03:21:09 PM smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
> errno writes:
> > Due to the requirements, it appears that incorporating the web as a
> > 1st-class-platform in plan 9 is effectively unapproachable:
>
> You forgot to backtrack to your webkit/gecko choicepoint and follow
> d
Gecko is also written primarily in c++, which means porting a c++
compiler to plan 9 would still remain a prerequisite for that path also.
No, it's written in a combination of g++- and
whatever Visual Studio calls C++ for its current release.
You cannot port that shit. Nor should you.
--lynd
On Saturday, April 30, 2011 04:33:23 PM Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > Gecko is also written primarily in c++, which means porting a c++
> > compiler to plan 9 would still remain a prerequisite for that path also.
>
> No, it's written in a combination of g++- and
> whatever Visual Studio calls C++ fo
One thing with webkit is at least the option is there to use a different
compiler (llvm/clang). And it looks like they're in the initial stages of
unifying the build system to gyp (written in python, which Plan 9
already supports) - which is far better than autotools IMHO.
For the last year I'
On Sunday 01 of May 2011 00:45:48 Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
> > Perhaps there's a "Plan 9" way to approach the problem which might
> > involve a "less-huge" amount of work.
>
> There is nothing "Plan 9" about this. When a piece of code gets so large
> as to be impossible to understand, it's time to
15 matches
Mail list logo
