On Thursday, May 05, 2011 09:35:15 PM ron minnich wrote:
> The reason I asked if errno had looked at webfs was that he can do the
> standard thing (port some C++/Python Library From Hell to Plan 9)
>
The above described standard thing is more in line with my capabilities.
Porting clang is well beyond me though, even at my most optimistic; so
I've decided to dedicate time toward looking more closely into porting
the netsurf libs for css, html and dom; and mozilla's spidermonkey - as
they are further along than webfs/abaco ("further along", meaning
seemingly more active and current), and I can focus simply on a port,
rather than green-field design and development from scratch.
In other words, I think I can manage to eventually port small ad-hoc
stuff; and then slowly "bake" it closer and closer to something that
is more and more "9'ish".
Although I think I understand that the prevailing custom here on 9fans
is to scorn most software written by and for the unwashed masses - or
for the general consumer industry - I'm not so convinced that a reasonable
compromise can't exist to fulfill the needs of a class of user who exist a
little higher up the stack than, say, low-level systems programmers working
on specialist projects within industrial or academic research and development
facilities.
> or do a much more interesting thing, which is look at stuff like abaco
> and webfs, and learn some lessons, and build something that is faster,
> better, and cheaper.
>
It's more interesting, yes - but I fear also far, far less likely for me to
pull off; no one else has managed to pull it off yet, there's no way I can.
(Like I said before: I write backend business logic for web-based applications
in java/groovy and perl and shell, along w/ some db and network administration
etc. on linux; my skills are humble, but serviceable for what I do for a
living .... not to give you my life story or anything... heheh)
In other words, I'm fully cognizant of the fact that I do not have the
necessary pre-requisite experience to build a better mouse trap.
> This is a research OS, not a Windows replacement.
> There's a reason to use it. You want a great desktop experience that
> is familiar, get an ipad.
>
Aww... man.
Do you not think it's possible or worthwhile to have a great(er) desktop
(or consumer-oriented embedded device) experience built atop Plan 9?
After a few months of reading and learning and actual hands-on
experience, I've found that rio and acme and mk and 8c ,etc., are
far less interesting than union directories, per-process namespaces,
9p and intrinsic, ubiquitous distributed computing - that's where I
personally think the action is at.
I don't care what editor or compiler someone uses; but the idea of cpu'ing
from a smartphone to run heavy-weight processes (for just one example)
gets the geek in me pretty excited with possibility.
Or the idea of a home network where I have one cpu/auth server, one file
server and a number of super cheap thin-clients providing a modern
web interface and shared data for friends, guests and family.
I'm tired of maintaining everyone's computers in my house on an ad-hoc
basis; and I think I could deploy a higher performing, more maintainable,
but overall cheaper network with Plan 9. But I can hardly expect visitors
and family to run acme and abaco.
Cheers
