On 12/6/20, cigar562hfsp952f...@icebubble.org <cigar562hfsp952f...@icebubble.org> wrote: > Lucio De Re <lucio.d...@gmail.com> writes: > >> But do we want a flock of 9front-wielding droids flooding the 9fans >> mailing list? > > Good point. [ ... ] Maybe we should keep Plan 9 a secret. ;)
Well, that's one way of spreading it, yes. > > It would be nice if there was some way to translate between technology > intended for idiots and technology intended for experts. Imagine if, > for example, every Android app automatically exported its functionality > over 9P. The cell phone idiots would have all their flashy toasts and > swipes, but the apps would still be usable by command line nerds. > I like that idea. Might not be as far-fetched as it may seem at a glance: surely, a human organism could be "generated" from a simpler DNA than the present one (merged chromosome-2 in humans suggests I'm not wrong, but I rate rank amateur regarding genetics), if one removes all the twists and turns of evolution from it. The same may be possible with, say, Linux. Much less so with Plan 9, so a deep, enlightened comparison should be instructive. Something like Lion's or Nemo's Commentaries, maybe as a black room redevelopment as was done with the IBM PC BIOS. Or as a brand new mathematical theory of Information. [ ... ] > That sounds like a variant of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (which applies > to natural languages) as applied to computer languages. > Thanks, I need to look that one up. As a very under-educated, remote "scholar", such nuggets only reach me by accident. But seSotho is the local "vernacular", one of nine "official" African ("tribal" is close to the truth) languages in this country. I cannot fathom what kind of hoops people taught in these languages need to go through to comprehend modern science. I find my native Italian pretty close to stultifying when technology is involved. Poetic, certainly, emotional, definitely, good for songs, but below inadequate, as compared to English to express scientific and technological concepts, but that used to be until quite recently, German's role, too. I guess we have to thank the Yanks for shifting that, or the Yanks have to thank the colonising Brits for beating the French. Twists and turns, indeed. > Pascal has pointers, too, and they make alot more sense than pointers in > C. > Not to me, they don't. They do belong in C, which is a partially successful, glorified assembler, not a programming language. Partially successful as applied to being an assembler. No one can deny C's success in getting computers to do what is demanded of them. But the key is that we build computers to do what we want, not what we ask and C allows that in spades, by making us think like the machines. Hm, more accurately, forcing us to model the target automaton in our head. Solving problems, seems to me, ought to ignore the target instruction set as long as possible. It's tempting to think of human relationships, which also pretty much rely on assumptions rather than statements - I presume that "proving" the validity of code in this sense may mean simply removing all kinds of "lies" that lurk in the model it is meant to reproduce (simplistically, of course). Lucio. PS: Rambling, as usual. It helps me thinking, my hope is that it will be confirmed or denied by the "crowd" so I can move on from there. ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3fd028fcf2eeb24c-Mf498142699b81d3110aed41d Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription