New question: can Limbo be compiled to raw binary to run on native
hardware? Yes. Will I do it? No.
Next question: can C be interpreted like Limbo? Yes. (10th edition
Unix has such a program.) Will I do it? No.
Someone's ideas on a programming language should not be "forced" onto
another's state of mind. I don't like some of the features of Limbo
(sys := load Sys Sys->PATH) and I don't think Limbo can be used to
write a system kernel without an abundant amount of reductions or
compiler hacks (http://www.osdev.org/wiki/C_PlusPlus discusses enough
of them for C++ to make one puke). If someone defies those odds, good
for them. Also, C can be a pain in the neck at so many times (pointer
arithmetic multiplies the difficulty of porting Assembly to C). C can
be made to type-check at runtime, but will I do it to C itself? Not
when I'm porting about 30 Assembly files to C. I fear I've fallen
victim to the complications of Duff's device and the alt construct,
so I'll stop.
Flame extinguished.
On Feb 17, 2008, at 11:31 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote:
you've changed your claims!
it says elephant!
1) no, limbo is not good for everything. my doorbell is better
without it.
in the context of the original thread you just dismissed it because
you wanted to argue.
2) porting limbo does not require ken's tool chain. have you had
experience with this? anything "self-containted" can only blame
itself for its blemishes.
3) the performance gain of having a fixed tlb with no context switch
penalty is amazing. have you had experience with this?
4) if you are hacking the kernel then you aren't hacking limbo so
what is the point of #4.
after 41 messages in this thread you'll ask for references.
brucee
On Feb 18, 2008 2:43 PM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
how did this get past my erik filter?
wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
four out of four as expected.
brucee
100% whinage. 0 justification. 0 information. par for the
course. ☺
since you disagree, i assume you claim that limbo's the hammer and
all
computing problems are nails. i'd like to know why limbo's the right
thing to run, e.g., on a freescale hc08 microcontroller. i'd also
like to know
why there is no performance penalty for running dis code over c. do
you claim the garbage collection doesn't take any appreciable time?
and the there is no overhead dealing with limbo's runtime
typechecking?
the inferno kernel i know about is written in c. where's the
limbo version?
how does one run a limbo program on a new architecture without
porting
the runtime or jit?
- erik
