> My mouse on the windows 7 desktop is connected via USB and has no outages.
I still own, but not use - I really ought to - some serial
three-button mice. I have noi doubt that I would get no outage from
them, too.
And, on a different sidetrack: why is it inconceivable for GCC (or
Clang, for tha
> In general my computer does about exactly what i envisioned 15 years
> ago whilst it was not possible yet.
I should now go into a tirade about the price we pay for the features
the marketing departments are foisting on us, but of course, it is not
all bad (I'm not sure if I can call my Galaxy S5
I may be showing my age, but Harvey was a 6' tall invisible rabbit.
"Harvey", 1950, starring James Stewart, Josephine Hull, Peggy Dow
Due to his insistence that he has an invisible six-foot rabbit for a best
friend, a whimsical middle-aged man is thought by his family to be insane -
but he may be w
Il 27/Lug/2015 23:47, "Skip Tavakkolian" <9...@9netics.com> ha scritto:
>
> > you are aware of the 9fans' fetish for movies
>
> and rabbits
...and feticists. ;-)
and rabbits
> you are aware of the 9fans' fetish for movies
>
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042546/
you are aware of the 9fans' fetish for movies
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042546/
> Lee Harvey Oswald comes to mind to me at least.
>
> In fact, when I was typing "harvey os" into my search bar, "harvey
> oswald" was the first autocomplete suggestion.
>
> On 27.07.15 13:48, Ryan Gonzalez wrot
>> pro tip: only use stable interfaces.
>
> Like what? W3C, or USB or CPU instruction sets?
This sounds so despairing I'm sorry for you. But to answer your
question, it depends on how you use it:
My mouse on the windows 7 desktop is connected via USB and has no outages.
Subsets of HTML 3/4 are st
Lee Harvey Oswald comes to mind to me at least.
In fact, when I was typing "harvey os" into my search bar, "harvey
oswald" was the first autocomplete suggestion.
On 27.07.15 13:48, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
On July 27, 2015 10:24:37 AM CDT, Daniel Valio wrote:
Am I the only one that is really b
On 27/07/2015 17:03, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
I always thought is was that emulating an open-source application
platform is easier than emulating a black box like Wine does, as you
can see how things are done and the internal APIs and stuff.
Yeah, but you know that Wine Is Not an Emulator! ;-)
htt
On July 27, 2015 10:24:37 AM CDT, Daniel Valio wrote:
>Am I the only one that is really bothered by the name?
>
>It doesn't quite bring good things to mind.
What?? The Batman character??
>
>On 24.07.15 21:43, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
>>
>https://medium.com/this-is-not-a-monad-tutorial/harvey-an-op
> open source software is often a moving target.
Amen.
> pro tip: only use stable interfaces.
Like what? W3C, or USB or CPU instruction sets?
Lucio.
open source software is often a moving target.
pro tip: only use stable interfaces.
> It doesn't quite bring good things to mind.
Are you suggesting that there are bad things out there with a similar
name? If so, I hope I'm not the only one who doesn't know about them.
Lucio.
Am I the only one that is really bothered by the name?
It doesn't quite bring good things to mind.
On 24.07.15 21:43, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
https://medium.com/this-is-not-a-monad-tutorial/harvey-an-operating-system-with-plan-9-s-shadow-3081414e5f0b
I'm not affiliated with this whatsoever; I jus
> I always thought is was that emulating an open-source application platform is
> easier than emulating a black box like Wine does, as you can see how things
> are done and the internal APIs and stuff.
You're right on that score, but emulating continually-changing bloat
isn't really any easier,
in some cases, plan 9's coincidental inability to run modern programs that do
unpredictable and undesirable things is a useful feature. mothra, for example,
doesn't even handle many html tags, but it also doesn't execute unknown
server-supplied code on my terminal. how can i be sure? because the
On July 27, 2015 9:19:47 AM CDT, Anthony Sorace wrote:
>> erik quanstrom wrote:
>>
>> when i need to run Linux programs, i run linux.
>
>Yeah, but then you’ve got linux. Now you’ve got two
>problems (hah! if only…).
>
>> what is the benefit of running firefox on a p9 like system,
>> rather tha
On 27 July 2015 at 15:19, Anthony Sorace wrote:
> (for many, it’s pretty
> much just a browser)
>
One of the reasons mere POSIX isn't enough is that there are many non-POSIX
tendrils that have worked their way throughout the system,
notably d-bus and now systemd, but there are many others, and t
> erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> when i need to run Linux programs, i run linux.
Yeah, but then you’ve got linux. Now you’ve got two
problems (hah! if only…).
> what is the benefit of running firefox on a p9 like system,
> rather than on linux?
The theory, anyway, is that you could then not have a
On 27 July 2015 at 14:44, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> It is slow.
But it doesn't matter anyway if your aim is to compile a ton of stuff that
only gcc can compile.
On 27 July 2015 at 13:08, Aram Hăvărneanu wrote:
> 'd expect GCC compiling Plan 9 at a speed reasonably comparable to kencc.
I used gcc for one of my own OS projects years ago, without all the
#include crud.
It is slow. For one thing, it still(!) produces textual assembly code
(because the PDP-
GCC is not a very slow C compiler in term of compiled LOC/s (although
the difference in speed between -O0 and -O3 is embarrassing). What
makes compiling Unix software so slow, is the way source code is
organised, headers which include headers, cpp having to generate lots
of code, and all the other
>> I personally wouldn't try fixing firefox' memory leaks with acid
>
> why not?
Same reason you're stating below. I agree with you.
> when i need to run Linux programs, i run linux.
> what is the benefit of running firefox on a p9 like system, rather than on
> linux? p9p does a good job of brin
23 matches
Mail list logo
