> Where did your C compiler come from? Someone probably compiled it with a C
> compiler. Bootstrapping is a fact of life as a new compiler can't just be
> culled from /dev/random or willed into existence otherwise. It takes a plan
> 9 system to build plan 9 right? (This was not always true for
> Wait, isn't it "the proof is in the *pudding*"? YOU MEAN WE DON'T GET
> FRENCH BENEFITS!?!
sadly, no. the work week is still 100hrs and we get -3 holidays/decade.
- erik
> Even C has a runtime. Perhaps you should look more into how programming
> languages are implemented :-). C++ has one too, especially in the wake of
> exceptions and such.
really? what do you consider to be the c runtime?
i don't think that the asm goo that gets you to main
really counts as "r
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 4:54 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > There was some mention that, during the history of Plan 9, developers
> > had difficulty maintaining two different languages on the system. I
> > wonder how much of that difficulty would still apply today. Although
> > the kernel could co
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Nick LaForge wrote:
> I hope it won't seem rude to suggest it, but the go-nuts list is the
> optimum place for your specific concerns. The Go authors read it and
> are very conscientious in responding to serious questions.
>
> The Go authors did express confidenc
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 9:14 PM, wrote:
> ron minnich writes:
>
> > I think you should set your sights higher than the macro approach you
> > propose. At least in my opinion it's a really ugly idea.
>
> You might be surprised to hear that I agree. :) It's far from an ideal
> solution. I am cert
Just to address the unanswered Limbo questions:
The only Limbo compilers extant compile to a portable bytecode for the Dis
virtual machine. The only first-class Dis implementation is built into Inferno.
Dis can be either interpreted or just-in-time compiled. The historical claim
was a that the J
2011/2/2 erik quanstrom :
>> There was some mention that, during the history of Plan 9, developers
>> had difficulty maintaining two different languages on the system. I
>> wonder how much of that difficulty would still apply today. Although
>> the kernel could concievably be translated to a mode
> There was some mention that, during the history of Plan 9, developers
> had difficulty maintaining two different languages on the system. I
> wonder how much of that difficulty would still apply today. Although
> the kernel could concievably be translated to a modern compiled
> language, I doub
I hope it won't seem rude to suggest it, but the go-nuts list is the
optimum place for your specific concerns. The Go authors read it and
are very conscientious in responding to serious questions.
The Go authors did express confidence that GC performance could
eventually be made competitive, alth
On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 11:06:33PM -0800, ron minnich wrote:
> Missionaries, at least
> according to the cartoons, sometimes are invited to dinner, and other
> times are invited to BE dinner. :-)
>
And they often are fatter than sacred cows :-)
++L
On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:06:33 PST ron minnich wrote:
>
> Just remember, Smiley, it's a good idea not to come across too much
> like a missionary bringing knowledge to the ignorant heathens -- which
> is certainly a bit of the tone of your notes. Missionaries, at least
> according to the cartoons,
Actually, I think we've talked quite enough at this point, perhaps
it's time to take a break and let's see some concrete work. Where's
the mkfile that broke your .h? What do your macros look like? What are
you going to do? I'll retire from the thread now.
Just remember, Smiley, it's a good idea no
And russ cox, and everyone else in the CONTRIBUTORS file.
On Feb 2, 2011 12:39 AM, "Scott Sullivan" wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 05:14:54 +, smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
Can Libmo be compiled to native machine code?
There was some mention that, during the history of Plan 9, developers
had difficulty maintaining two different languages on the system. I
wonder how much of that difficulty would sti
On 02/02/2011 12:14 AM, smi...@zenzebra.mv.com wrote:
[...] though I would hesitate to use ANY code written by
Google without a thorough audit.
This is where I point out that GO isn't so much written by Google, as
more it's written by Rob Pike and Ken Thompson who now work at Google.
--
Scott
ron minnich writes:
> I think you should set your sights higher than the macro approach you
> propose. At least in my opinion it's a really ugly idea.
You might be surprised to hear that I agree. :) It's far from an ideal
solution. I am certainly open to alternatives!
> You could make a lasti
101 - 117 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
