hiro:
Yeah, I think your arguments make perfectly sense.
I would still be interested to know whether Akshat had the same
thoughts in mind:)
I have great affinity for everything Plan 9 -- from
the superficial interface to the depths of its
methodology (although, I was recently dumped
by venti).
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Akshat Kumar
aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
Although there is already an ircfs for Inferno, since I don't want to
run Inferno outside of Plan 9
Why not?
and certainly not over a remote connection to Plan 9
Why not?
(these
also being my only options --
I don't want to
run Inferno
outside of Plan 9, and certainly not over a remote connection to Plan 9 (these
also being my only options -- unless someone wants to start creating drivers
for
Atheros wireless cards)
Couldn't you run Inferno inside of plan9?
I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, seems like a total waste of time
when you have a perfectly fine one in limbo, which is a much more
convenient language for building such a thing anyway.
the op said he was running plan 9.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 3:28 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
ircfs for Plan 9 ages ago. Still, seems like a total waste of time
when you have a perfectly fine one in limbo, which is a much more
convenient
Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for some time,
but I've much else on my hands. One day when free...
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 9:28 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.netwrote:
I seem to remember Mjl, the author if the inferno ircfs, wrote an
ircfs for Plan 9
Uh, considering that ircfs is for Inferno (via Limbo), having a Limbo
compiler to native Plan9 would be a potential solution, assuming the run
time could be kept the same.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Charles Forsyth fors...@terzarima.netwrote:
Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been
Or have a native Limbo compiler; I've been itching for that for some time,
it doesn't mean anything.
Uh, considering that ircfs is for Inferno (via Limbo), having a Limbo
compiler to native Plan9 would be a potential solution, assuming the run
time could be kept the same.
de top-posted
Inline
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:52 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.netwrote:
Well, actually, I was thinking of something along the lines of Lisaac:
dynamic modules are statically compiled ala object files, the run
time
handles issues between Plan9 Inferno. Sys-load the like would
So it did on Windows + Mulberry. I know, I know, I'll shut up.
--On Friday, January 16, 2009 8:17 PM -0500 erik quanstrom
quans...@quanstro.net wrote:
On Fri Jan 16 20:16:55 EST 2009, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
due to
Regarding nadict (the rc scripted Acme interface to dict(7)), for
those interested,
I plan to add the remaining Next, Prev, and Nmatch
functionalities as found
in adict.
Of the brief trials I did with this, it seemed to get messy.
Although there is already an ircfs for Inferno, since I don't want
the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
due to GMail's default encoding. now using Unicode
sorry
ak
On Fri Jan 16 20:16:55 EST 2009, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
the subject header in the last message came out to be very ugly
due to GMail's default encoding. now using Unicode
sorry
ak
looked fine on plan 9.
- erik
13 matches
Mail list logo
