On Apr 18, 2024, at 2:48 PM, Shawn Rutledge wrote:
>
> Just another reason to eventually have Rust on Plan 9…
Yeah. Compiles are too damn fast; no time to make masala chai :-)
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink:
On Apr 18, 2024, at 1:41 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
>
> Culturally, there was a feeling that source revision a la RCS, SCCS,
> etc, were unnecessary because the dump filesystem gave you snapshots
> already. Moreover, those were automatic and covered more than one file
> at a time; RCS/SCCS required
Did anyone try to port sccs to plan9?
> On Apr 18, 2024, at 9:11 AM, Paul Lalonde wrote:
>
> The Bell Labs approach to source control was, I'm, weak. It relied on
> snapshots of the tree and out-of-band communication. Don't forget how small
> and tight-knit that development team was, and
On Apr 15, 2024, at 1:50 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
>
> And, if I hear about it being
> “declarative” as a virtue, I point to the 81,000+ lines (and
> growing) of YAML, that I defy any one human to comprehend.
>
> You might find help in culang.org
Not sure how much the Cue language will help
Faster for any command that operates on dir trees such as diff, du, rm, tar.When I first looked at plan9, I was a bit surprised its open *didn’t* workthis way! May be because of this earlier thread on comp.unix.wizardshttps://groups.google.com/g/comp.unix.wizards/c/i8vapj9BAqs/m/FlNUK705I0UJ
To me this sounds very similar to open() given a path relative to your current
working directory.
> On Apr 5, 2024, at 2:22 PM, ron minnich wrote:
>
> not so much what I want, I'm curious about ideas people have about
> implementing it that I would not think of.
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at
