On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 02:39:43PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
>> Well, yes-and-no. The end user (who in the case of many linux desktops
>> and laptops is also the sys admin) may not be aware of how things are
>> struc
ould be.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:00:03PM +0100, David Tweed wrote:
>> I'll just note that, regardless of code quality, etc, there's the
>> question of what the end-user usability goals for an init system
>>
I'll just note that, regardless of code quality, etc, there's the
question of what the end-user usability goals for an init system
should be.
Is it just to bring up the system, or is it to bring up the system
fast enough to use in an "quickbooting" environment (<5s off an SSD)?
I'm very inclined t
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Haller
<201009-suckl...@haller.ws> wrote:
> On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
>> community activity, and my productivity in DWM vs. WMII and finally
>> decided to switch back t
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Hey,
>
> 2011/12/13 Hadrian Węgrzynowski :
>> C is the king and Go is the prince. Go needs to be more stable/mature,
>> then it will be the king.
>
> Maybe I'm biased, but I think the future is all about functional
> programming. C has i
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 08/11/2011, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
>> has this changed? If so, why?
>
> Appreciative, not necessarily enthusiastic. Plan 9 technologies have
> their place, but
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Interesting, those on IRC were very 'for' this idea. Different
> demographics? Oh you silly ML people!
>
> On 4 July 2011 06:51, garbeam wrote:
>> No I totally disagree. Click to focus makes the life uneccessary harder.
>> Doing this just
As my vote, I prefer to keep sloppy focus, at the very least as an
option, (the fact that sloppy focus doesn't seem to work properly on
Windows means I'm forced back to click to focus at work at it's
driving me mad the sheer volume of unnecessary clicking).
Incidentally, I use the mouse a LOT with
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:51 AM, David Tweed wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Nicolai Waniek wrote:
>> On 06/17/2011 10:37 AM, markus schnalke wrote:
>>> For the same reason we want Unix's manifold toolchain and for the same
>>> reason we want severa
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> On 06/17/2011 10:37 AM, markus schnalke wrote:
>> For the same reason we want Unix's manifold toolchain and for the same
>> reason we want several programming languages: Because ``One fits all''
>> is an illusion.
>
>
> Then try to figure ou
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:15 AM, David Tweed wrote:
>> I'm going to assume that what you mean by "The editor doesn't need to
>> do this." is "the computer user doesn't benefit from having undo i
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Peter John Hartman
wrote:
>> > A simple editor probably shouldn't have any more keybindings than, say,
>> > surf; in fact one or two less: page up/down, up/right/left/down, and find.
>> > One doesn't need modes for that. If you want to do something wacked out to
>
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Peter John Hartman
wrote:
> A simple editor probably shouldn't have any more keybindings than, say,
> surf; in fact one or two less: page up/down, up/right/left/down, and find.
> One doesn't need modes for that. If you want to do something wacked out to
> your fil
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 1:38 AM, Bjartur Thorlacius
wrote:
> On 6/11/11, Peter John Hartman wrote:
>> Why not just utilize dwm's tile mode and have each link open in a new
>> window?
> Presumably so you don't have to close a window after every article you
> examine, and resize the search results
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Guilherme Lino wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 7:25 PM, David Tweed wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Guilherme Lino
>> wrote:
>> > i would recomend a cheap phone, that make calls and sends smSs..
>> >
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Guilherme Lino wrote:
> i would recomend a cheap phone, that make calls and sends smSs..
>
> whene you dont have your pc, read a book.. i think thats the most suckless
> way
A "smart phone" makes sense in certain circumstances. I have an old
mobile phone which just
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> fwiw, I agree. TermKit appears to be a very glossy turd, but there are
> certainly outstanding issues in our terminals, which is why in Plan 9
> they tried to fix them by pairing a plaintext-only Rio term with
> graphical windows which a
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Nick wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:23:39AM +0200, hiro wrote:
>> https://github.com/unconed/TermKit
>>
>> no comment, only sorry.
>
> indeed. i read about it yesterday. makes me want to vomit.
>
>
Certainly the general implementation, the language and the
ar
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis
wrote:
>
> On 25 Apr 2011, at 11:03 am, David Tweed wrote:
>>
>> (As
>> background, I currenlty use a hacked aterm which changes the
>> background colour according to the cwd.
>
> Sounds like you want to ha
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Jan wrote:
>> It is also worth considering whether to handle this via X Resources (the
>> ~/.Xdefaults file) instead of command line options - since a terminal is
>> not normally something you are going to start by invoking directly, but
>> rather through a shortc
Hi,
I'm considering experimenting with st, but I'm incredibly habituated
to having my terminal windows all with slightly different coloured
backgrounds (so I can "semi-subconsciously" keep track of where the
ones in various directories are). The obvious minimal change would be
to convert DefaultBG
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Peter John Hartman
wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 06:21:54PM +0000, David Tweed wrote:
>> it. However, my experience is that linux is not particuarly snappy
>> booting from a hibernate image, partly because there's so many
>> programs
Hi, one of those general suckless software questions:
I'm in a position where I'll be both commuting a lot and needing to
write a lot of text (review coments) over the coming months. I've got
a "spare" old but very small, low weight notebook PC I plan to try and
use. The only requirements I have a
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Paolo wrote:
>>> Why program in C++ when you can do it in C, making the program simpler and
>>> better?
> When you can't make the program simpler and better, or you need to do it
> faster
> than you do in C, just write C++ or whatever.
>
> This is just the place
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Paolo wrote:
> Why program in C++ when you can do it in C, making the program simpler and
> better?
One of my maxims is that "everyone mistakenly thinks that the kind of
programs that they write are the kind of programs everyone writes".
There are some domains in
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Joel Davila <6336...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 September 2010 15:12, Nikhilesh S wrote:
>>
>> What kind of music do you listen to? Your favourite artists, genres,
>> etc.?
>
> Interesting.
>
> Suckless music may be classics as Beethoven, Brahms,Chopin, Ravel,
> Tch
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:20 PM, Joseph Xu wrote:
> On 8/22/2010 12:47 PM, David J Patrick wrote:
>>
>> On 10-08-22 12:37 PM, Alexander Teinum wrote:
>>>
>>> What doesn’t work well for me, is that I cannot easily extend
>>> Markdown. The design that I propose is simpler and more strict. All
>>> ta
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Martin Kopta wrote:
> I wrote my bachelor thesis using LaTeX and now I am going to write my
> master thesis. I would rather avoid TeX and everything TeX based this time.
Are you planning on writing any papers (effectively, do you plan to
become an academic)? If
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> i experimented with various types of genericity for algorithms
> here is one approach:
> implement the algorithm in the simplest way for the most useful types
> etc. then when you need it for a specific task then copy the code and
> apply app
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:09 AM, Alex Hutton wrote:
> An idea I had the other day, and this is for dealing with data
> compartmentation in games, was to write a game in C and use sqlite for
> all the data. I've never used sqlite so I don't know how the
> performance would go, but it seems like a g
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 9 August 2010 04:54, David Tweed wrote:
>> The one thing that leaps out at me is that there's no checksumming of
>> either the individual files or the whole the archive file performed,
>> so if you give it a
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I've written a tiny archiver, which I've called "wrap" for lack of a
> better name. It is 120 lines of C, and yields far smaller archives
> than tar while overcoming the various crippling limitations of ar. It
> does, however, only store f
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:01 PM, David Tweed wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:22 PM, John Yates wrote:
>> performance though. An instruction reference claims that it's latency
> is 50 instructions on an Atom, which is why I try and avoid
> unnecessary divisions.)
Oops:
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:22 PM, John Yates wrote:
> Here are two useful references:
>
> http://bretm.home.comcast.net/hash/
> http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/
>
> RE computation cost: Generalized integer multiplication and integer
> division both used to be expensive. On modern processors a
>
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 5:01 AM, David Tweed wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Jacob Todd wrote:
> It's also worth remembering that K & R was written at a time many
> decades ago when performance aspects of computer architecture were a
> lot, lot simpler. Apparently
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Jacob Todd wrote:
> In K&R, chapter 6, section 6, there is a funtion called hash that hashes a
> string, which will be stored in a linked list. The function in question is on
> page 144, but here it is for those of you who don't have K&R handy.
>
> /* hash:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:32 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:27 AM, David Tweed wrote:
>> "obviously safe machine code"
>
> hahahahahah
Would you care to elaborate on this? The compilation problem is
asymmetric: there's going to be lots of c
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Will Light wrote:
> yeah, I'm aware that the stuff exists. just earlier today I was doing
> quite a bit of fiddling around with the current version of audiotool
> (http://www.audiotool.com/), and it's pretty cool. the potential is
> definitely there, but the poin
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Will Light wrote:
> but the notion of a browser-based terminal
> for a local machine just seems ridiculous...and that's a mild example!
> a browser-based music sequencer or video editor, for example, is so
> far off that it's just impractical.
Just to provide so
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Will Light wrote:
> i only take issue with the notion
> that web-based applications will somehow "replace" desktop apps
> entirely.
>
> for some use cases, sure...i mean, if somebody only uses facebook and
> gmail on their netbook, then yeah, why the hell do they
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Matthew Bauer wrote:
> I wish modern filesystems would allow some way of identifying a file type
> besides in the filename. It seems like that would make things more straight
> forward.
The other issue is an providing a very-easy-to-type equivalent of
globbing on
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 14 June 2010 00:16, David Tweed wrote:
>> One of the issues to consider is that what computers are used for
>> changes with time, and decisions that one may classify as "the
>> suckless way of doing things
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Martin Kopta wrote:
> Some philosophical questions..
>
> What does it mean for an operating system to be suckless?
> What features should (or should not) an OS have in order to be suckless?
> Are there suckless or close-to-be-suckless operating systems out there?
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Kris Maglione wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:53:27PM +0200, pancake wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2010, at 9:27 AM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> On 12 June 2010 08:00, Kris Maglione wrote:
>>> Except it can actually fetch as much data as is addressable in mem
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 01:27:07PM +0200, Mate Nagy wrote:
>> > Using the vim splits may be cheating, but it sure is convenient.
>> sorry for self-reply: I thought that maybe for maximum punishment, the
>> fibonacci layout could support nm
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Charlie Kester wrote:
> On Mon 05 Apr 2010 at 08:29:24 PDT Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 5 April 2010 15:13, Uriel wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, modern browsers parse HTML much faster than XHTML (yes, I
>>> was fooled by the XML scam once too, and it was not until r
On 2/14/10, Kris Maglione wrote:
> 1) We've been using Mercurial since long before the advent of git.
As a purely factual matter, this can't be correct as Matt Mackall
started work on Mercurial after reading Linus Torvalds announce he'd
got the very initial bare-bones of git working. (It all bega
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:15 AM, Noah Birnel wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 04:49:52PM +0100, sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
>
>>... a mobile phone with integrated camera,
>> touch screen, 'apps' for learning languages, etc. is as much suckless as an
>> axe with a door bell, toilet paper and nucle
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Uriel wrote:
> Why the fucking hell should the fucking build tool know shit about the
> OS it is running on?!?!?!
>
> If you need to do OS guessing, that is a clear sign that you are doing
> things *wrong* 99% of the time.
[In what follows by "OS" I mean kernel pl
Thanks to everyone for all the help.
I'm looking more at the development process than the distribution
process which means different issues are most important for me. The
big issue I'm looking at is that I've got lots of programs which can
be visualised as having "conventional" dependencies with t
Hi,
I'm wondering if anyone has had particularly good experiences with any
meta-build system (cmake, etc) in the following circumstances:
I will have a large codebase which consists of some generic files and
some processor specific files. (I'm not worried about OS environent
stuff like "has vsnpr
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Jukka Ruohonen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 02:57:24PM +0000, David Tweed wrote:
>> I was pointing out more how the simple-minded software metrics would
>> condemn you to around about the level of performance acheived by the
>> reference L
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Jukka Ruohonen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 01:53:47PM +0000, David Tweed wrote:
>> FWIW, my understanding is that the LAPACK library must have an API
>> which conforms with a reference Fortran implementation, but there are
>> various ve
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Jukka Ruohonen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 02:23:35PM -0600, A.J. Gardner wrote:
>> Anyone know of any suckless math software out there in the tubes?
>
> As for algebra, the king of the hill is without doubt LAPACK. But since
> Fortran is nowadays seldom used,
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Kris Maglione wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 02:23:35PM -0600, A.J. Gardner wrote:
>>
>> I'm interested in math and CASs, but my opinions on available software
>> are ill-formed and mostly ignorant. Does anyone else here have an
>> interest in this topic, broadl
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:56 PM, QUINTIN
Guillaume wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Do you guys know a (working) typesetting system other than latex ?
> And a good soft to make presentations ?
A key point is: do you need to typeset complicated mathematical
expressions? I'm not aware of anything that has such good
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 3:43 AM, David Tweed wrote:
[snipped]
> No matter how hard you try, I'm not going to turn this into a pissing
> match. Just keep in mind you're not the only one in the world -- or
> even on this
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:49 AM, David Tweed wrote:
>> what would be most effective in tracking
>> down the inevitable problems when there's a bug in the user input
>> and/or mismatched input, particularly if it
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:27 AM, Maurício wrote:
> I've been thinking on how to implement such tool. Since I'm
> not a really good developer, I thought about asking people for
> sugestions. If you had such "shell yacc", how would you like it
> to be or behave? Would BNF be okay, or would you expect
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 2009/7/24 Leandro Chescotta :
>> yeah, im waiting to see with which window manager google develop for their
>> google chrome operating system... i think is that or android :P then...
>
> Afaik it'll be a new window system, so it's VERY intere
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
> David Tweed dixit (2009-07-07, 16:58):
>> system, the "full" display-postscript compositing engine behind "full"
>> GNUstep and all those other "new" windowing systems that never
>> act
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> a) on top of existing ones
>>
>> b) existing ones on top
>>
>> I tend to a) atm just because it would make porting to other platforms
>> so much simpler.
>
> There is no point to running a
62 matches
Mail list logo
