See below...
On 09/06/2011, at 2:59 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver, ...);
method_t is a pointer to a function that returns an object pointer and
takes receiver and additional argument
Thanks
Answering my own question...
On 09/06/2011, at 4:27 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
See below...
On 09/06/2011, at 2:59 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver, ...);
method_t is a pointer to a function
On 6/8/2011 11:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Answering my own question...
On 09/06/2011, at 4:27 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
See below...
On 09/06/2011, at 2:59 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver,
On May 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Hi Cornelius
There are lots of egregiously wrong things in the web design. Perhaps one of
the simplest is that the browser folks have lacked the perspective to see
that the browser is not like an application, but like an OS. i.e. what it
On 6/9/2011 12:56 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On May 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Hi Cornelius
There are lots of egregiously wrong things in the web design. Perhaps
one of the simplest is that the browser folks have lacked the
perspective to see that the browser is not like an
On 09/06/2011, at 5:56 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
However, can we do better than that? I guess the answer depends on which
aspect of the status quo we're trying to improve on (searchability, mashups,
etc). For search, there must be plenty of technologies that can improve on
HTML by
On 09/06/2011, at 7:04 PM, BGB wrote:
actually, possibly a relevant question here, would be why Java applets
largely fell on their face, but Flash largely took off (in all its uses from
YouTube to Punch The Monkey...).
My own opinion of this is the same reason that the iPad feels faster
Some of the implications, anyway. The benefits of the OS-perspective are
clear. Once it hits its stride, there will be no (technical) barriers to
deploying the sorts of systems that we talk about here
(Croquet-Worlds-Frank-OMeta-whatnot). Others will be doing their own cool
things, and
On Jun 9, 2011, at 2:04 AM, BGB wrote:
On 6/9/2011 12:56 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On May 31, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Alan Kay wrote:
Hi Cornelius
There are lots of egregiously wrong things in the web design. Perhaps one
of the simplest is that the browser folks have lacked the perspective
How about _recursive_ VM/JITs *beneath* the level that HTML/JS is implemented.
So the browser that ships only supports this recursive VM.
HTML is an application of this that can be evolved by open source at
internet scale / time. Web pages can point at a specific HTML
implementation or a general
On Jun 9, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Cornelius Toole wrote:
Some of the implications, anyway. The benefits of the OS-perspective are
clear. Once it hits its stride, there will be no (technical) barriers to
deploying the sorts of systems that we talk about here
That all sounds very cool.
However, I don't think that it's feasible to try to ship something like this as
standard in all browsers, if only for political reasons. It would be
impossible to get Mozilla, Google, Apple, and Microsoft to agree on it.
That's what's cool about NaCl. It's minimal
*** AOSD 2012 ***
March 25-30, 2012
Hasso-Plattner-Institut Potsdam, Germany
http://aosd.net/2012/
Call for Papers -- Research Results
Modularity transcending traditional abstraction boundaries is
essential for developing complex modern systems - particularly
software and software-intensive
On Jun 9, 2011, at 11:42 AM, BGB wrote:
OSes on top of this hypervisor.
If it tickles you fancy, then by all means use it to run a sand-boxed Unix.
Undoubtedly someone will; witness the cool hack to run Linux in the browser,
accomplished by writing an x86 emulator in Javascript
On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/9/2011 11:10 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
That all sounds very cool.
However, I don't think that it's feasible to try to ship something like this
as standard in all browsers, if only for political reasons. It would be
impossible to get Mozilla,
On 6/9/2011 12:20 PM, Josh Gargus wrote:
On Jun 9, 2011, at 12:06 PM, BGB wrote:
On 6/9/2011 11:10 AM, Josh Gargus wrote:
That all sounds very cool.
However, I don't think that it's feasible to try to ship something like this as
standard in all browsers, if only for political reasons. It
Josh, All
I'm not sure I understand your last sentence, nor how you suggest we might
mitigate the opacity of non-HTML client technologies. Let's say that you
embed in an HTML page a view into a persistent 3d virtual environment like
OpenQwaq. Can you help me understand how we might expand
On Jun 9, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Josh Gargus j...@schwa.ca wrote:
Conceptually, yes. In practice, no, because the HTML/DOM render-target is
also the lingua franca that makes the Web searchable and mashupable.
So I'd like to first point out that you're making a great point here, so I hope
it
Frank,
Really good to hear that you've taken your first steps. You have great parents
and a promising future. Keep up the good work!
I was really impressed that you've already gotten into HyperCard; I must have
been fully 12 or 13 years old before I noticed it sitting on my own computer. I
You know this isn't usable with the browser I have handy at the moment, but I
can already see it. Really interesting, I can imagine it would look more or
less like this. Thanks for putting me onto this, Ian.
On Jun 9, 2011, at 2:52 PM, Ian Piumarta piuma...@speakeasy.net wrote:
On Jun 9,
20 matches
Mail list logo
