[fonc] greetings: new here...

well, I was referred here by someone I know, and it seems like it it may be possible to have interesting conversations... granted, I am not so fammiliar at present with either this group or what everyone here is trying to accomplish. I was given a little doubt though by the initial descripti

Re: [fonc]( picoVerse-:( LambdaLisp Assembler needs testing ) )

I don't know what the point of this is, but oh well... (personally, the idea seems a little silly, and the context seems to not make a whole lot of sense, but oh well...). but, in any case, one can easily enough track function calls in a manner similar to a profiler, where each time a function

Re: [fonc]( picoVerse-:( LambdaLisp Assembler needs testing ) )

or: one could produce the code to be run as specialized zip files, filled with some-odd Java class files, and any data files; the zip file is recieved, unpacked into a local directory, then executed with a specialized/modified Java VM (mostly modified to keep track of what things are run); any c

Re: [fonc]( picoVerse-:( LambdaLisp Assembler needs testing ) )

- Original Message - From: "Michael FIG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 2:32 PM Subject: Re: [fonc]( picoVerse-:( LambdaLisp Assembler needs testing ) ) "Kjell Godo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Currency ? ! -- Now let's not

Re: [fonc] greetings: new here...

- Original Message - From: "John Leuner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 4:36 PM Subject: Re: [fonc] greetings: new here... more so, not only is this codebase written in C, but it also compiles C, and links the newly compliled

[fonc] maybe of interest: VM directions...

dunno if this is the kind of thing that is on-topic/of-interest here, I will see... figured I would include it (this being from an email to someone I know): --- did start a little bit implementing some of the things I mentioned a few days ago (restructuring the MI mechanism, making in

[fonc] ok, thoughts: VM design...

well, in writing this I will at least try to organize my thoughts, and speak more of "general ideas" than "implementation details" (granted, I am far more inclined towards the latter than the former). I will allow that probably many of those here will strongly disagree with all I have to say,

Re: [fonc] x86_64...

- Original Message - From: "John Leuner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:44 AM Subject: Re: [fonc] x86_64... On Thu, 2008-12-04 at 18:04 +0100, Michael Haupt wrote: Hi, today I migrated to a new machine at work, a nice and

Re: [fonc] x86_64...

- Original Message - From: "Aaron Gray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 2:53 AM Subject: Re: [fonc] x86_64... apparently both this, and my effort, had independently discovered the idea of having 2 different this/self values (

Re: [fonc] ok, thoughts: VM design...

yeah. I didn't much go into the low-level details... but, yeah, I personally believe there is more merit in stack-based VMs than register based ones, for the primary reasons: it is much easier for compilers to target stack-based VMs; a register-based VM will not offer much practical advantage ov

[fonc] ok: addon, stacks and registers...

well, my last comment may have been a little harsh on register VMs. so, on each side there are costs and gains. for this, I will focus on interpreters, since this is the main area where the debate is relevant. stack VM, pros: typically very simple to target; instruction stream is usually fair

[fonc] misc: request opinions...

for the people here in this group: what are your opinions of .NET? what of open-source alternatives, such as Mono and Portable.NET / dotGNU? what of the Java VM? what about LLVM and like? or, maybe, the AVM2 / Tamarin? .. what of the relative merits and detractors between them? what particular

Re: [fonc] Other interesting projects?

this reminds me of a number of years ago... I had my own custom Scheme implementation, but this effort imploded due to a number of factors (in large part, the code had become unworkable and unmaintainable...). but, hell, this was my first non-trivial forray into interpreter and compiler technol

Re: [fonc] Fonc on Mac Snow Leopard?

yep. seems an interesting way to do things, as then the emphasis can be kept on the design rather than on the implementation. in general, I agree. we don't need "one true app X" or "one true implementation Y". there are already enough of these... it is better then if technology can be kept ope

Re: [fonc] Program representation

(sorry if similar is already in use...). like having documentation in a hypertext form, and having code contain links into the docs, and from the docs back into the code?... markup could be done similar to a wiki, and the editor can interpret comments containing wiki-links as linking elsewhere

Re: [fonc] Program representation

- Original Message - From: John Nilsson To: Fundamentals of New Computing Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 3:33 PM Subject: Re: [fonc] Program representation On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:29 PM, BGB wrote: like having documentation in a hypertext form, and having code

Re: [fonc] Fonc on Mac Snow Leopard?

I disagree... personally, I often find it far more useful, not to add meaning to data, but rather to strip meaning and intention from the data. so, content is stripped of nearly all meaning, becomming essentially raw data to be interpreted however is as-needed for a given task. for example, c

Re: Object Ontology... Was: [fonc] Fonc on Mac Snow Leopard?

- Original Message - From: Julian Leviston To: Fundamentals of New Computing Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 10:27 PM Subject: Object Ontology... Was: [fonc] Fonc on Mac Snow Leopard? Salut, Comme illustration, j'ai decidé a repondre en français... Si tu n'as pas une co

Re: [fonc] Reverse OMeta and Emulation

can't say exactly... but, before I wrote an interpreter for x86 (basically, like an emulator, but it doesn't bother with faking the entire system). but, in this case, I had basically used some logic from an assembler of mine to essentially "disassemble" the machine code into a higher-level v

Re: [fonc] Reverse OMeta and Emulation

my effort had not gone nearly so high "up" the abstraction tree, but instead operated in a space more like an abstracted x86 machine. moving to a much higher level model, such as that of GCC IR or LLVM IR, would likely be difficult to pull off effectively starting from "real" machine code, suc

Re: [fonc] goals

(pardon the top-post) granted, I probably don't speak for others here, who may have differing opinions, I just speak for myself... I am not formally involved with the project in question here, but work on some of my own stuff in a similar domain (VM and compiler technology). well, that is

Re: [fonc] goals

- Original Message - From: John Zabroski To: Fundamentals of New Computing Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 8:44 AM Subject: Re: [fonc] goals I personally do not believe technology actually improves lives. Usually, it is the opposite. Technology creates instant gratificati

Re: [fonc] goals

- Original Message - From: "Julian Leviston" To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 9:11 AM Subject: Re: [fonc] goals On 09/07/2010, at 1:44 AM, John Zabroski wrote: I personally do not believe technology actually improves lives. Usually, it is the oppo

Re: [fonc] goals

11 PM, chris mills wrote: On 8 July 2010 17:40, BGB wrote: however, morals, ... would seem to be degraded in industrialized nations (note the widespread prevelance of promiscuity, gays, gangs and violence, ...), so this may be a cost associated with industrialization (although there is n

Re: [fonc] goals

(pardon this thread's continued existence...). well, each generation has to have come from somewhere... but, yeah (prior to the big ethics issue), the general point I tried to make is that it is generally much more a matter of pragmatics (what people can get from technology or use it to accom

Re: [fonc] goals

much agreed. pardon my likely inelegant extension: seemingly, nearly any problem can be abstracted, and a set of more elegant solutions can be devised to long-standing problems. for example, to abstract over the HW, there was the CPU instruction set; to abstract over the instruction set, there

Re: [fonc] goals

yeah. I guess a lot depends on other factors though. for example, is a lot of this added code because: the programmer has little idea what he was doing, and so just wildly copy-pasted everywhere and made a big mess?... has lots of code which is actually beneficial, such as doing error checking

Re: [fonc] goals

yeah. at least in my experience, prototype systems tend to also lead to much simpler implementations than class/instance systems as well (I have implemented both types of system). originally, and for a fairly long time, I had been using prototype systems (with a design essentially based on t

Re: [fonc] goals

yes. there is much emphasis on people understanding an entire system, whereas often a programmer does not need to have such comprehensive understanding. in a large codebase, for example, parts of the project will come into view as one works on them, and when one moves elsewhere they may pass aw

Re: [fonc] goals

- Original Message - From: "K. K. Subramaniam" To: Cc: "BGB" Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 9:47 PM Subject: Re: [fonc] goals On Wednesday 14 Jul 2010 9:25:11 am BGB wrote: there is much emphasis on people understanding an entire system, whereas often a program

Re: [fonc] automation

I think it is mostly because the internet is composed of well-defined / agreed-upon protocols and data formats. each part is largely decoupled from the others. it sends and accepts data, and it responds to whatever is happening. often, the protocols are very much layered, with most layers not c

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for thedynamic semantic web

- Original Message - From: "Waldemar Kornewald" To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for thedynamic semantic web On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 8:28 PM, John Zabroski wrote: Why a

Re: [fonc] Spec-Driven & Self-Testing Code

- Original Message - From: "Julian Leviston" To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2010 10:21 AM Subject: [fonc] Spec-Driven & Self-Testing Code <-- Does anyone know about a language (possibly something in smalltalk) that involves spec-driven development? A

Re: [fonc] Spec-Driven & Self-Testing Code

- Original Message - From: "Julian Leviston" To: "Fundamentals of New Computing" Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [fonc] Spec-Driven & Self-Testing Code On 11/10/2010, at 12:24 PM, BGB wrote: <-- Does anyone know about a lang

Re: [fonc] On inventing the computing microscope/telescope for thedynamic semantic web

another idle thought: in many traditional OO languages, classes/objects necessarily 'contain' the methods (in terms of both their definition syntax and conceptualization). what about being able to define operations "over" a class if need-be (sort of like operator overloading, but with methods)

Fwd: Re: [fonc] Software and Motivation

Original Message Subject:Re: [fonc] Software and Motivation Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 04:01:22 -0700 From: BGB To: Fundamentals of New Computing CC: David Harris On 2/19/2011 1:06 AM, David Harris wrote: Here is a very interesting 'cartoon' o

Re: [fonc] Beats

On 5/16/2011 9:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: Dear Josh, Thanks for posting this! Thought you guys would get a kick out of this YAML->WAV sequencer written in Ruby: https://github.com/jstrait/beats I think this is pretty cool. (It puts us well on the way to archiving the entire output of Kraft

Re: [fonc] Parsimony (was: Alto-2?)

On 5/27/2011 4:29 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote: snip... coming out of lurk mode for the moment (well, also no-one has really been talking to me recently either...) ["Wireworld Computer"] It is very cute. The circuit style of the Wireworld might actually be the way of the future if quantum

Re: [fonc] Static typing and/vs. boot strap-able, small kernel, comprehensible, user modifiable systems

On 6/3/2011 8:37 PM, Scott McLoughlin wrote: For many, many moons, I've examined the early Smalltalk books, small bootstrap Forth systems, Lisp based systems (implementing a large subset of CL decades ago) and the like. In recent years, I've taken an interest in type systems and typed functional

Re: [fonc] languages

On 6/5/2011 4:48 PM, Steve Wart wrote: I like both Smalltalk and APL. I disagree with the assumption that operator precedence is a big hurdle for people learning Smalltalk. At least I find mathematical expressions in Smalltalk to be clearer than their counterparts in Lisp. I like the following ex

Re: Terseness, precedence, deprogramming (was Re: [fonc] languages)

On 6/5/2011 7:06 PM, David Leibs wrote: I love APL! Learning APL is really all about learning the idioms and how to apply them. This takes quite a lot of training time. Doing this kind of training will change the way you think. Alan Perlis quote: "A language that doesn't affect the way yo

Re: [fonc] languages

On 6/5/2011 11:03 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:35 PM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: I would personally like to see an IDE which was: more-or-less language neutral, to what extent this was practical (more like traditional standalone editors)

Re: [fonc] Re: Electrical Actors?

On 6/6/2011 12:18 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote: Below:) On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:19 PM, "C. Scott Ananian" wrote: I explored this idea a bit once upon a time in the context of Java: http://cscott.net/Publications/design.pdf The bibliography cites most of the related work I know about. --scott

Re: [fonc] languages

s=str; while(*t++=*s++); funny how this works sometimes... or such... On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:55 PM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 6/5/2011 11:03 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:35 PM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: I would p

Re: [fonc] languages

On 6/6/2011 10:29 AM, K. K. Subramaniam wrote: Alan, Thanks for the correction. IAL was one of the proposed names for the ALGOL, wasn't it? The reason why this name popped up from my grad days was because something as complicated as designing a new programming language was considered a fun thin

Re: [fonc] Electrical Actors?

On 6/6/2011 11:53 AM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote: Casey, Has anyone taken the actor model down to the metal? I studied this in detail back in 1990 and had several references. These are physically hard for me to reach right now and probably are not easy to find on the web. Though not an actor m

Re: [fonc] languages

On 6/6/2011 6:05 PM, David Barbour wrote: On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Julian Leviston > wrote: Is a language I program in necessarily limiting in its expressibility? Yes. All communication architectures are necessarily limiting in their expressiveness (

Re: [fonc] Issues with understanding obj.c

On 6/8/2011 12:13 PM, Josh Gargus wrote: On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Kevin Jones wrote: Comments and explanations inline below. --- On *Wed, 6/8/11, Julian Leviston />/* wrote: Also, what is this? struct vtable *_vt[0]; Is that creating a pointer

Re: [fonc] Issues with understanding obj.c

On 6/8/2011 9:20 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: Tanks everyone for answering on this so much... Comment/Question below, On 09/06/2011, at 4:56 AM, Kevin Jones wrote: I really don't understand what this means: typedef struct object *(*method_t)(struct object *receiver, ...); method_t is a pointe

Re: [fonc] Issues with understanding obj.c

On 6/8/2011 10:03 PM, Josh Gargus wrote: Looks like you beat me to the punch on my last email... On Jun 8, 2011, at 9:39 PM, BGB wrote: apparently, some people don't like using typedef for some reason I am not entirely sure of... According to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org

Re: [fonc] Issues with understanding obj.c

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, ...)

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

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 applicati

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/9/2011 10:25 AM, Josh Gargus wrote: 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

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

e computers, as time sharing was starting to? But not in dozens. Why not thousands of them, each simulating a useful structure?' Toby On 9 June 2011 10:25, Josh Gargus wrote: 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

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

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 re

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/10/2011 7:33 AM, Chris Warburton wrote: On Thu, 2011-06-09 at 11:42 -0700, BGB wrote: interesting... less painfully slow than I would have expected from the description... I wasn't thinking exactly like "run an emulator, run OS in emulator", but more like, a browser plug

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/10/2011 10:24 AM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Jun 9, 2011, at 5:58 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: 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

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/10/2011 12:17 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 2:45 PM, BGB wrote: just had an idle thought of a JVM starting up as a prebuilt "image" (say, methods are pre-JIT'ed and pre-linked, static fields are pre-initialized, ...). unless of course, they already sta

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/10/2011 12:45 PM, Max OrHai wrote: On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:09 AM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: < snip ... > there is not a whole lot that seems in common between a browser and an OS. yes, there is Chrome OS, but I sort of suspect this will

history (Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

(sorry, I don't know if this belongs on-list or not...). On 6/10/2011 1:44 PM, Max OrHai wrote: Well, INTP here, so at least we have /some/ common ground. yeah... I think I generally get along well enough with most people, in general... well, except "Q's", which are basically people who a

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/10/2011 5:21 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: On Jun 9, 2011, at 02:58 , Julian Leviston wrote: reason that the iPad feels faster than a modern desktop operating system: it was quicker to get to the user interaction point. http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.131.1805 "The resp

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/11/2011 6:59 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 11/06/2011, at 3:40 PM, BGB wrote: this is also partly where dynamic script loading and eval can be nifty... say, one is using an app, and then in the console they type in a command, say: ;load("scripts/myscript.bs"); and can quickl

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/11/2011 6:30 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 1:40 AM, BGB wrote: "The responsiveness of exploratory programming environments (such as the Smalltalk programming environment) allows the programmer to concentrate on the task at hand rather than being distracted by

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote: image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though... dynamic reload could be a "good enough" compromise IMO, if done well... I don't follow this train of thought. Everything ru

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/13/2011 3:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 13/06/2011, at 7:50 PM, BGB wrote: On 6/13/2011 1:33 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 12/06/2011, at 1:00 PM, BGB wrote: image-based systems have their own sets of drawbacks though... dynamic reload could be a "good enough" compromi

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/13/2011 8:39 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima wrote: At Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:16:10 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote: given that most non-Chinese can't read Chinese writing, despite that many of these characters do actually resemble crude line-art drawings of various things and ideas. It is a common linguis

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/13/2011 8:09 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 14/06/2011, at 7:33 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote: Kids may not have the linguistic development out of the way that one needs to do "serious" programming. Adults who don't already code may find themselves short on some of the core concepts that con

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/14/2011 12:14 PM, Michael FIG wrote: Hi, John Nilsson writes: So my fix is to make the separation a hidden thing, which means the program needs to be represented in something that allows such hidden things (and I don't think Unicode control characters is the way to go here). Why not cri

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

On 6/14/2011 2:31 PM, John Nilsson wrote: On both questions the answer is basically that Java was an example. I was looking for a general solution. Something that would work withoug prior assumptions about the languages involved. The problem I was thinking about was how to provide an infrast

Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?

handlers/... related to value-type objects, which can support pass-by-value semantics rather than necessarily follow pass-by-reference, ...). or such... Sent from my phone Den 15 jun 2011 01:08 skrev "BGB" <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>>: > On 6/14/2011 2:31 PM, John Nilsso

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/14/2011 9:50 PM, Dethe Elza wrote: On 2011-06-14, at 9:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: The thing that irritates me about this attitude of "don't consider kids as equal" is that we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic and cognitive de

Re: Waterbear announcement (was Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?))

On 6/15/2011 6:30 AM, Dethe Elza wrote: On 2011-06-15, at 3:22 AM, BGB wrote: and, meanwhile, recent output has been net negative... Nothing wrong with that, we learn to write better, tighter code and get rid of the old cruft. Some of the best code I've seen has been written with the d

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/15/2011 9:06 AM, Dethe Elza wrote: On 2011-06-15, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumarta wrote: If a wiki is the kind of "database" you had in mind, please feel free to make use of: http://vpri.org/fonc_wiki Thanks for setting this up, Ian. When I go to Log in/ create account I don't see any way to

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote: http://vpri.org/fonc_wiki description sounds like it is specific to the FoNC / VPRI projects... Sorry about that. I left the original main page, figuring that people would just start a new page and when some

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote: On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote: http://vpri.org/fonc_wiki description sounds like it is specific to the FoNC / VPRI projects... Sorry about that. I left the original main page, figuring that people would just

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote: On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote: On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote:

Re: History's Forced-Perspective (was Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration)

On 6/17/2011 11:37 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote: On Jun 15, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Ian Piumarta wrote: Invention receives no attention, and innovation (even when incorrectly understood) receives lip service in the press, but no current-day vehicle exists to to nurture it. +360 +360! I love this e

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/16/2011 8:43 AM, Frederick Grose wrote: On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:34 AM, BGB <mailto:cr88...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 6/15/2011 8:04 PM, BGB wrote: On 6/15/2011 3:22 PM, Ian Piumarta wrote: On Jun 15, 2011, at 14:09 , BGB wrote:

Re: [fonc] Consolidation and collaboration

On 6/18/2011 1:05 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote: I'm asking myself how relevant the projects I hack on are in this context. Others probably are too. Of the stuff that didn't disappear into the commercial void, recently it's been mostly Smalltalk for me, and FONC is not about Smalltalk; Smalltalk i

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/19/2011 7:20 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote: On 2011-06-14 Tue, at 09:36 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: The thing that irritates me about this attitude of "don't consider kids as equal" is that we DO consider them as equal in other frames... we expect so much of them in terms of linguistic and cogni

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/19/2011 9:49 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 2:33 PM, BGB wrote: in a sense, the metaphor no longer works, and should likely itself be left to fall into the recycle-bin of history. worse yet is having to read stuff written by people who actually take this metaphor seriously

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/19/2011 11:54 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote: interestingly, I don't believe in getting rid of the file-system, per-se, as technically it works fairly well and is a proven piece of technology. Interestingly, I disagree entirely. Finding things is a

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/19/2011 11:58 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 4:33 PM, BGB wrote: For example, when web programming on a specific web app, I use a web browser, a text editor, a database management program, a command line, and a couple other tools. It'd be nice to be able to "

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/20/2011 1:00 AM, Steve Dekorte wrote: On 2011-06-19 Sun, at 09:33 PM, BGB wrote: .. which mappings are more natural and under which circumstances seems to be the important question and one, AFAICS, that may not well answered by simply replacing words with ideograms and expressions with

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/20/2011 2:19 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 6:33 PM, BGB wrote: I am not certain I follow how this would get rid of file-systems though... I am not aware of any good alternative to the filesystem which is generally better than the filesystem (can effectively manage huge

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote: hmm... S-Expression database?... sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store. or such... I'd like to know if you think there's a difference between a filesystem and a

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/20/2011 9:19 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: Hi... (see below)... On 21/06/2011, at 3:42 AM, BGB wrote: On 6/20/2011 3:22 AM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 20/06/2011, at 8:06 PM, BGB wrote: hmm... S-Expression database?... sort of like a hybrid between a database and a persistent store. or

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/21/2011 11:38 AM, Max OrHai wrote: There are certainly practical differences between "conventional" relational databases and hierarchical filesystems, without having to get into implementation details. I'm sure at least a few people on this list are familiar with the BeOS filesystem, whic

Re: Age and Language (was Re: [fonc] Alternative Web programming models?)

On 6/22/2011 5:08 PM, Steve Wart wrote: Still, databases and file systems are both based on concepts that predate electronic computers. When Windows and Macs came along the document metaphor became prevalent, but in practice this was always just a "user friendly" name for a file. The layers and

Re: [fonc] Richard Gabriel & Guy Steele, "50 in 50" talk

On 6/22/2011 2:45 PM, Steve Dekorte wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nii1n8PYLrc Thoughts? interesting, but wasn't so fond of the music or graphics or skits... a bit much like something from the 70s... also, although mainstream languages aren't necessarily all that creative/concise/...,

Re: [fonc] Richard Gabriel & Guy Steele, "50 in 50" talk

On 6/24/2011 9:07 PM, Julian Leviston wrote: On 24/06/2011, at 11:42 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote: They gave that presentation more than once (I saw it a OOPSLA). Awesome :) Here's a version from JAOO'08, streams fine in Germany: http://blog.jaoo.dk/2008/11/21/art-and-code-obscure-or-beautifu

Re: [fonc] Richard Gabriel & Guy Steele, "50 in 50" talk

On 6/25/2011 3:27 AM, Bob Arning wrote: I concur. It was mildly entertaining at points, but mostly I kept hoping they would speed up the pace while slowing down the camera switching. Since some smart people recommended it, I kept plugging away. I got a bit over half way before bailing. I fo

[fonc] misc: x86 and ARM

well, here is my thing: I mostly develop on x86 (and x86-64), and so most of my code is targeted to this target. recently, I figured I would try to port some of my stuff to ARM, mostly as a matter of personal experience and seeing if I could. I started with my assembler here (it is a major co

Re: [fonc] misc: x86 and ARM

On 7/9/2011 5:07 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. wrote: BGB, or, maybe all my x86 experience blinds me some to the "elegance" of ARM's ISA?... whatever is so great about it, well, I am not seeing it at this level. why then do so many people seem to complain that the x86 ISA is so

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/17/2011 11:31 AM, karl ramberg wrote: Hi Here is a interesting video about programming languages http://skillsmatter.com/podcast/agile-testing/bobs-last-language Karl some of this is why my own BGBScript language has a C-family syntax (well, yes, it is closer to ActionScript, but in a

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/17/2011 2:33 PM, Craig Latta wrote: That talk would have been a whole lot better if he had grounded it with a discussion of how constraints are good for creativity. It's how he should have spent the time where he went on about memorizing Pi for no good reason... if memorizing pie is

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/17/2011 2:46 PM, David Leibs wrote: I couldn't handle his condescending attitude towards goto statements. I might not use them very often but when you need one there is nothing better. generally agreed... it is not for no reason that languages like C# still have them, despite being desig

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/17/2011 3:39 PM, Derek Kulinski wrote: Hello BGB, Sunday, July 17, 2011, 2:51:40 PM, you wrote: for example, if/while/for/... don't mean goto shouldn't exist in a language or should be branded as "evil" as a result, rather they provide better alternatives such that

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/17/2011 5:18 PM, Karl Robillard wrote: Heh... that talk didn't recieve a very warm welcome over at Lambda the Ultimate either. My favorite comment was the idea that AI could advance to the point where the final programming language may end up being English. I guess that means programmers i

Re: [fonc] Last programming language

On 7/18/2011 2:56 AM, Casey Ransberger wrote: Smells like Kool-Aide. I smell bullshit. Dude is selling a book tour or something. Let's just pick the POS we have now and run with it? Seriously? How many times has that gone well? Dude is on a book-tour or something. Let him have it. for most

  1   2   3   4   >