Hiho,
On 20 Jun 2010, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 01:05:49PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
There is appropriate in that we can build a blog in 200 LOC.
There is appropriate in that we can write a POSIX-compatible OS in one
(somewhat long) line of APL that nobody will
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:32:33AM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
If anyone is interested, let me know; I'll just import it (and all
necessary dependencies). Otherwise, I'll remove this stuff from my
local tree in a few days.
Some people asked me to just post the necessary ports here.
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:26:33AM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:32:33AM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
If anyone is interested, let me know; I'll just import it (and all
necessary dependencies). Otherwise, I'll remove this stuff from my
local tree in a few
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 08:36:00AM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
Anyone? We've 58 ports depending on ghc in the tree, I've 40
additional uncommitted ports in my local tree and I really want to
get rid of some of them. Either by importing or by deleting.
I have a Haskell book on my
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Then there is no need to learn another language and you can continue on
lisping ;-)
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 02:48:31PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 08:36:00AM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
Anyone? We've 58 ports depending on
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:57:29AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Guess what WM I'm using on my non-{i386,amd64} machines ;-)
Then there is no need to learn another language and you can continue on
lisping ;-)
And now let's start a flame war about weak vs.
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:57:29AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Guess what WM I'm using on my non-{i386,amd64} machines ;-)
Then there is no need to learn another language and you can
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:57:29AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Guess what WM I'm using on my non-{i386,amd64} machines
On 2010-06-20, Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote:
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Then there is no need to learn another language and you can continue on
lisping ;-)
You can't really compare scrotwm to xmonad. For starters xmonad is
actually a high level library to write window
Tell me again how awesome xmonad works on arm.
On Jun 20, 2010, at 10:10 AM, Jona Joachim j...@hcl-club.lu wrote:
On 2010-06-20, Marco Peereboom sl...@peereboom.us wrote:
You guys should just use scrotwm ;-)
Then there is no need to learn another language and you can
continue on
lisping
On Jun 20, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Kenneth R Westerback kwesterb...@rogers.com
wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:57:29AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
You guys
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:24:42AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
Tell me again how awesome xmonad works on arm.
It actually does but well, not on OpenBSD for the moment.
But that's a different problem, it's just that the developers of the
main Haskell compiler happen to be on crack.
--
Worse
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 05:35:44PM +0200, Jona Joachim wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:24:42AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
Tell me again how awesome xmonad works on arm.
It actually does but well, not on OpenBSD for the moment.
But that's a different problem, it's just that the
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
And now let's start a flame war about weak vs. strong typing, and
a second one about lazy (non-strict) vs. strict evaluation.
I'll play :-)
C has the right semantics for operating system code.
Noone said that something
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 10:23:26AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Jun 20, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Kenneth R Westerback
kwesterb...@rogers.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun
On 2010-06-20, Matthias Kilian k...@outback.escape.de wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 09:06:14AM -0500, Marco Peereboom wrote:
And now let's start a flame war about weak vs. strong typing, and
a second one about lazy (non-strict) vs. strict evaluation.
I'll play :-)
C has the right
For operating system code, yes. But for some stuff -- I mean
real-world stuff like web applications -- languages like haskell
or even lisp are probably more appropriate than C (and Haskell,
Lisp and C are more appropriate than Java or PHP).
Obviously. That's why so many real-world web sites
On 2010-06-20, Ian Darwin i...@darwinsys.com wrote:
For operating system code, yes. But for some stuff -- I mean
real-world stuff like web applications -- languages like haskell
or even lisp are probably more appropriate than C (and Haskell,
Lisp and C are more appropriate than Java or PHP).
Everybody uses it so it must be good, Nobody uses it so it must be
bad, these are very weak arguments, there is no such causality.
I didn't say it was good (and I'm no fan of PHP!), but the notion
of appropriate has many shades of meaning which the original post
on appropriate did not cover.
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:32:53PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
Obviously. That's why so many real-world web sites are written
in Lisp, and so few are written in Java and PHP...
Oh sure.
Slow or insecure. Choose two.
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:32:53PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
For operating system code, yes. But for some stuff -- I mean
real-world stuff like web applications -- languages like haskell
or even lisp are probably more appropriate than C (and Haskell,
Lisp and C are more appropriate than
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 01:05:49PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
Everybody uses it so it must be good, Nobody uses it so it must be
bad, these are very weak arguments, there is no such causality.
I didn't say it was good (and I'm no fan of PHP!), but the notion
of appropriate has many shades of
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:22:37PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 01:05:49PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
Everybody uses it so it must be good, Nobody uses it so it must be
bad, these are very weak arguments, there is no such causality.
I didn't say it was good (and
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:32:53PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
For operating system code, yes. But for some stuff -- I mean
real-world stuff like web applications -- languages like haskell
or even lisp are probably more appropriate than C (and Haskell,
Lisp and C are more appropriate than
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 07:48:55PM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:32:53PM -0400, Ian Darwin wrote:
For operating system code, yes. But for some stuff -- I mean
real-world stuff like web applications -- languages like haskell
or even lisp are probably more
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:05:55PM +0200, Matthias Kilian wrote:
If anyone is interested, let me know; I'll just import it (and all
necessary dependencies). Otherwise, I'll remove this stuff from my
local tree in a few days.
Some people asked me to just post the necessary ports here. Note:
all
26 matches
Mail list logo
