Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PowerNex: A Kernel Written In The D Programming Language

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    FYI: Master5000's favourite system is Windows, and he wants stuff to be written in languages that "are tried and tested and not in development", which means probably COBOL.
    Oh well, I went over Master5000's posts and seems you are correct.. Had not expected it.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Then another forum user complaining over NIH (and that they should help out with Linux instead) felt just incredibly funny in that context..
    FYI: Master5000's favourite system is Windows, and he wants stuff to be written in languages that "are tried and tested and not in development", which means probably COBOL.

    Leave a comment:


  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    can you please explain why linux-bigots should say it is progress? Anything not moving Linux forward is not progress for linux-bigots.

    Also, it's licensed with MPL (more permissive license), not GPL, so that's blasphemy for linux-bigots.

    You manage to bew even more troll fail than him. Slow clap.
    I just recalled how forum user SystemCrasher keeps bashing on literally everything non-Linux and part of his texts has been that Linux's gradual divergence from POSIX and general "Not Invented Here" syndrome/attitude is all well and good - progress over stale and ancient Unix..

    Then another forum user complaining over NIH (and that they should help out with Linux instead) felt just incredibly funny in that context..
    Last edited by aht0; 18 July 2016, 11:44 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by aht0 View Post
    Oh but it's all progress.. just read some random Linux-bigot
    Probably interesting personal challenge for a coder, much more interesting than contributing to projects of others..
    can you please explain why linux-bigots should say it is progress? Anything not moving Linux forward is not progress for linux-bigots.

    Also, it's licensed with MPL (more permissive license), not GPL, so that's blasphemy for linux-bigots.

    You manage to bew even more troll fail than him. Slow clap.

    Leave a comment:


  • aht0
    replied
    Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
    Great! Another fucking kernel. That will go after Hurd that is a turd. Great work guys! Don't help with what already works! Be original! Reinvent the PC! Fuck Intel! Make your own chips!
    Oh but it's all progress.. just read some random Linux-bigot

    Probably interesting personal challenge for a coder, much more interesting than contributing to projects of others..
    Last edited by aht0; 18 July 2016, 09:26 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • nils_
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael_S View Post
    But to be fair, the Go team has been working very hard to optimize their garbage collector and they've achieved performance on par with Java.
    On par with Java really isn't much of an accomplishment, the garbage collector(s) in Java is one of the major pain points now since it doesn't scale to todays system size. But I think go made huge strides in version 1.5, very much so that GC won't really be an issue for applications.

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
    But for whatever reason, it never really caught on - and over time, it's lost what advantage it had.
    I seem to remember it having issues similar to what kept Ada from catching on. (Back in the days when it mattered, the official DMD compiler wasn't released under suitably open terms and nobody else like Microsoft offered an acceptable alternative, so people chose what they'd already paid for or had free access to (C++) instead, just like in the C vs. Ada competition.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Delgarde
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael_S View Post
    On the highly popular C++ vs D debate, D2.0 came out in in 2007 and most of the language features that currently exist were in place in 2010, comfortably before C++11 and C++14. The comparison between D and C++17 with all of the latest C++ language features and recommended coding practices is tough. I still maintain that D is a better language, but C++11 and newer is good enough that when you weigh in all of the existing C++ code you can use with it, D is a hard sell.
    Yeah, this is the main problem with D. When it first appeared, it was an interesting option, and a reasonably attractive one compared to C/C++ of the time... I remember looking at it many years ago. But for whatever reason, it never really caught on - and over time, it's lost what advantage it had.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
    D. Always wondered why they called it that. Now I know. Because D comes from Dead. D is Dead. Only moronic hipsters would use it. Especially to write an OS.
    Another great example of useless troll post. Completely ignoring the whole thread and the subject at large, making not-even-funny name jokes, and calling names people for the sake of it.

    9.5/10, near perfect.

    Leave a comment:


  • unixfan2001
    replied
    Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
    D. Always wondered why they called it that. Now I know. Because D comes from Dead. D is Dead. Only moronic hipsters would use it. Especially to write an OS.
    In that case, C++ ought to be renamed to "Z" for zombie.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X