Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Red Hat Is Hiring More LLVM Compiler Engineers

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

  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    but why fork didn't continue as fork? (hint: egcs was forked in the first place because gcc wasn't merging existing forks which wanted to merge. i.e. egcs was forked to reduce number of forks)
    Because the GCC name was more valuable than the EGCS name when Stallman admitted he was wrong, so the best code and the best name were merged into a "best of both worlds" project... as it should be.

    Leave a comment:


  • pal666
    replied
    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
    Because Stallman admitted that he'd made the wrong decision and retired his version of GCC to rebrand EGCS as the new GCC 2.95
    but why fork didn't continue as fork? (hint: egcs was forked in the first place because gcc wasn't merging existing forks which wanted to merge. i.e. egcs was forked to reduce number of forks)
    Last edited by pal666; 14 May 2021, 09:15 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Awesomeness
    replied
    Originally posted by Uncle H.
    lugenpresse
    Picking up Nazi terminology. Says enough where you stand....

    Leave a comment:


  • Awesomeness
    replied
    Originally posted by paulpach View Post
    He was making excuses for his friend Minsky. His argument was basically that Minsky didn't know she was a prostitute. It is a stretch to say he excuses sex slavery.
    He picked up standard excuses used by rapists – "He thought she wanted him". Bullshit. The young woman in question was a sex slave and RMS made excuses that his friend raped her.

    He could have just shut the fuck up, considering that his fried is dead anyway. But no, RMS made excuses for fucking sex slavery.

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by uncle h.

    this is why he's relevant and you're not. Your post is just scatterbrain stupidity that betrays your low iq.
    lol, ok.

    Leave a comment:


  • SilverFox
    replied
    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post

    Which he is obviously correct, if a person don't know that he has sex with another person being forced to, and she shows clear consent, then you can't assault somebody. That is the femnazi inter-sectional redefinition of words that goes on in the US.

    Because if you got raped in Europe or the US are at this stage as example not even remotely the same words, you basically can't translate this words anymore.

    The newest definition of the US Wokistan is that if a women has consenting sex but drunk 1 beer and the next day thinks it was maybe a bad they even she enjoyed it at the evening... it's rape... Maybe we need some international comity that defines and explains words.

    It's not only the absurd redefinitions the radical left Americans do, it's also the absolute failure of wisdom of meaning of words, so apparently most Americans think that when people have sex with subadults that they are pedophiles or even if they rape young kids that that was "pedophilia", pedophilia is a sexual orientation, if you get 1mio dollar to fuck a guy and do that that also makes you not gay, and the same is true for straight people having sex with small children because they are easy victims.

    And if you start canceling people because you are either stupid or woke and don't understand reality then we talk about a psychopat or mentally disabled country... get your shit together America maybe forbid social media and close the university if you are to immature to handle it...

    Or you need public healthcare and then send all the twitter users to mental institutions to get them help. It's insufferable and shameful.
    What's shameful is that you wrote this.

    Leave a comment:


  • tildearrow
    replied
    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
    Huh. That unapproved message doesn't even have any links in it.
    If "inquiry Fortran Pentium" marks your post as unapproved, then it's probably the system marking Quantum as unapproved again...

    Leave a comment:


  • smitty3268
    replied
    Originally posted by Uncle H.

    Typical entitled zoomer. Stallman has been doing this gig since a time when maybe 1 in a million people had even heard of "open source".

    What has he done that's special? He built the movement almost from scratch, you absolute tool.
    He did that 40 years ago, what's he done in the last generation? I guess people can have different opinions on this, but I don't believe a single accomplishment a long time ago gives you a free pass on everything else for the rest of your life. You celebrate the achievements, but what you're doing today is always more important than what you did yesterday.

    Does building a movement does that mean he's entitled to destroy it? I can understand why some people might think so, but I just think it's a shame.

    I wish the movement was bigger than Stallman, because sooner or later he's going to die of old age. It doesn't seem like his FSF movement will survive that, given it's tied so exclusively to himself now and his past achievements. Once he's gone, I don't see anyone likely to replace him. At least, no one competent.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 08 May 2021, 12:21 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Huh. That unapproved message doesn't even have any links in it.

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by pal666 View Post
    and then it was unforked. guess why
    Because Stallman admitted that he'd made the wrong decision and retired his version of GCC to rebrand EGCS as the new GCC 2.95. More or less the same situation as with how LibreOffice came about, except that the window for renaming LibreOffice back to OpenOffice is long past.[/quote]

    Originally posted by ezekrb5 View Post
    That's amazing to hear, it got forked for technical reasons, and that same fork allowed it to become much better. I'm all for improving performance and usability, however so far red hat has not said a single thing about improving the performance, and how exactly they plan on doing it (besides the "if we control it we can improve it more" statement, which is a non-argument).
    All the company said so far is "the FSF is bad, RMS is bad", which I believe is childish.
    Then it'll fail on those merits and the FSF can laugh at them, similar to how Glimpse's CoC-centric development model hasn't really gained any significant traction against mainline GIMP. A healthy open-source ecosystem has the same darwinian properties as a healthy process of scientific inquiry.

    Also, why focus on performance and usability specifically? EGCS added things like the Fortran compiler frontend, Pentium optimizations, and support for a bunch of new platforms by merging together a bunch of smaller forks that Stallman had left out in the cold.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X