Re: [dev] less(1) replacement?

From: Stéphane Aulery <>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2017 23:31:38 +0200

Le 28/08/2017 à 21:04, a écrit :
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 07:22:58PM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
>> Le 28/08/2017 à 11:44, a écrit :
>>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 02:41:42AM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
>>>> Le 27/08/2017 à 19:29, a écrit :
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 05:27:24PM +0200, Stéphane Aulery wrote:
>>>>>> My idea is how to reconcile the implementation of programs and a kernel
>>>>>> that is a multiplexer like plan9 with a language and a sound compilation
>>>>>> environment like that of Oberon.
>>>>> Once you have a nice working kernel with a vulkan stack and GPUs drivers, we'll
>>>>> talk about it again. In the meantime, good luck and fair winds.
>>>>> But really, you should try ada and rust, they "solved" probably all what you
>>>>> are talking about, already.
>>>>> Even rust has a less worse syntax than go, as far as I can recall. Don't forget
>>>>> to have a look at ada, a very strongly backed language... oh! and I was told
>>>>> something about mathematical proof integration with the D language.
>>>>> You also have the ML family, the "beauty" of "functional" languages:
>>>>> formal proof software is usually written using them, and lucky you, one of them
>>>>> has object orientation straight in the syntax, ocaml. I expect the addition of
>>>>> "aspect programming" straight in the syntax too!
>>>>> A good start would be to write your own compiler (not optimizing first). I
>>>>> suggest a c++17 compiler could be a good warm up, what do you think of that?
>>>> That one feels the anger through irony. Thanks anyway.
>>> Irony, probably, but there is probably more, like a bit of truth and reality?
>>> It may be time to come down from the silver tower.
>> Then explains.
> You are on suckless. _You_ have to explain how you end up here missing some core
> points of suckless that much.

I had read extensively *, plan9 materials, used WMII for a
long time, Debian since 2007, but I have been mostly limited to web
development since the beginning of my career. It does not stop me from
being interested in fundamentals.

I have never had the choice to use a scripting language or not, but I
have always had a way to approach programming that is in sync with the
suckless philosophy. At least I think so : clarity, conciseness,
simplicity, throw out all the features that are not essential, reduce
dependencies to zero if possible, not depend on the temple merchants for
something as essential as its information system.

As I mentioned in my first post, I will not want to write a piece of
lower level or intermediate software with a scripting language, but one
can still write a user software whose only dependency is the
interpreter. The principles can be transposed.

For Oberon I can not remember how I discovered it (maybe via Rob Pike's
Plan9 Acme inspiration). Niklaus Wirth literally spent his life
simplifying Algol to retrieve only the essential in Oberon, a language
like C but with less caltrop. Its aesthetic is not the same but the
spirit is the same. It was not for nothing that Uriel was pushing Go
which has some relationship with it.

Stéphane Aulery
Received on Mon Aug 28 2017 - 23:31:38 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Aug 28 2017 - 23:36:17 CEST