Did you really just say that here on a FreeBSD forum?!I think smalltalk is dying
Did you really think that concerns anyone here on a FreeBSD forum?!!
Did you really just say that here on a FreeBSD forum?!I think smalltalk is dying
Crystal has the ups of Ruby without most of its downs, it looks great. I never used it, but I also believe that their compiler is batteries-included and ready to cross-compile to most supported OSes and CPU arches. I'd say Crystal should take Go's market share but we know that isn't happening lol.I have been playing with Crystal recently and enjoying it. It is inspired by Ruby in terms of syntax, standard library, and testing tools. It is statically typed with type inference; and provides exhaustive type handling, case statements, and error handling. It uses UTF-8 strings, but still includes a null-terminator for compatibility with C. I suspect it will be my go-to language for simple CLI utilities.
Tabs? Spaces?How are we supposed to have a decent flamewar otherwise?
We agree on OS choice, so programming languages it is.
Ah yes, smalltalk, I remember... "a programming language that could only have been invented in southern california".I think smalltalk is dying...
Yeah but what about squirrel? Don't you use any real programming languages in belgium? http://www.squirrel-lang.org/sbcl,chicken,racket,F#,haxe,zig,nim,scala,gerbil-scheme,idris2,julia...
And the "blues corner" club in bruxelles. Saw a couple of really good bands there. Unfortunately I believe they shut up shop many years ago, a real shame.No, but they have decent fried potatoes, and superb beer. Also good chocolate.
Yep, that was our solution. Don't use the C heap, no more heap frag, and other useful stuff.There's a reason some larger C/C++ projects just mmap(2) some large chunk of address space and implement their own allocator on top of that, tailored to the behavior and needs of the application.
68k assembler... yum I did an embedded project using an exormacs dev system once, vme card stuff. So much nicer to work with than the intel junk which was segmented at the time, all that near and far crap. Sadly 68k seems to be disparu nowadays, along with motorola semi themselves. I think some people are still putting 68k's on gate arrays, like this amiga clone: https://www.minimig.net/ . I had a sinclair QL at one point too, which was a 68008. Bloody microdrives...M68010 asm ($JOB '84)
Of course a true master would use FunnelWeb to generate their squirrel for them. http://ross.net/funnelweb/
Please don't ask me how I know about FunnelWeb...
I still would like a 68060 or such build in modern processes. What would the clock rate be? Like, on GaAs? 68k assembler was one of the first things I learned, and I still like to read it. When messing with a compiler, I check if it can generate 68k code and use that to get familiar with the language. You can read that, not like x86.68k assembler... yum I did an embedded project using an exormacs dev system once, vme card stuff. So much nicer to work with than the intel junk which was segmented at the time, all that near and far crap. Sadly 68k seems to be disparu nowadays, along with motorola themselves. I think some people are still putting 68k's on gate arrays, liks this amiga clone: https://www.minimig.net/ . I had a sinclair QL at one point too, which was a 68008. Bloody microdrives...
Ditto, but Oric 1, 1 MHz 6502, 6522, GI AY-3-8912, custom ULA, 48K. I couldn't afford a Beeb, they were too expensive! The oric was a lovely little box, much better made than the crappy sinclair spectrum. https://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/526/Oric-1-48k/ . Tangerine was a good company.For me it was assembly on a Commodore 64.
MOS 6510 , 1Mhz.
LDA : Load Accumulator.
Well, that's its whole focus.I liked Smalltalk, but for the current me it has too much of that smell of object oriented programming to it.
I designed a whole medical computer using the 68K on the VME bus. The engineering director had put together what was essentially an IBM PC clone to do the same work but mine was modular in that you could upgrade the processor, memory, IO, attached devices, etc. by just pulling one small half-size card out. It wound up being (now) Bausch & Lomb's top selling product and the architecture is still in use today (in a modern form).68k assembler... yum I did an embedded project using an exormacs dev system once, vme card stuff. So much nicer to work with than the intel junk which was segmented at the time, all that near and far crap.
Very interesting, it sounds like an impressive piece of work Presumably it had pluggable specialised medical instrumentation cards as well. I wonder if you used OS/9? I remember that used to be quite popular (in the UK, anyway) on 68k vmebus systems. If they're still selling it now, it would be interesting to know what 68k-descendent CPU they have used in the current product, presumably it still uses some variant of the 68k core.I designed a whole medical computer using the 68K on the VME bus. The engineering director had put together what was essentially an IBM PC clone to do the same work but mine was modular in that you could upgrade the processor, memory, IO, attached devices, etc. by just pulling one small half-size card out. It wound up being (now) Bausch & Lomb's top selling product and the architecture is still in use today (in a modern form).
I loved the 68K. I was enamored by National Semiconductor's NS32000, too, but that went nowhere.
I stopped doing that. I get the idea that most of the people engaging in these types of conversations are the ones who don't really do any professional/serious programming work themselves. Nothing wrong with that - but it seems to have become a social sport to complain about something you know very little about - and that little they "know" is often based on some YouTube video or a random blog post.I simply miss in every discussion someone stands up for C/C++
Careful, this could easily imply anybody criticizing C++ design flaws could only ever do that for not really knowing the language. In fact, some things can't be fixed by adding new features. But they can of course be hidden, when code using these new features can sidestep them.And when it comes to C++ specifically, most of the time people are completely oblivious to modern C++. Why would I want to spend my time presenting objective arguments if the person on the other end only has some C++98 experience from college? It's pointless.
Agreed - that was not the intention of my (poor) wording.Careful, this could easily imply anybody criticizing C++ design flaws could only ever do that for not really knowing the language.
… use FunnelWeb to …