Unfortunately, you didn't make up the word "thunk":)
From Jargon File (4.3.0, 30 APR 2001) [jargon]:
thunk/thuhnk/ n. 1. [obs.]"A piece of coding which provides an
address", according to P. Z. Ingerman, who invented thunks in 1961 as a
way of binding actual parameters to their formal definitions in Algol-60
procedure calls. If a procedure is called with an expression in the
place of a formal parameter, the compiler generates a thunk which
computes the expression and leaves the address of the result in some
standard location. 2. Later generalized into: an expression, frozen
together with its environment, for later evaluation if and when needed
(similar to what in techspeak is called a `closure'). The process of
unfreezing these thunks is called `forcing'. 3. A {stubroutine}, in an
overlay programming environment, that loads and jumps to the correct
overlay. Compare {trampoline}. 4. People and activities scheduled in a
thunklike manner. "It occurred to me the other day that I am rather
accurately modeled by a thunk -- I frequently need to be forced to
completion." - paraphrased from a {plan file}.
Historical note: There are a couple of onomatopoeic myths circulating
about the origin of this term. The most common is that it is the sound
made by data hitting the stack; another holds that the sound is that of
the data hitting an accumulator. Yet another suggests that it is the
sound of the expression being unfrozen at argument-evaluation time. In
fact, according to the inventors, it was coined after they realized (in
the wee hours after hours of discussion) that the type of an argument in
Algol-60 could be figured out in advance with a little compile-time
thought, simplifying the evaluation machinery. In other words, it had
`already been thought of'; thus it was christened a `thunk', which is
"the past tense of `think' at two in the morning".
Well, this is the second time you've said it. You may be trolling, but on the offhand chance you actually believe what you're saying let me just inform you that you're incorrect.
A T1 is 1.54 Mbps, not MEGS/sec, as many other replies have said.
From the nubus-pmac site, the following machines are supported:
Apple Power Macintosh 6100, 7100, 8100 and compatibles
Apple PowerBook 1400, 2300, 5300
Apple Performa 5200, 6200, 6300
The nice thing about this is they have kernel's with installers for Debian (woo!), YDL, and LinuxPPC. (and MkLinux...but you probably don't want that...)
But he wants people to licence software under the GPL, which allows what Caldera et al are proposing. As long as they supply the source code...
Umm, no it doesn't. Did you read the article? Buying UnitedLinux (binaries) will not allow you to re-distribute said binaries. This is against the GPL. You would need to buy individual copies for each machine to be installed on.
There seems to be a pretty significant misunderstanding in most of these comments. (even more than usual, which is pretty incredible!;)
So, SOMEONE must be able to tell me what's so *great* about Ruby that we should start calling Python obsolete. Either that, or acknowledge that Ruby is just a fun, impractical project that truly is re-inventing the wheel.
Are just intended to be inflammatory, don't you think? I guess not.
What I'm saying is that just because a language doesn't severly improve on the features of another is not a good reason to dismiss it.
I have no problem with Python -- the problem I have is with people who are too closed minded enough to try new things. I know many people who use C all the time, and always spout the standard, "but you can do anything in C -- it's the best language, even for OO programming!" They say this because that's all they use, and assume nothing could possibly be better, becuase that's all they're familiar with.
It's hard to reply to this -- how could this (obvious) flame get moderated so high? I don't understand why you think that for Ruby to be useful it has to obsolete Python?
I don't know Python, but I suspect the features of both Ruby and Python are similar. The syntax for Ruby is very nice.
What happened to you (switching from Perl to Python) is basically what happened to me, except it was Perl -> Ruby.
Can't you accept that it's possible for someone to actually like one language more than the other? (you obviously do, and are so closed minded to not give Ruby more than a quick look over)
I recommend reading some of the Pickaxe Book, which is available online.
What? It's next to impossible to download Debian? I think you're confused, because I seem to download it fairly frequently to do installs, and don't seem to have any problems.
What I find amusing about this whole thing is a old script (tcl of course) for the eggdrop bot called 'flud' that was floating around irc botnets about 6 years ago. Only then, it was intentional ddos attacks, and they were targeted at irc users. ie, 'flud '...2 seconds later, oh look, they're not on IRC anymore:)
In fact, as far as I can tell, things are going well. I'm running Debian/PowerPC on my PowerBook G3 series machine (Wallstreet) and it's quite solid.
At the moment, the whole system is running quite well.
Emacs appears to be working again (package dependancies were a messed up for it for a little while), along with almost all the other packages you could ever want.
Additionally, if you happen to be on a fast (or not even) internet connection, it's always nice to be able to type: # apt-get update # apt-get upgrade
to have apt automatically install the latest version of all your installed packages.
Very sweet system they have going, and it's all done by people working for free all over the world -- this I think is the coolest part of it all. If you really truely believe in the linux philosophy, debian is the distro of choice!:)
Slashdot Mirror
A friend of mine worked on the Grid Project over at MIT's LCS department...sounds pretty interesting -- they have some test networking set up:
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/grid/
...And smalltalk...and Ruby...
Unfortunately, you didn't make up the word "thunk" :)
/thuhnk/ n. 1. [obs.]"A piece of coding which provides an
From Jargon File (4.3.0, 30 APR 2001) [jargon]:
thunk
address", according to P. Z. Ingerman, who invented thunks in 1961 as a
way of binding actual parameters to their formal definitions in Algol-60
procedure calls. If a procedure is called with an expression in the
place of a formal parameter, the compiler generates a thunk which
computes the expression and leaves the address of the result in some
standard location. 2. Later generalized into: an expression, frozen
together with its environment, for later evaluation if and when needed
(similar to what in techspeak is called a `closure'). The process of
unfreezing these thunks is called `forcing'. 3. A {stubroutine}, in an
overlay programming environment, that loads and jumps to the correct
overlay. Compare {trampoline}. 4. People and activities scheduled in a
thunklike manner. "It occurred to me the other day that I am rather
accurately modeled by a thunk -- I frequently need to be forced to
completion." - paraphrased from a {plan file}.
Historical note: There are a couple of onomatopoeic myths circulating
about the origin of this term. The most common is that it is the sound
made by data hitting the stack; another holds that the sound is that of
the data hitting an accumulator. Yet another suggests that it is the
sound of the expression being unfrozen at argument-evaluation time. In
fact, according to the inventors, it was coined after they realized (in
the wee hours after hours of discussion) that the type of an argument in
Algol-60 could be figured out in advance with a little compile-time
thought, simplifying the evaluation machinery. In other words, it had
`already been thought of'; thus it was christened a `thunk', which is
"the past tense of `think' at two in the morning".
Well, this is the second time you've said it. You may be trolling, but on the offhand chance you actually believe what you're saying let me just inform you that you're incorrect.
A T1 is 1.54 Mbps, not MEGS/sec, as many other replies have said.
I believe this article on the penis enlargment lobby is relevant.
Yeah, if you can't get electricity -- now that's remote!
I second that!
From the nubus-pmac site, the following machines are supported:
- Apple Power Macintosh 6100, 7100, 8100 and compatibles
- Apple PowerBook 1400, 2300, 5300
- Apple Performa 5200, 6200, 6300
The nice thing about this is they have kernel's with installers for Debian (woo!), YDL, and LinuxPPC. (and MkLinux...but you probably don't want that...)Good luck!
But he wants people to licence software under the GPL, which allows what Caldera et al are proposing. As long as they supply the source code ...
;)
Umm, no it doesn't. Did you read the article? Buying UnitedLinux (binaries) will not allow you to re-distribute said binaries. This is against the GPL. You would need to buy individual copies for each machine to be installed on.
There seems to be a pretty significant misunderstanding in most of these comments. (even more than usual, which is pretty incredible!
Insightful, huh?
RMS says:
"[...] Free software developers, please don't let them license YOUR program per seat. Use the GNU GPL!"
The point RMS is making is that this use is NOT permitted under the GPL, so by using the GPL for your own software you are refusing!
Did you read the article? His statement is only 3 sentences, after all.
I'm confused...what bug? What happens with a wide comment string in IE?
I don't have windows here, so I can't see what the bug is...
Not only that, it has the exact same title! Hmm, perhaps they could search for previous postings before posting a new story?
Is that too much to ask?
...and doesn't need to be installed to run.
:)
Really. And how exactly does that work?
Can you tell us more about your efforts with the assbarn project?
Thanks!
Actually, it didn't. See people know about it now, and there are millions of vulnerable browsers out there just waiting to be taken advantage of.
wtf did you reboot for?
I disagree, comments like:
:)
So, SOMEONE must be able to tell me what's so *great* about Ruby that we should start calling Python obsolete. Either that, or acknowledge that Ruby is just a fun, impractical project that truly is re-inventing the wheel.
Are just intended to be inflammatory, don't you think? I guess not.
What I'm saying is that just because a language doesn't severly improve on the features of another is not a good reason to dismiss it.
I have no problem with Python -- the problem I have is with people who are too closed minded enough to try new things. I know many people who use C all the time, and always spout the standard, "but you can do anything in C -- it's the best language, even for OO programming!" They say this because that's all they use, and assume nothing could possibly be better, becuase that's all they're familiar with.
I've said enough already
Hear hear! (LOL)
It's hard to reply to this -- how could this (obvious) flame get moderated so high? I don't understand why you think that for Ruby to be useful it has to obsolete Python?
I don't know Python, but I suspect the features of both Ruby and Python are similar. The syntax for Ruby is very nice.
What happened to you (switching from Perl to Python) is basically what happened to me, except it was Perl -> Ruby.
Can't you accept that it's possible for someone to actually like one language more than the other? (you obviously do, and are so closed minded to not give Ruby more than a quick look over)
I recommend reading some of the Pickaxe Book, which is available online.
In case anyone was interested, here is this CG girl's web site. The information on there is pretty amusing...
What? It's next to impossible to download Debian? I think you're confused, because I seem to download it fairly frequently to do installs, and don't seem to have any problems.
What I find amusing about this whole thing is a old script (tcl of course) for the eggdrop bot called 'flud' that was floating around irc botnets about 6 years ago. Only then, it was intentional ddos attacks, and they were targeted at irc users. ie, 'flud '...2 seconds later, oh look, they're not on IRC anymore :)
In fact, as far as I can tell, things are going well. I'm running Debian/PowerPC on my PowerBook G3 series machine (Wallstreet) and it's quite solid.
:)
At the moment, the whole system is running quite well.
Emacs appears to be working again (package dependancies were a messed up for it for a little while), along with almost all the other packages you could ever want.
Additionally, if you happen to be on a fast (or not even) internet connection, it's always nice to be able to type:
# apt-get update
# apt-get upgrade
to have apt automatically install the latest version of all your installed packages.
Very sweet system they have going, and it's all done by people working for free all over the world -- this I think is the coolest part of it all. If you really truely believe in the linux philosophy, debian is the distro of choice!
Josh