Maybe it would be less confusing if you bothered to read? That is referring to the plan 9 license 3 years ago. Like I said, the compiler is now available under a perfectly acceptable MIT license as well, so the license is no longer the issue. They simply don't want it.
Unfortunately, its not so simple. Many of the optimizations required serious recoding of gcc, making it MUCH slower to compile code, even when you don't have any optimizations turned on. Notice how gcc3 is twice as slow as gcc2? Notice how gcc4 is even slower?
And what? You said "but he doesn't like the license Lucent offer for them.". I pointed out the obvious fact that you are incorrect, as it is offered under the perfectly acceptable MIT license. Which part of this is confusing you?
The simple, easy optimizations that have the most effect are fine. But gcc spends ages trying to over-optimize code, making it take 5 times longer to compile, and then producing code that is often incorrect (crashes or corrupts data) and/or slower than without the optimizations.
You hear that gcc isn't good enough at optimization because its true. Its really bad at it, and produces slow, broken output. That doesn't mean everyone else should try to make their compiler blow too, it means gcc sucks.
"It only supports x86 right now". So that means its not an option. And given what a lackluster compiler it is, its probably not even worth using as a starting point to add more arches to.
All they have to do is release the docs for their hardware. Open source developers will write their own (superior) drivers. Quit making up bullshit excuses for corporations to keep cheating us. I bought the fucking hardware. It is mine. I own it. I should be allowed to use it. Provide the docs so I can write my own drivers for any OS I want.
You don't need stats to design your site correctly, that's nonsense. And google tracking the details of everything you do on the thousands of sites that use urchin is certainly something worth blocking.
WTF are you talking about? Adapt to what new times? The new times of 20 years ago? Why does wether or not you care about software being free have anything to do with anything? Just because you don't mind RMS's GNU/communist goals, doesn't mean he doesn't have those goals does it? And I don't need to adapt to jack, I don't code for a living, try to keep your random assumptions to yourself.
What is with morons and FPGAs lately? Its not an FPGA. Nobody uses FPGAs for performance sensitive tasks. And its their own code, which works together with their own physics engine that has been around for quite a while (used to be called novodex).
His contributions have been in the minor to miniscule range, and are mostly so old that they've been replaced over time anyways. The only major GNU software that has a significant enough amount of RMS code to be considered "his software" is emacs.
My reply is directly and obviously related to what you posted. You pretend that just because you technically are allowed to sell GPL software, that that means RMS hasn't tried to destroy programming as a source of income. He has, he wants all programmers to give all their work away all the time, forever. He is a hypocritical douchebag.
Haha, that's pretty funny. Passing self around is retarded, plain and simple. It does not add anything, it just makes things look ugly, and wastes my time.
I will just ignore your last comment, it is simply too ridiculous to be serious.
I don't use any of RMS's software at all, nothing he wrote is even vaguely useful. I assume you meant GNU software, since "his" software is pretty much just emacs. But I don't even use any GNU software every day, I only use it when I have no other option. GNU software is buggy, bloated crap.
As soon as you give one copy to anyone, then you can no longer sell it, as that person can just re-distribute it for free. Selling GPL software may be "allowed" but it does not actually work in the real world.
Its painful to see that slashdot has degraded to the point where even the most obviously incorrect and ridiculous statement is modded up as insightful. HTML has no iterations or conditional statements at all. It does nothing even vaguely resembling what a programming language does. It simply describes how to display data, it cannot manipulate or create the data.
Just because a language leaves out alot of nice functionality and makes you do things the long way, doesn't mean its tightly designed or elegant. Its just simplified, or "lacking". And if python was tightly designed and elegant, then you wouldn't be forced to pass self around all the damn time, or use __ to pretend your methods are private.
Slashdot Mirror
The inferno compiler is the plan 9 compiler. Compare the sources.
Maybe it would be less confusing if you bothered to read? That is referring to the plan 9 license 3 years ago. Like I said, the compiler is now available under a perfectly acceptable MIT license as well, so the license is no longer the issue. They simply don't want it.
Unfortunately, its not so simple. Many of the optimizations required serious recoding of gcc, making it MUCH slower to compile code, even when you don't have any optimizations turned on. Notice how gcc3 is twice as slow as gcc2? Notice how gcc4 is even slower?
I know what is was designed for. That doesn't mean its useful as a general purpose compiler for many platforms.
And what? You said "but he doesn't like the license Lucent offer for them.". I pointed out the obvious fact that you are incorrect, as it is offered under the perfectly acceptable MIT license. Which part of this is confusing you?
This is from march, why is everyone freaking out now?
The plan 9 compiler is available under an MIT license as part of inferno.
The simple, easy optimizations that have the most effect are fine. But gcc spends ages trying to over-optimize code, making it take 5 times longer to compile, and then producing code that is often incorrect (crashes or corrupts data) and/or slower than without the optimizations.
You hear that gcc isn't good enough at optimization because its true. Its really bad at it, and produces slow, broken output. That doesn't mean everyone else should try to make their compiler blow too, it means gcc sucks.
"It only supports x86 right now". So that means its not an option. And given what a lackluster compiler it is, its probably not even worth using as a starting point to add more arches to.
Yeah, you can't believe sketchy sources like sony about stuff like this. How the hell would they know?
All they have to do is release the docs for their hardware. Open source developers will write their own (superior) drivers. Quit making up bullshit excuses for corporations to keep cheating us. I bought the fucking hardware. It is mine. I own it. I should be allowed to use it. Provide the docs so I can write my own drivers for any OS I want.
"Well that isn't really accurate"
Yes it is. The PS3 uses opengl, as well as other open standards.
You don't need stats to design your site correctly, that's nonsense. And google tracking the details of everything you do on the thousands of sites that use urchin is certainly something worth blocking.
WTF are you talking about? Adapt to what new times? The new times of 20 years ago? Why does wether or not you care about software being free have anything to do with anything? Just because you don't mind RMS's GNU/communist goals, doesn't mean he doesn't have those goals does it? And I don't need to adapt to jack, I don't code for a living, try to keep your random assumptions to yourself.
What is with morons and FPGAs lately? Its not an FPGA. Nobody uses FPGAs for performance sensitive tasks. And its their own code, which works together with their own physics engine that has been around for quite a while (used to be called novodex).
His contributions have been in the minor to miniscule range, and are mostly so old that they've been replaced over time anyways. The only major GNU software that has a significant enough amount of RMS code to be considered "his software" is emacs.
My reply is directly and obviously related to what you posted. You pretend that just because you technically are allowed to sell GPL software, that that means RMS hasn't tried to destroy programming as a source of income. He has, he wants all programmers to give all their work away all the time, forever. He is a hypocritical douchebag.
Haha, that's pretty funny. Passing self around is retarded, plain and simple. It does not add anything, it just makes things look ugly, and wastes my time.
I will just ignore your last comment, it is simply too ridiculous to be serious.
RMS didn't write mv or rm.
I don't use any of RMS's software at all, nothing he wrote is even vaguely useful. I assume you meant GNU software, since "his" software is pretty much just emacs. But I don't even use any GNU software every day, I only use it when I have no other option. GNU software is buggy, bloated crap.
As soon as you give one copy to anyone, then you can no longer sell it, as that person can just re-distribute it for free. Selling GPL software may be "allowed" but it does not actually work in the real world.
Its painful to see that slashdot has degraded to the point where even the most obviously incorrect and ridiculous statement is modded up as insightful. HTML has no iterations or conditional statements at all. It does nothing even vaguely resembling what a programming language does. It simply describes how to display data, it cannot manipulate or create the data.
Just because a language leaves out alot of nice functionality and makes you do things the long way, doesn't mean its tightly designed or elegant. Its just simplified, or "lacking". And if python was tightly designed and elegant, then you wouldn't be forced to pass self around all the damn time, or use __ to pretend your methods are private.
Like -1 (verbal diarrhea).
Oh yeah, you can just download pike and type "make && make install" and it will work fine. I've gotten all of the openbsd related fixes into pike.